That's the idea: take telephone/voice @ what? 4kbps? -- it was
standard means between 300-3100Hz. often - sounds below 300Hz are now that
filtered today.
record your voice at 8Khz sampling rate and then compress with speex
various options and compare compressed and uncompressed.
If you're not an expert you should probably stick with one of the
--preset modes. E.g. '--preset medium' or '--preset standard'. That will
give you variable bitrate files with good quality.
lame -h -V 3 is what i use.
The speakers in telephones are tiny. That's probably a large part of it.
Th
On Sat, Mar 14, 2009 at 08:51:02PM -0700, Gary Kline wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 14, 2009 at 08:26:02AM +0100, Roland Smith wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 08:05:59PM -0700, Gary Kline wrote:
> > > > lame -h -V 3 - nobody could tell the difference, it gives <200kbps
> > > > bitrate
> > > > lame -h -b
On Sat, Mar 14, 2009 at 09:42:25PM -0700, Gary Kline wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 14, 2009 at 08:36:25AM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
> > >
> > >There is a special codec for speech. You'll find it the
> > >audio/speex port. From the pkg-descr:
> >
> > actually i use it with asterisk - at about 15kbps (VB
On Sun, Mar 15, 2009 at 05:18:06AM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
> > listened-to (kttsd) the man lame. Then surfed around; then came
> > back to the man page and read the several examples. So: the idea
> > is that lame ["just"] converts WAV files to mp3. There is a
>
> as every good
On Sat, Mar 14, 2009 at 08:36:25AM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
> >
> >There is a special codec for speech. You'll find it the
> >audio/speex port. From the pkg-descr:
>
> actually i use it with asterisk - at about 15kbps (VBR) there are audible
> differences between this and standard 64kbps a-l
listened-to (kttsd) the man lame. Then surfed around; then came
back to the man page and read the several examples. So: the idea
is that lame ["just"] converts WAV files to mp3. There is a
as every good unix tool - it does exactly what is supposed to do.
nobody forbid
On Sat, Mar 14, 2009 at 08:26:02AM +0100, Roland Smith wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 08:05:59PM -0700, Gary Kline wrote:
> > > lame -h -V 3 - nobody could tell the difference, it gives <200kbps bitrate
> > > lame -h -b 192 - as above
> > > lame -h -b 128 - they were able to tell difference, but
I use ape :)
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
For the same reason, you do not convert between lossy formats. Each might
give different kinds of artifacts that you do not want to combine. (Of
especially true with mp3 and ogg
Are you sure you can hear the difference between your flac originals and
"--preset standard" lame encoded mp3? Consi
Gary Kline wrote:
> my hearing is exceptionally good and while call myself an audiophile,
[...]
> lectures. when i tried to cut the quality even by a bit it was
> evident immediately. rar compresses these file to
If you care for quality (and call yourself an audiophile), you should
read up on
There is a special codec for speech. You'll find it the
audio/speex port. From the pkg-descr:
actually i use it with asterisk - at about 15kbps (VBR) there are audible
differences between this and standard 64kbps a-law - but the differences
are POSITIVE - speech sounds clearer!
The Speex
On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 08:05:59PM -0700, Gary Kline wrote:
> > lame -h -V 3 - nobody could tell the difference, it gives <200kbps bitrate
> > lame -h -b 192 - as above
> > lame -h -b 128 - they were able to tell difference, but not on all
> > music/songs
> >
> > lame -h -b 96 - i was able to tel
lame -h -b 96 - i was able to tell the difference on every song, but it
wasn't really huge deal.
hm. oh, yeah, my new box has to have a superior soundcard. and
i'll pony up for even better speakers too. (so when i'm ready,
i'll ask what's best. maybe find something
On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 09:31:50PM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
> >- The general archivers can compress the wav somewhat without loss, but
> > none do as well as the dedicated lossless compression program flac.
> >- Trying to compress mp3, ogg and flac files further is a waste of time.
> >- If you
- The general archivers can compress the wav somewhat without loss, but
none do as well as the dedicated lossless compression program flac.
- Trying to compress mp3, ogg and flac files further is a waste of time.
- If you want smaller files, use lossy compression like mp3 or ogg
vorbis, and pick
On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 12:15:24PM -0700, Gary Kline wrote:
>
> guys, this is for any compression experts on-list. my main
> desktop is nearly full. i'm looking for the best means of
> compressing [mostly] audio files. mp3, ogg, and .flag.
All of these are already compressed.
I would look into archivers/bunzip and archivers/p7zip. I recall
reading that the 7z format produces better compression rates than RAR
7zip is comparable to grzip (sometimes sligtly better - difference in
order of 1%), while much slower
___
freebsd-
already highly compressed and will not compress much further.
As far as the best compressor, I vote for bzip2/bunzip2.
in my tests i found NO case when grzip would not compress data better than
bzip2
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http
guys, this is for any compression experts on-list. my main desktop is
nearly
full. i'm looking for the best means of compressing [mostly] audio
files.
mp3, ogg, and .flag. i cross backup among my servers and would like to
have
mp3 is already compressed as ogg
flac
On Fri 2009-03-13 12:15:24 UTC-0700, Gary Kline (kl...@thought.org) wrote:
> guys, this is for any compression experts on-list. my main desktop is nearly
> full. i'm looking for the best means of compressing [mostly] audio files.
> mp3, ogg, and .flag. i cross backup among my servers and would
Gary Kline wrote:
> guys, this is for any compression experts on-list. my main desktop is
> nearly
> full. i'm looking for the best means of compressing [mostly] audio
> files.
> mp3, ogg, and .flag. i cross backup among my servers and would like to
> have
> the most r
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On March 13, 2009 03:15:24 pm Gary Kline wrote:
> guys, this is for any compression experts on-list. my main desktop is
> nearly full. i'm looking for the best means of compressing [mostly] audio
> files. mp3, ogg, and .flag. i cross backup am
>guys, this is for any compression experts on-list. my main desktop is
> nearly
>full. i'm looking for the best means of compressing [mostly] audio
> files.
>mp3, ogg, and .flag. i cross backup among my servers and would like
> to have
>the most reasoned approa
guys, this is for any compression experts on-list. my main desktop is
nearly
full. i'm looking for the best means of compressing [mostly] audio
files.
mp3, ogg, and .flag. i cross backup among my servers and would like to
have
the most reasoned approach to com
25 matches
Mail list logo
