Re: [codec] Next Steps for WG

Even without DTX, the Voice modes will expose a Voice Activity flag in the decoder API. This will reveal without any decoding whether a payload contains active speech.

And all decoder modes have low CPU demands, so decoding all streams to determine which ones are most active is relatively cheap.

koen.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Christian Hoene" <hoene@uni-tuebingen.de>
To: "Jean-Marc Valin" <jmvalin@jmvalin.ca>, "Roman Shpount" <roman@telurix.com>
Cc: codec@ietf.org
Sent: Friday, January 14, 2011 12:27:02 AM
Subject: Re: [codec] Next Steps for WG

The easiest way to mix the multiple streams is to take advantage of the DTX
feature, which is available in the Silk and hybrid mode. However, I am not
aware whether DTX or VAD is supported in the CELT mode.

Christian

> -----Original Message-----
> From: codec-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:codec-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf
> Of Jean-Marc Valin
> Sent: Friday, January 14, 2011 3:51 AM
> To: Roman Shpount
> Cc: codec@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [codec] Next Steps for WG
> 
> Hi Roman,
> 
> We believe that we meet all requirements that were identified. As for
mixing
> multiple encoded streams, that was marked as desirable in the draft
because
> it's very hard to achieve without sacrificing efficiency.
> To some extent, if you constrain the Opus encoder to a subset of the
> available options (CELT only without short blocks or post-filter), then
you can
> create streams that can be mixed at roughly half the normal complexity. I
> think that's about as much as we can do here.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> 	Jean-Marc
> 
> On 11-01-13 07:34 PM, Roman Shpount wrote:
> > Just out of curiosity, have the OPUS codec been review against the
> > list of requirements that we put together?
> >
> > In particular, I raised the requirement that multiple encoded streams
> > form different sources can be efficiently combined. Is it possible
> > with OPUS? If it is, then how?
> > _____________________________
> > Roman Shpount - www.telurix.com <http://www.telurix.com>
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 5:29 PM, Cullen Jennings <fluffy@cisco.com
> > <mailto:fluffy@cisco.com>> wrote:
> >
> >
> >     The OPUS draft authors believe the bitstream for OPUS will be ready
> >     to be "frozen" by the end of the month. At that point we plan to
> >     spend the following month testing and, baring any surprises, will
> >     likely go to WGLC after that.
> >
> >     There has been some questions about what "frozen" means in IETF
> >     context. The bitstream could change any time up to when the IESG
> >     approves it which is after Working Group Last call and after IETF
> >     Last Call so there is no guarantee that nothing will change but ...
> >       by "frozen" we mean that we believe no changes are needed and
> >     don't plan to make changes unless some significant problem is found.
> >
> >     Thanks,
> >     Cullen, Jonathan, and Mike
> >
> >
> >     _______________________________________________
> >     codec mailing list
> >     codec@ietf.org <mailto:codec@ietf.org>
> >     https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/codec
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > codec mailing list
> > codec@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/codec
> _______________________________________________
> codec mailing list
> codec@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/codec

_______________________________________________
codec mailing list
codec@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/codec