[Asterisk-Users] g729 quality at GSM bitrates

[David Ankers]

2nd vote for ADPCM - depends on how fat you can get though? I would guess
though that this is over a smallish pipe?

After a lot of time and various experiments, my preferred codec is G.726/32
in combination with RTP header compression - low impact on the WAN and the *
server but quality that is excellent. Might not be suitable for your needs
though but, well, worth mentioning.
   

-----Original Message-----
From: asterisk-users-bounces at lists.digium.com
[mailto:asterisk-users-bounces at lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of Rusty
Shackleford
Sent: Tuesday, 21 February 2006 8:40 AM
To: 'Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion'
Subject: RE: [Asterisk-Users] g729 quality at GSM bitrates

> -----Original Message-----
> From: asterisk-users-bounces at lists.digium.com 
> [mailto:asterisk-users-bounces at lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of 
> Chris Bagnall
> Sent: Monday, February 20, 2006 11:43 AM
> To: 'Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion'
> Subject: [Asterisk-Users] g729 quality at GSM bitrates
> 
> I'm trying to improve the codec selection on a few of the 
> asterisk boxes we have to keep the g729 licences free for 
> calls from ATAs that don't support anything apart from g711 
> and g729. GSM seems to offer noticably inferior call quality 
> (at least when using a softphone + decent headphones), but 
> it's about where I want the bitrate to be.

To my ear, ILBC sounds much better than GSM. It's slightly more
efficient, and more tolerant of things like packet loss. Some folks,
hate the sound of ILBC encoded calls. <shrug>

Your other choice would be G.726/32. * supports it, as do many ATA's and
softphones. It's a bit fatter, but sounds MUCH better than GSM.

_______________________________________________
--Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com --

Asterisk-Users mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users