Hi [UTF-8?]Макс [UTF-8?]Карпов <[email protected]>

(Sorry no name in plain text)

I think we are comparing apples to oranges.

As I see it, Codec2 voice compression is about determining what
a human voice is doing and digitising that. And, to as low a data
bitrate as practical in carrying good intelligibility.

Digging a voice out of a noisy environment is not the main purpose.

And as I see it, the 1200/2400 modes are interim steps towards the lower
bitrate modes.

Alan VK2ZIW 

On Sun, 12 Jan 2020 07:01:01 +1100, David Rowe wrote
> Hi [UTF-8?]Макс,
> 
> Nice work on your tests!  OK so this is what I hear:
> 
> 1/ On the noise free English samples, codec 2 at 1200/2400 is 
> slightly worse than MELP at the same rates.  This is consistent with 
> other tests
> (e.g. academic papers using the two codecs as references).
> 
> 2/ With noisy speech the MELP samples appear to have removed the
> interfering noise - the noise is suppressed in the output samples, 
> and not faithfully reproduced.  This suggests the MELP 
> implementation you have used also has a pre-processing step to 
> remove noise.
> 
> So it's not quite an A/B comparison - the core MELP codec is being
> tested on audio that has had the noise suppressed.
> 
> With noisy input speech, the Codec 2 samples are distorted and
> unpleasant to listen too, but still (as you suggest) intelligible.
> 
> For noise suppression in Codec 2 applications we use the Speex noise
> suppressor (codec2/misc/speexnoisesup.c for a command line version).
> 
> 3/ It's difficult for me to evaluate the Russian samples, as I don't
> speak the language, but thanks for the feedback.  Yes, Codec 2 was
> developed on just English samples.
> 
> 4/ You are correct Codec 2 1200/2400 hasn't been actively developed 
> in over 5 years, recent efforts have been at lower bit rates, and LPCNet
> 
> (at 1733 bit/s).  In particular to support digital voice systems for 
> HF radio.
> 
> Cheers,
> David
> 
> On 11/1/20 11:08 pm, [UTF-8?]Макс [UTF-8?]Карпов wrote:
> > Sorry for sending HTML message, I didn't expect it to mess up the archive.
> > 
> > Plaintext copy of previous message follows:
> > 
> > ------
> > 
> > Hello!
> >  
> > Recently I had tested Codec2 on audio samples on both English and Russian 
languages, using MELPe as a reference. Moreover, I used three noise modes: no 
noise at all, gaussian noise and voice noise (e.g. when you are talking in a 
crowded room). As I don't have a source code for MELPe 600, I had tested only 
1200 and 2400 bitrates. Some of MELPe tests were repeated in a environment 
where encoder and decoder processes were separated to ensure that no audio 
information is leaked through internal buffers and structures.
> >  
> > To my disappointment, however, Codec2 performed much worse than MELPe, 
producing yet still intelligible (in some cases), but heavily distorted result. 
I made page with original and encoded samples: https://m-k.mx/static/codec2/.
> >  
> > I am surprised why Codec2 performs so bad even on high bitrates where MELPe 
produces almost identical audio without any audible artifacts. Codec2 also 
degrades significantly on non-English samples (VQ codebooks are fine-tuned for 
English?). While degradation at noisy samples is expected (especially in voice 
noise), Codec2 sometimes produces very distorted and hardly intelligible 
results, while MELPe exhibit only slight degradation.
> >  
> > So my questions are:
> >  
> > 1. Are my experiments correct? Maybe I'm missing something important, like 
equalizer in front of Codec2 (--eq option appears to have no impact on the 
quality).
> > 2. Are high-bitrate modes like 2400 and 3200 still up-to-date? I have seen 
a lot of effort put into 700C mode, but sometimes high-bitrate modes are useful 
as well.
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Freetel-codec2 mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freetel-codec2
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Freetel-codec2 mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freetel-codec2


---------------------------------------------------
Alan Beard

OpenWebMail 2.53



_______________________________________________
Freetel-codec2 mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freetel-codec2

Reply via email to