[VoiceOps] G.729 A/B Experiences

[David Knell]

One data point.  Our ACDs for our international calling card type traffic
increased by ~15% when
we dropped G.729 and went to G.711.  Whilst G.729 on its own is fine, a
typical call path would be
cell->us->cell, so there'd be at least three separate encodings and
decodings.  Call quality under
these circumstances isn't great, and taking out one set of compression help
noticeably.

--Dave

On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 12:56 PM, Carlos Alvarez <caalvarez at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Our customers completely disagree with that.
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 6:55 PM, Anthony Orlando via VoiceOps <
> voiceops at voiceops.org> wrote:
>
>> Depends on whether you want to provide a quality product or not.  G.729
>> already hovers just above the line of "satisfied".  The slightest
>> impairment drives that below what is considered acceptable.  I wouldn't
>> deploy it.
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>> *From:* Robert Johnson <robert.j at bendtel.com>
>> *To:* voiceops at voiceops.org
>> *Sent:* Friday, March 11, 2016 5:43 PM
>> *Subject:* [VoiceOps] G.729 A/B Experiences
>>
>> Hey everyone,
>>
>> I'm looking to deploy a lower-bandwidth codec, and am wondering what
>> everyone's experience has been with G.729, primary regarding voice
>> quality. Historically, we have limited our codec use to G.711.
>>
>> Some test calls in the lab are showing promising results, I'm just
>> curious what might happen in the real-world.
>>
>> Thank you for your time!!
>> --
>> Robert Johnson
>> BendTel, Inc.
>> (541)389-4020
>> Central Oregon's Own Telephone and Internet Service Provider
>> www.bendtel.com/about/
>> _______________________________________________
>> VoiceOps mailing list
>> VoiceOps at voiceops.org
>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Sent from Yahoo Mail
>> <https://go.onelink.me/107872968?pid=E-mail&c=MG_FNU_Feb16&af_sub1=E-mail&af_sub2=US_MG_YGrowth_Mail&af_sub3=US_Mail_MG_FEU>
>> ------------------------------
>> *From:* Robert Johnson <robert.j at bendtel.com>
>> *To:* voiceops at voiceops.org
>> *Sent:* Friday, March 11, 2016 5:43 PM
>> *Subject:* [VoiceOps] G.729 A/B Experiences
>>
>> Hey everyone,
>>
>> I'm looking to deploy a lower-bandwidth codec, and am wondering what
>> everyone's experience has been with G.729, primary regarding voice
>> quality. Historically, we have limited our codec use to G.711.
>>
>> Some test calls in the lab are showing promising results, I'm just
>> curious what might happen in the real-world.
>>
>> Thank you for your time!!
>> --
>> Robert Johnson
>> BendTel, Inc.
>> (541)389-4020
>> Central Oregon's Own Telephone and Internet Service Provider
>> www.bendtel.com/about/
>> _______________________________________________
>> VoiceOps mailing list
>> VoiceOps at voiceops.org
>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> VoiceOps mailing list
>> VoiceOps at voiceops.org
>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> VoiceOps mailing list
> VoiceOps at voiceops.org
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
>
>


-- 

David Knell, Director, TelNG
T: +44 1223 797979 / +1 970-315-4721
W: http://www.telng.com
H: http://www.daveknell.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/voiceops/attachments/20160313/742cc079/attachment.html>