Francois Menard (Mailing List Account) wrote:> > did you try speex in wideband mode ... what bitrate? > > f.15kbps mode. It does significantly better with a different speaker (the male does better than the female), as well. I'm considering purchasing a commercial PESQ license and wrap the PESQ software in a server application. I could then allow other folks to run PESQ comparisons on my server through some API, either for free or for a fee. (ie, commercial customers for $$, open source & hoby-ists for free)... I'm hoping this might allow Speex & similar developers test their codecs in some standardized manner without having to pay the thousands of dollars for a PESQ license... Ben -- Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com> Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com
Ben Greear wrote:> Francois Menard (Mailing List Account) wrote: > >> >> did you try speex in wideband mode ... what bitrate? >> >> f. > > > 15kbps mode. It does significantly better with a different > speaker (the male does better than the female), as well.Most CELP based codecs do a better job with lower pitched voices, so male voices tend to sound better than female voices.> I'm considering purchasing a commercial PESQ license and wrap > the PESQ software in a server application. I could then allow > other folks to run PESQ comparisons on my server through some API, > either for free or for a fee. (ie, commercial customers for $$, > open source & hoby-ists for free)...I have mixed feelings about the value of that. People are starting to trust PESQ scores, like they are a solid measure of how a human would perceive the quality. That could mean codecs will win in the marketplace if they sound bad, but score well. PESQ is pretty useful for quick checkouts of system setups. It is a pretty lousy way to judge the worth of a codec.> I'm hoping this might allow Speex & similar developers test their > codecs in some standardized manner without having to pay the thousands > of dollars for a PESQ license...PESQ is being pushed hard to people with limited knowledge of the subject, and the superficially useful results it produces sells licences. Beware of the true value of things which make money. Snake oil makes money. :-) Regards, Steve
Steve Underwood wrote:> Ben Greear wrote: > >> Francois Menard (Mailing List Account) wrote: >> >>> >>> did you try speex in wideband mode ... what bitrate? >>> >>> f. >> >> >> >> 15kbps mode. It does significantly better with a different >> speaker (the male does better than the female), as well. > > > Most CELP based codecs do a better job with lower pitched voices, so > male voices tend to sound better than female voices.Good information, thanks!>> I'm hoping this might allow Speex & similar developers test their >> codecs in some standardized manner without having to pay the thousands >> of dollars for a PESQ license... > > > PESQ is being pushed hard to people with limited knowledge of the > subject, and the superficially useful results it produces sells > licences. Beware of the true value of things which make money. Snake oil > makes money. :-)Heh, I make network testing software...and people are asking for the PESQ snake oil...so I'm bottling it up. It's definately useful for automated testing and regression testing, but I'd agree that it is not the total solution. Ben -- Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com> Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com