[Asterisk-Users] compression quality of wav voicemail attachments

[Steven Critchfield]

On Fri, 2003-03-07 at 22:45, Brian Capouch wrote:
> Mark Spencer wrote:
> > Actually I'm considering dropping mp3 codec support from Asterisk (of
> > course, we would still keep the "music on hold" and so on which use
> > mpg123).  The reason is that mp3 is relatively expensive (even in decode)
> > and isn't really appropriate due to its large frame size and high bit rate
> > for telephony.
> > 
> 
> 
> I sure wish (and I'm sure there are others in the same boat) that 
> something like MP3 could be made an option for the email attachments. 
> It seems like it would be very low cost in terms of the implementation, 
> and the savings would be enormous.
> 
> I have a load of multiple-megabyte attachments in my Inbox right now 
> that represent something just over two minutes of voicemail.  I think 
> that is horribly wasteful, and where I am right now, on a very 
> limited-bandwidth connection, getting those mails is excruciating.
> 
> What would be the problem with encoding JUST THE ATTACHMENTS that way?

Think scale for those not using asterisk in the home. MP3 doesn't
compress that well for speech only, it is overkill. Use gsm and you will
get almost 8 times compression. Also your disk usage would go down if
you don't save in so many formats. 

-- 
Steven Critchfield <critch at basesys.com>