‎Yeah, touché. I just meant that for 8 Kbps that's pretty good. That doesn't 
mean it's a worthwhile call experience.

--
Alex Balashov | Principal | Evariste Systems LLC
1447 Peachtree Street NE, Suite 700
Atlanta, GA 30309
United States

Tel: +1-800-250-5920 (toll-free) / +1-678-954-0671 (direct)
Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.csrpswitch.com/

Sent from my BlackBerry.
  Original Message  
From: Paul Timmins
Sent: Friday, March 11, 2016 19:05
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] G.729 A/B Experiences

If you like the way cellphones sound, you'll love G.729. I'll leave it 
at that.

On 03/11/2016 06:50 PM, Alex Balashov wrote:
> ‎As far as I can tell, G.729 is still the best intersection of low bandwidth 
> and call quality, although the OPUS fans have their own opinion. It certainly 
> leads to intelligible speech, though it can make for some amusing gibberish 
> when applied to hold music, given the extreme code word contractions it uses 
> to achieve its vicious compression ratio.
>
> However, it's relatively CPU intensive and frequently requires transcoding 
> from G.711 PSTN table stakes. Moreover, in general things are going in the 
> other direction, e.g. higher bandwidth ‎HD codecs.
>
> This leads me to ask: why, as a North American operator, would you want to do 
> this today, in light of the capacity and price of available bandwidth today? 
> Generally speaking, G.729 is something like a niche interest for 
> international haulers and folk operating in developing world markets where 
> bandwidth remains stubbornly expensive.
>
> --
> Alex Balashov | Principal | Evariste Systems LLC
> 1447 Peachtree Street NE, Suite 700
> Atlanta, GA 30309
> United States
>
> Tel: +1-800-250-5920 (toll-free) / +1-678-954-0671 (direct)
> Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.csrpswitch.com/
>
> Sent from my BlackBerry.
> Original Message
> From: Robert Johnson
> Sent: Friday, March 11, 2016 18:56
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: [VoiceOps] G.729 A/B Experiences
>
> Hey everyone,
>
> I'm looking to deploy a lower-bandwidth codec, and am wondering what
> everyone's experience has been with G.729, primary regarding voice
> quality. Historically, we have limited our codec use to G.711.
>
> Some test calls in the lab are showing promising results, I'm just
> curious what might happen in the real-world.
>
> Thank you for your time!!

_______________________________________________
VoiceOps mailing list
[email protected]
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
_______________________________________________
VoiceOps mailing list
[email protected]
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops

Reply via email to