Hi Bill,
Its a while since I used this. I had to look it up. The "rate" effect in sox is the default one. It uses a really nasty straight line interpolator. The good one is "resample". Try the manual entry for sox, and it will tell you the details of how to use it.
Regards, Steve
Bill Seddon wrote:
Steve
Can you offer some recommendations regarding the sox arguments to use? My use of sox for down sampling is limited to this kind of command:
sox in.wav -r 8000 out.gsm
Are there other arguments that will give better sound from compressed formats?
Thanks
Bill Seddon
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steve Underwood Sent: September 20, 2004 2:33 PM To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Users] English vs American voice files
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
sox offers several ways to change sampling rates. The poorest one is really quite poor. The best should not be distinguishable from any other good converter over a telecphone line. Dithering is completely irrelevant for telephony. It too LoFi to notice. :-)On 20 Sep 2004 at 12:38, Andreas Sikkema wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Initially we recorded using 16 bit/8K sampling on the basis that this is what is required by Asterisk but that was really terrible. So we're sampling at higher rates onWe've found that downbsampling with sox resulted in significantly lower quality files as those downsampled with Cool Edit.
the basis that we can use sox to change it as necessary. Any
thoughts on what we can do to make the recordings sound "sharper"?
Dithering in Cool Edit maybe?
Matt Riddell
Regards,
Steve
_______________________________________________ Asterisk-Users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
