[asterisk-dev] iLBC codec

[François Delawarde]

On Wed, 2011-07-13 at 21:33 +0800, Steve Underwood wrote: 
> On 07/13/2011 04:41 PM, François Delawarde wrote:
> > On Wed, 2011-07-13 at 01:49 +0800, Steve Underwood wrote:
> >> iLBC actually sounds a little worse than G.729, despite running at
> >> twice the bit rate.
> > Just out of curiosity, do you mean the graph and statements from their
> > web is wrong when they compare it to G.729?
> > http://www.ilbcfreeware.org/
> >
> You'll notice in that graph that G.723.1 scores a little lower than 
> G.729 and iLBC, and iLBC scores exactly the same as G.729. Most stuff on 
> the web shows a higher MOS for G.723.1 than for G.729, which it totally 
> bogus. These are subjective scores, so you generally get the result you 
> are looking for. :-)
> 
> Perhaps you are looking at the degradation of these codecs with rising 
> packet loss. Those curves are certainly bogus. iLBC is about twice the 
> bit rate of G.729, so you can send G.729 with some redundancy, end up 
> with the bit rate of iLBC, and have a better overall result.

Good to know!

What would be your recommendation for a compressed "free" alternative to
G.729 (GSM, Speex, Opus, ...)?

Thanks,
François.