[Asterisk-Users] Wildcard X100P or TDM400P?

[Steven Critchfield]

On Tue, 2005-03-08 at 13:24 -0600, Rich Adamson wrote:
> > > > TDM400P with FXO daughter card includes 1 hour of Digium support. It is
> > > > supposed to support other line types. If you have trouble, it is likely
> > > > you will get direct support from Digium and from the community here. 
> > > 
> > > It should be noted that several people including myself are having voicemail
> > > volume problems with the TDM400P (is anyone having it with the X100P?) which
> > > for us makes the card unusable for what was intended (a basic home PBX/answering
> > > machine).
> > > 
> > > This is documented in bug #2023:
> > > http://bugs.digium.com/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=0002023
> > > 
> > > You'll also notice that it has been dormant for quite some time.
> > 
> > Voicemail volume is not related to the card you use. If it was related
> > to the card used, you wouldn't have the separation needed to make all
> > the interfaces work.
> > 
> > Voicemail volume is usually complained about by people not using
> > standard wav format. It is due to the volume of wav files being
> > manipulated at write time where as all other formats are as they come
> > off of the line.  
> 
> Steve, help me understand exactly what you said above. Having problems
> with "to the card you use" and "related to the card used".

By the time any audio makes it to voicemail, it has been "normalized"
into ast_frames. The source of audio is not relevant to the voicemail
app.  

> Also, please clearify "not using standard wav format". Does that truly
> mean recording voicemail messages in gsm format is the cause for the
> additional 10db of loss measured and noted in bug 2023?

I don't know or care how you are measuring a 10db loss. I know for a
fact that in format_wav.c there is a section of code that effectively
doubles the volume as it is saving and removes the doubling on playback.
No other audio format is given the same treatment.

> If that's the case, then why has bug 2023 been lurking without any such
> comments for many many months?

If it is lurking for 10 months it is because no one cares to read it. I
promise you I don't look at any bug unless it is mentioned on a list as
is pertaining to code I am running. I have so little time now, I don't
go looking for needles in haystacks that I don't need.
-- 
Steven Critchfield <critch at basesys.com>