Re: walkie-talkie use within city limits
- From: Don Bowey <dbowey@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 04 Dec 2006 14:12:35 -0800
On 12/4/06 12:10 PM, in article 4tjdlaF14a7scU1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Dirk
Bruere at NeoPax" <dirk.bruere@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Don Bowey wrote:
On 12/3/06 6:48 PM, in article 4thgj1F13debrU2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Dirk
Bruere at NeoPax" <dirk.bruere@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Don Bowey wrote:
On 12/1/06 2:20 AM, in article 4tadvoF139672U2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "DirkThat was a recording of me in Bedford, talking to Russell in Norwich in
Bruere at NeoPax" <dirk.bruere@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Joel Kolstad wrote:That recording is of a one-ended (broadcast?) conversation, not of a
"Dirk Bruere at NeoPax" <dirk.bruere@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in messageDrop in quality?!
news:4t99n1F12d7f0U1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
So when are we going to get WiFi enabled mobile phones that can useYou can already do that with Windows Mobile phones and, I would guess,
Skype
when they latch onto an open network?
Palm
OS-powered phones.
That being said, Skype is a great example of where a drop in quality is
acceptable when the price is right (free).
Surely you are joking?
Listen to this test recording I made.
http://www.neopax.com/test/skypetest.mp3
conversation of two people, each on one end of a circuit. As such, what is
missing is the time delay between the time a sound is uttered and the time
it would be coded, sent, and then received at the other end of the circuit.
Your recording does not contain the echo that exists on low bit-rate
encoded
systems. If you have ever experienced a Network echo-canceller failure on
a
cellphone call you will know how badly the call is degraded.
The free part of Skype is good; the quality is fair, but not as good as the
Public network 56/64 kbit/s coded calls.
real time, both of us on Skype.
There is no low bit-rate coding in that conversation.
I recorded to wave and encoded at 128kb MP3
Ok, but that isn't relevant to the issue of the effects of low bit-rate
coding in telecommunications. The recorded end-to-end conversation was not
low bit-rate coded (common voip).
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: walkie-talkie use within city limits
- From: Dirk Bruere at NeoPax
- Re: walkie-talkie use within city limits
- References:
- walkie-talkie use within city limits
- From: ap
- Re: walkie-talkie use within city limits
- From: Rich Grise
- Re: walkie-talkie use within city limits
- From: Dirk Bruere at NeoPax
- Re: walkie-talkie use within city limits
- From: Joel Kolstad
- Re: walkie-talkie use within city limits
- From: Dirk Bruere at NeoPax
- Re: walkie-talkie use within city limits
- From: Don Bowey
- Re: walkie-talkie use within city limits
- From: Dirk Bruere at NeoPax
- Re: walkie-talkie use within city limits
- From: Don Bowey
- Re: walkie-talkie use within city limits
- From: Dirk Bruere at NeoPax
- walkie-talkie use within city limits
- Prev by Date: Re: Photodiode TIA
- Next by Date: Re: How inaccurate is a 555 or 7555 REALLY?
- Previous by thread: Re: walkie-talkie use within city limits
- Next by thread: Re: walkie-talkie use within city limits
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|