I might as well jump on the Mumble bandwagon too. I had some friends looking for a voice server of some type. I researched Ventrilo, TeamSpeak, and Mumble. I eventually decided to set up a Mumble (Murmur) server. I set up a generic account and gave the password to a few people. I left all of the voice quality settings at their defaults on the server.
They used it with both voice-detection mode, using an omni-directional microphone (multiple people around a conference table), and the typical Push-To-Talk mode with microphones and headsets of varying quality. After a couple of weeks, I asked for their opinions. Everyone loved it. One person was a die-hard Ventrilo user and he came right out and said he liked Mumble better and thought the voice quality sounded better. To be fair, I have no idea what the quality settings were on the Ventrilo servers he used. I just wanted to add this because I know I find the experiences of others to be tremendously helpful when making decisions. -- Andy On Fri, 30 Jan 2009 15:35:56 +0100, "Arnaud DUMAS de RAULY" <[email protected]> said: > Personally, Mumble is the best sound quality with the least latency > you can get (it's almost real-time whereas you have a couple of ms of > latency with TeamSpeak and Ventrilo) and uses way less resources than > the other two, the only thing which is preventing it from being used > is ... marketing, and maybe the fact that the others are already used > by 90% of gamers. As an example, we currently host more than 800 > murmur (mumble) servers on a P4 with 4Gb of RAM. > > It's maybe cheaper to sell but at least there are no licensing > problems ;) _______________________________________________ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
