EVS is a full-range codec, covering both speech and music compression.
Alas: the first link I gave includes tests involving both EVS and Opus.
AMR is a clear speech codec; better to see (E)LD-AAC as forerunner of EVS.
(Support included in many operating systems, including iOS and Android.
https://www.iis.fraunhofer.de/en/ff/amm/communication/aaceld.html
Just check compatibility lists?)
I am not doing politics here, please respect this. But I think
representations have to be
balanced. You could not write a scientific article about LD audio
compression leaving out
several codecs which are in very wide use.
The patent argument is not relevant in this context. (You were < now >
introducing the patent
argument in the sense that people “should” use opus. This is unrelated
to the claim I was
disputing. Alas, you simply can’t use opus in < every > context. )
Just to clarify a few things.
Best,
Stefan Schreiber
P.S.: I am definitively positive about Opus, but the person who is
doing “politics” doesn’t
seem to be me.
That “EVS is basically a revenue engine” is IMO a biased statement,
because it has
been chosen to be a 3GPP standard. (Most companies voting not
receiving EVS revenues.)
And yes, Opus seems to be patent-free. (Or say the SILK patents have
been donated by
Microsoft. So actually there are some patents, but there are no fees.)
- - - -
Citando mgraves mstvp.com <mgra...@mstvp.com>:
Perhaps "pinnacle" is a bit of an over statement, but the point is sound.
EVS is quite capable, but note that that entire presentation makes
no mention of Opus at all. One arises from the 3GPP the other from
the IETF. Fundamentally different groups, with very different
perspectives.
Like AMR before it, or MPEG, EVS is basically a revenue engine for
the various patent holders.
Much of what EVS can do follows Opus, after-the-fact. The real
strength of EVS are the compatibility modes with legacy telecom
codes (AMR, AMR-WB, AMR-WB+) which virtually ensured adoption in
mobile telecom.
Opus is open source and free to use by anyone. It also accommodates
an arbitrary number of channels, supporting various surround schemes.
There are those who, fearing the appearance of some patent holder
making a claim against Opus, will prefer to pay for a license to use
something else.
Michael Graves
mgra...@mstvp.com
http://www.mgraves.org
o(713) 861-4005
c(713) 201-1262
sip:mgra...@mjg.onsip.com
skype mjgraves
-----Original Message-----
From: Sursound <sursound-boun...@music.vt.edu> On Behalf Of Stefan Schreiber
Sent: Friday, May 31, 2019 10:01 AM
To: Surround Sound discussion group <sursound@music.vt.edu>
Subject: Re: [Sursound] wifi audio (was Re: Deconstructing soundbar
marketing B.S.)
(Opus)
It's basically the pinnacle of audio encoding at this point, having
merged the best ideas from CELT, Silk and a few entirely new ones.
It would be hard to see how any proprietary codec vendor could compete
except where addressing a very narrow niche.
- -
Low delay AAC, in various versions?
What about EVS?
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Anssi_Raemoe/publication/282605143/figure/fig6/AS:281480141651970@1444121503098/Combined-results-with-all-72-listeners-and-all-signal-types-with-increasing-bitrate-in.png
Opus is really good. But the “pinnacle”?
http://www.aes.org/technical/documentDownloads.cfm?docID=548
“A narrow niche? “ 😉🍷
I would see EVS (more or less) as the low-delay version of USAC.
Best,
Stefan Schreiber
- - -
Citando mgraves mstvp.com <mgra...@mstvp.com>:
Chris,
Actually, I too come from a broadcast background, having installed
graphics systems into production and master controls for over 25
years. I completely appreciate the demand for hard real-time and zero
latency.
I've tracked Opus since its earliest days in the IETF CODEC working
group. The standard has many operative modes. It's absolutely capable
of full-bandwidth, in both lossy and lossless modes.
You will find it both in the production/contribution side of the house
(remote codecs, STL, etc.) and distribution. It also dominates video
conference space.
It's basically the pinnacle of audio encoding at this point, having
merged the best ideas from CELT, Silk and a few entirely new ones.
It would be hard to see how any proprietary codec vendor could compete
except where addressing a very narrow niche.
Michael Graves
mgra...@mstvp.com
http://www.mgraves.org
o(713) 861-4005
c(713) 201-1262
sip:mgra...@mjg.onsip.com
skype mjgraves
-----Original Message-----
URL:
<https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20190531/f2e08f40/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20190531/dadf011a/attachment.html>
_______________________________________________
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, edit
account or options, view archives and so on.
