[asterisk-dev] iLBC packet loss concealment (was: code-cleanup concerns)

[Anton]

I may be wrong, but all going about using loose codec iLibc 
or Speex in skype and * in compariosion to PSTN connection, 
and how that codecs may sound better than PSTN? Or I'm 
missing something? 

On 16 April 2006 19:25, Steve Underwood wrote:
> Hi Anton,
>
> I'm sure we'd all love to hear an explanation for that.
>
> Regards,
> Steve
>
> Anton wrote:
> >IMHO: To sound better than PSTN you either must transmit
> >more than 64Kbps audio or have poor PSTN connection to
> >compare :)
> >
> >On 16 April 2006 18:33, Steve Underwood wrote:
> >>Andrew Kohlsmith wrote:
> >>>On Sunday 16 April 2006 04:05, Matt Ranney wrote:
> >>>>My users tell me that Skype sounds better than
> >>>> asterisk even when going to the PSTN, but I think
> >>>> this might be because the headsets they are using
> >>>> just sound better than their Cisco 7940 handsets.
> >>>
> >>>the iLBC codec used in Skype is the wideband variety;
> >>> it *is* better than PSTN.
> >>
> >>Skype is certainly better than the PSTN when going
> >> Skype to Skype, but why do people think it sounds
> >> better than the PSTN when going to the PSTN? Is it
> >> just psycological, or are they using an environment
> >> (e.g. headset) that just sounds better than their
> >> usual phone? Having they been using a Cisco 7940 with
> >> G.729, where a real PSTN to PSTN connection would
> >> sounds rather better? I find it an interesting comment
> >> that Matt made.
> >>
> >>Steve
>
> _______________________________________________
> --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com --
>
> asterisk-dev mailing list
> To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
>    http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev