[asterisk-users] Call recording format

[Vilius Adamkavicius]

Hi David,

Looking at MOS G.711alaw wav most definitely has the higher score than gsm.
Moreover recording in gsm is more CPU intense than wav. Therefore your
suggestion to do more CPU intense recording and afterwards use system
resources to convert it back to wav is not a solution. Also some of our
customers require call recordings to be done in wav.

Thanks,
Vilius.

On 22 November 2010 15:03, David Backeberg <dbackeberg at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 8:47 AM, Vilius Adamkavicius
> <vilius.adamkavicius at invade.net> wrote:
> > Hi All,
> > We have a requirement to record over 60 simultaneous calls. Our recording
> > facilities are implemented using Monitor() over AMI. The thing we have
> > noticed that making 60 simultaneous call recordings using wav CPU load is
> > significantly higher (around 2 times more) than using gsm. Even writing
> call
> > recordings to /dev/null makes a big difference in CPU load.
>
> Ignoring your real questions, and asking an alternate question:
>
> Why not just record in gsm?
>
> If your answer is that you have to play these back on Windows, you can
> build an on-the-fly gsm-to-wav converter using sox.
>
> My understanding is that recording in wav doesn't exactly make you
> have higher audio quality in your recordings, although the experts at
> codecs could better answer that.
>
> --
> _____________________________________________________________________
> -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --
> New to Asterisk? Join us for a live introductory webinar every Thurs:
>               http://www.asterisk.org/hello
>
> asterisk-users mailing list
> To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
>   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-users/attachments/20101122/124c73a0/attachment.htm