| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
GNU and FSF tell WBUR.org Boston: PlayOgg!GNU and FSF tell WBUR.org Boston: PlayOgg!Posted Apr 16, 2008 9:31 UTC (Wed) by bk (guest, #25617)In reply to: GNU and FSF tell WBUR.org Boston: PlayOgg! by drag Parent article: GNU and FSF tell WBUR.org Boston: PlayOgg!
As you say, Speex is designed more as a phone/VoIP codec than for use in broadcast audio. Radio and talk shows would sound significantly worse (although intelligible) than they would encoded in Ogg Vorbis.
(Log in to post comments)
GNU and FSF tell WBUR.org Boston: PlayOgg! Posted Apr 18, 2008 21:01 UTC (Fri) by zooko (subscriber, #2589) [Link] Radio talk shows would sound worse in Speex than in Vorbis? Why is that? Anybody got an uncompressed radio talk show that we can try it out on? (The only internet talk show that I listen to is http://econtalk.org , but they don't distribute raw audio versions...)
GNU and FSF tell WBUR.org Boston: PlayOgg! Posted Apr 18, 2008 21:41 UTC (Fri) by jmspeex (subscriber, #51639) [Link] (I am the author of Speex) Speex is indeed designed for VoIP in mind, although it has other applications. When it comes to choosing Speex vs Vorbis for applications like speech-only radio, here's the rule of thumb I always suggest. If your target bit-rate is above ~32 kbps, use Vorbis, if below, use Speex. Of course, that's a rule of thumb and the exact application can change things. Speex does worst on music than Vorbis, but it does much better than Vorbis in case of packet loss. If used properly (at 16 kHz and not 44.1 kHz as some idiots try to use it), Speex will give you a quality that's somewhere between AM and FM radio.
|
|
||||||||||||