Re: smallest page of encoded data
"Adam Langley" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.multimedia.ogg.vorbis.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <0E3B93B53D42FA4DA20B91009D283B0A015D5999@wsserver100.winscribe.com> |
I could do that, but then to merge the final result into a single file I would need to decode each chunk, concatenate them, and re-encode them again... actually resulting in more overall work and kind of defeating the purpose... Adam Langley Senior Developer Tel: +64 9 486 9010 [email protected] www.winscribe.com -----Original Message----- From: Ben B [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, 16 March 2009 4:37 p.m. To: Adam Langley Subject: Re: [Vorbis] smallest page of encoded data >Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2009 14:43:10 +1300 >From: "Adam Langley" <[email protected]> > >Thanks for the insight Carsten. >Basically, we're building a dictation system, with SPEEX at its core. Curre= >ntly we have this working but the problem is, the SPEEX encoding process ta= >kes approximately 1 minute per MB of PCM audio, resulting in lengthy 'encod= >e' jobs after a user has finished their dictation. >I am attempting to find a way around this, and my hope was that I could per= >form some type of incremental encode during the record process, yet still e= >nable the user to trim/rearrange their dictation without requiring a comple= >te re-encode. >And most users do edit the file to some degree... Well, I'm no expert on ogg or speex encoders. How about taking each 1/4 second, and encoding it a separate file. Then you could allow editting down to 1/4 second chunks. -Ben >Adam Langley >Senior Developer >Tel: +64 9 486 9010 >[email protected] >www.winscribe.com >=A0 >=A0 > >From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of= > Carsten Haese >Sent: Monday, 16 March 2009 2:08 p.m. >To: [email protected] >Subject: Re: [Vorbis] smallest page of encoded data > >On Sun, Mar 15, 2009 at 8:27 PM, Adam Langley <[email protected]> wrot= >e: >My end-goal is actually to do this with the SPEEX codec, but I'm using >Vorbis for now because I have previous experience with it. Am I going to >have the same problem with SPEEX? > >You're going to have a different but equally insurmountable problem. Speex = >is a CELP-based codec. The LP stands for "Linear Prediction", which means t= >hat each frame depends on the history of frames that came before it. This i= >n turn means that you can't rearrange frames without introducing artifacts. > >By the way, you're not saying what kind of audio you're planning to encode,= > so it should be noted that Speex is purely designed to encode human speech= >. It's very good at that, but It will perform poorly if you try to encode m= >usic or other sounds with it. > >-Carsten >_______________________________________________ >Vorbis mailing list >[email protected] >http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/vorbis