Well, I have been asking myself a few questions:
1. I have observed a number of times that Astlinux gives bether sound quality than other Asterisk installations, I have tried, but still I ask myself: Can this be really true, or is it just a number of coincidents ? (I can se it and I can hear it, but I still dont know if I can believe it.)
2. Is the Astlinux based on a standard Linux kernel or is it a modified kernel that gives it some improved properties for ip telephony ?
3. Coult it be the Asterisk source code that is modified in some way ? Some functions like the Disa function, as an example just give some partly good enough functionality, if based on one of the newer Digium source codes. It works, but not 100 % like I wanted it to work. With the Astlinux
0.3.0 installation it works just perfect. The dialtone is 100 % stable, there is no unwanted interupts of any kind. It just work, smooth and nice.
In this tread it has been mentioned that Asterisk can not coexist wery well with X-win. Well the alternate installations I have tested Astlinux against has all benn text based installations, only with a minimum number of processes running.
For me it looks like there is smething more of improvements built into the Astlinux than just a reduction of the number of running processes. When I take a Clarkconnect server and compile the newest Digium Asterisk sourcecode into it, and reduce the number of active proceses to allmost nothing, and run it like a Asterisk server, it still sounds like ip-telephony with a "allmost good enough digital sound". When I compare with a Astlinux installation running on a much less powerfull computer, it just sounds and work quite perfect. If I run the Astlinux on a more powerfull PC it still sounds and work just perfect.
For me it looks like that to make iptelephony "to work", you can just use any guide and standard distro and it will work. But if it is a question of things like tweaking out the right sound quality and to make everything running just perfect like it should, there is still some element of mysterious and unexplainable behaviour as a part of it all. (How could to digital streams of the same analoge sound signal sound different, and also one other example: How could two allmost equaly configured routers perform rather differently with ip telephony, even though they should work equally and the same way.)
I whish I were able to understand one day how to Asterisk installations can "sound different", when based on the same protocols and identical same configuration files, same hardware etc. I think it shouldn't be possible, but still it looks like it is ???
Best reg Arne.
On 5/29/06, Tom Lynn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
So, it tastes great AND it's less filling? ;-)
On 5/29/06, Mark Spring < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I can concur with the sound quality. I've installed asterisk on many
> different platforms and with almost nothing else installed. My current
> platform has almost as little running as astlinux...but we know that's
> not completely possible unless it's astlinux. Everything I have read
> leads me to believe that it is simply the native sounds. This produces
> less load on the entire system. That's my two cents..
>
> Mark
>
> On 5/29/06, Michael Graves <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Much of what you describe may be attributed to not having a GUI running
> > while Asterisk is working. Any heavily interrupt driven process, such as a
> > GUI, can interfere with Asterisk.
> >
> > Michael
> >
> > --Original Message Text---
> > From: Arne Gylseth
> > Date: Sun, 28 May 2006 07:08:48 +0200
> >
> >
> > Hello everybody !
> >
> > I have carried out a number of test installations of Asterisk on different
> > PC platforms.
> >
> > My conclusion based on experience only is that Astlinux gives a quality of
> > sound that is allways superior to Asterisk installed on a more complex Linux
> > distros.
> >
> > I have tried a number of Asterisk installations on Linux distros like SME
> > server and Clarkconnect to see if it not could be practical and usable to
> > run Asterisk just as an background process on a server, doing mainly
> > something else. Asterisk installations has been done based on different
> > versons of Asterisk sourcecode and some precomiled rpms.
> >
> > My experience is the same all the time - If Asterisk is installed on a
> > general server with a lot of processes running this allways lead to a
> > reduced analog sound quality.
> >
> > The way that I think the sound quality is reduced is that this more complex
> > Linux distros tends to give Asterisk a some sort of "semi duplex caracter" -
> > If the two persons are talking at the same time it tends to give some sort
> > of "ultrashort pauses" that makes the analogue sound to "float not so nice
> > and smoot as it should". The sound easyaly and usually sound like "poor
> > digital sound quality".
> >
> > Astlinux allways gives a "smooth and nice running analog sound" without any
> > hearable degradation of the analogue signal.
> >
> > I have tested different installations on the same hardware and with the
> > same identical set of configuration files, and I think that the difference
> > is there all the time.
> >
> > One other thing that I have noticed is that the load on the processor is
> > smaller when a telephone call is running via Astlinux compared with asterisk
> > on a mor complex Linux distro. (Difficult to measure presicely but it looks
> > like a difference something like 10:1 or 5:1, 0.9 % processor load for a
> > call on SME server (a bit more than 100 processes running), 0.1 % processor
> > load on Astlinux on same hardware and same configuration files.)
> >
> > I have lately been testing a bit on one AMD XP 1500 / 512MB pc with a
> > standard Asterisk sourcecode installation on Clarkconnect and Astlinux on a
> > HP Compaq T5000 thin client. It looks like that the Astlinux on the small
> > thinklient outperformes the PC installation completely. (Its Astlinux
> > version 3.0 because the thin client has only a 32 MB onboard memory.)
> >
> > I find these observations allmost hard to believe. It is digital sound
> > processing, and it should not behave like this, but it does (??)
> >
> > I am courios to know - is this observations only my observations or my
> > "believe" or is these observations that other Astlinuxusers also have done ?
> >
> > If it should be like this, how could it then work like this, how could
> > digital sound processed on one platform sound different from digital sound
> > processed on another platform, when Asterisk configuration files and
> > hardware is identical the same.
> >
> > Still I ask myself - can this really be true ?
> >
> >
> > Best reg Arne
> >
> >
> > --
> > Michael Graves
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sr. Product Specialist
> > www.pixelpower.com
> > Pixel Power Inc.
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > o713-861-4005
> > o800-905-6412
> > c713-201-1262
> > fwd 54245
> > _______________________________________________
> > Astlinux-users mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > http://lists.kriscompanies.com/mailman/listinfo/astlinux-users
> >
> > Donations to support AstLinux are graciously accepted via PayPal to
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED].
> >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Astlinux-users mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.kriscompanies.com/mailman/listinfo/astlinux-users
>
> Donations to support AstLinux are graciously accepted via PayPal to [EMAIL PROTECTED].
>
_______________________________________________
Astlinux-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.kriscompanies.com/mailman/listinfo/astlinux-users
Donations to support AstLinux are graciously accepted via PayPal to [EMAIL PROTECTED].
_______________________________________________ Astlinux-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.kriscompanies.com/mailman/listinfo/astlinux-users
Donations to support AstLinux are graciously accepted via PayPal to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
