[Serusers] G723.1 vs G729

[m36828253-1 at imap.1and1.com]

I tried G723 on hardphone on dialup over mediaproxy.
On Dialup UA end up/down stream was 24k/19k
It was nice call but sometimes both party of both end noticed voice loss.

Thanks,
MOhammad


Original Message:
-----------------
From: Iqbal iqbal at gigo.co.uk
Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 15:36:07 +0100
To: kofi at radiocomplex.com, serusers at iptel.org
Subject: Re: [Serusers] G723.1 vs G729


the 5.3, 6.3K are really theoretical, i dont think they include IP 
overheads, I  used media_sessions.phtml, and looked at the actual calls 
per codec, and I dont think u can really get a good call without 50-70K, 
also most bandwidth providers (at least here in the UK) are 
asymmetrical, so even on a 128K, u could have problems.

Having said that I have done a nice call on xlite using ilbc on dial up.

Iqbal

Kofi Obiri-Yeboah wrote:

>Just to add a few more details, Greger is right to point out the quality
>inferiority of G.723 compared to those of G711 and G729. In fact, in most
VOIP
>deployments, in order to quarantee interoperability, a minimum bandwidth of
>128K is specified. However to reach the wider "lower bandwidth areas" most
>service providers are opting for G.723 which uses either 5.3 or 6.3K. At
this
>low bandwidth transmission needs, one could literally reach "dial up modem"
>equipped areas. in fact most VOIP phone hardware and software are begining
to
>specify G.723 as their default codec. Note that until the direct media
>connection phase of a VOIP vall setup, wide bandwidth is not required. Also
>note that analogue phones have a maximim bandwidth need of 3K, hence even
the
>low quality of G.723/5.3K, compared to the average analogue phone call, is
>superior
>  
>

_______________________________________________
Serusers mailing list
Serusers at iptel.org
http://mail.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers

--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .