On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 2:01 AM, Kristoff Bonne <[email protected]> wrote: > > With reading more about FEC systems and coding for the header of c2-gmsk > modem; I have also been thinking about other (better) FEC systems for > the voice-part of the stream.
It seems to me that it would be best to match the size of the FEC to the size of the voice payload for a frame (48 bits or whatever) rather than correcting four groups of 12 bits. In other words, if there is such a thing as (48,24)BCH, I would expect it to work better than doing (12,6) four times. Consider that a (48,24) FEC could correct for a certain number of bit errors no matter where they occurred in the frame. If those bit errors (after de-interleaving) were evenly distributed in each of the four (12,6) FEC blocks, they would also be correctable. But if they were not evenly distributed, the (12,6)*4 version would fail to work as well as the (48,24) version. In other words, I think error correction should be done on the largest blocks possible without increasing latency. Steve -- Steve Strobel Link Communications, Inc. 1035 Cerise Rd Billings, MT 59101-7378 (406) 245-5002 ext 102 (406) 245-4889 (fax) WWW: http://www.link-comm.com MailTo:[email protected] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ _______________________________________________ Freetel-codec2 mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freetel-codec2
