IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V  < 1 2  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Opus 1.1a BABYEATER build
Omicron
post Feb 26 2013, 23:10
Post #26





Group: Members
Posts: 9
Joined: 17-February 13
From: Kishinev
Member No.: 106693



QUOTE
what kind of problems did you hear?


It sounds intermitently and tinkling as compared with others. I think everybody can hear some kind of noise if listen carefully.


Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
RobertM
post Feb 28 2013, 09:36
Post #27





Group: Members
Posts: 12
Joined: 17-February 13
Member No.: 106691



I think I've noticed a minor issue in the encoder, but I'm not familiar enough with the tech to understand exactly why it happens. See the attached files for an example. I created the sound a long time ago so it's not copyright in any way.

Sample 1: The 44.1kHz wav file shows some distortion in the output .opus file (and .wav file when decoded).

Sample 2: When the same original wav file from Sample 1 is first resampled to 48kHz using a different tool (Audacity), the encoded result sounds basically perfect, except for a small click at the beginning, but I suspect that's due to my player - the decoded wav output has no click.


Is this related to the resampler in the Opus encoder?


Edit: Updated attachment

This post has been edited by RobertM: Feb 28 2013, 10:25
Attached File(s)
Attached File  Issue1.zip ( 654.96K ) Number of downloads: 59
 
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Gainless
post Apr 8 2013, 14:14
Post #28





Group: Members
Posts: 169
Joined: 28-October 11
Member No.: 94764



Another sample making issues:
DWK Sample
A sweeping sound in the background occurs synchronical to the bassline. I haven't tested it with the latest git version, though, but with the one here from the topic.

This post has been edited by Gainless: Apr 8 2013, 14:17
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
jensend
post Apr 8 2013, 17:16
Post #29





Group: Members
Posts: 140
Joined: 21-May 05
Member No.: 22191



I can't reproduce your problem on mainline builds. Haven't tried with the babyeater build.

jmvalin has asked that people now use mainstream pre-1.1 builds and not the babyeater build. The Babyeater builds were an experiment in variable frame sizes; jmvalin and NullC needed some feedback on their experiment, people responded, some major issues were found, and there's a good bit of work to be done before they ask people to test that again. In the meantime there are plenty of other innovations etc in the master builds that need more testing.

This again highlights the need for very visible instructions and warnings for prospective testers and an up-to-date link to builds (and possibly source snapshots/git revision numbers) the Opus devs would prefer people use for testing. I've proposed before that this be done with a sticky in the Opus subforum- indeed that's one of the main reasons I pushed for having a dedicated Opus subforum. When those instructions and warnings aren't very visible, we all have to keep correcting misconceptions. When people who want to help test don't know which builds to test, they may be wasting their time, and responding to their reports may waste developers' time. Simple steps to improve communication can go a long way to help.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
db1989
post Apr 8 2013, 17:32
Post #30





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 5141
Joined: 23-June 06
Member No.: 32180



The above post has been moved from the associated thread in Uploads.

Thanks for pointing out jmvalinís request. It would have made sense for him or NullC to post that here, but better late and posted by someone else than never, I suppose. Should this thread be closed until further notice, in that case?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
jmvalin
post Apr 8 2013, 18:20
Post #31


Xiph.org Speex developer


Group: Developer
Posts: 473
Joined: 21-August 02
Member No.: 3134



QUOTE (jensend @ Apr 8 2013, 12:16) *
jmvalin has asked that people now use mainstream pre-1.1 builds and not the babyeater build. The Babyeater builds were an experiment in variable frame sizes; jmvalin and NullC needed some feedback on their experiment, people responded, some major issues were found, and there's a good bit of work to be done before they ask people to test that again. In the meantime there are plenty of other innovations etc in the master builds that need more testing.


Actually, I recommended that people stop testing babyeater, but testing of 1.1-alpha and git is still very appreciated. The more testing we get, the quicker we can get to a final 1.1 release. We're interested in cases where 1.1 performs poorly, but what's even more useful is when 1.1 performs worse than 1.0.x, i.e. regressions.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Gainless
post Apr 8 2013, 18:39
Post #32





Group: Members
Posts: 169
Joined: 28-October 11
Member No.: 94764



QUOTE (jensend @ Apr 8 2013, 18:16) *
I can't reproduce your problem on mainline builds. Haven't tried with the babyeater build.

I can't spot it anymore either since I switched to Direct Sound as output, seems to be a problem with WASAPI (which I use in general) or my audio drivers, didn't take that possibility into account lol. Anyway, I'm very sorry for putting that "blinder", Opus is indeed fine on this one.
QUOTE (jensend @ Apr 8 2013, 18:16) *
This again highlights the need for very visible instructions and warnings for prospective testers and an up-to-date link to builds (and possibly source snapshots/git revision numbers) the Opus devs would prefer people use for testing. I've proposed before that this be done with a sticky in the Opus subforum- indeed that's one of the main reasons I pushed for having a dedicated Opus subforum. When those instructions and warnings aren't very visible, we all have to keep correcting misconceptions. When people who want to help test don't know which builds to test, they may be wasting their time, and responding to their reports may waste developers' time. Simple steps to improve communication can go a long way to help.

Regularly updated builds would indeed be great, though.

This post has been edited by Gainless: Apr 8 2013, 19:11
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
IgorC
post Apr 8 2013, 19:05
Post #33





Group: Members
Posts: 1506
Joined: 3-January 05
From: Argentina, Bs As
Member No.: 18803



The version 1.1a is the last testing build that works fine for me.
Opus 1.1 alpha version (not BABYEATER)
In my opinion Opus 1.1a is already very good and there is still a room for improvements. But I think the development of a new video codec Daala should have a highest priority as bandwith savings are much higher for video.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
jensend
post Apr 8 2013, 22:41
Post #34





Group: Members
Posts: 140
Joined: 21-May 05
Member No.: 22191



QUOTE (jmvalin @ Apr 8 2013, 11:20) *
Actually, I recommended that people stop testing babyeater, but testing of 1.1-alpha and git is still very appreciated.
I'm confused. By starting with 'Actually,' you give the impression that I said something false which you're correcting, but you apparently go on to repeat what I just said. Maybe by "pre-1.1" you thought I meant "1.0.x"? I meant "development versions leading up to 1.1," as could be seen from my mention of the innovations in git master.

QUOTE (Gainless @ Apr 8 2013, 11:39) *
Regularly updated builds would indeed be great, though.
Sure, it would, but that's not quite what I was asking for, and perhaps I didn't do well at making that clear.

Regardless of how frequent/up-to-date the builds are, the link needs to be up-to-date. In other words, whether they set up a Jenkins windows build artifact and prefer that testers use those bleeding edge builds or whether they only sporadically provide "blessed" builds for testers every few months, they need to communicate clearly about which builds prospective testers should use.

Right now, the most up-to-date advice on which build to test is quite frequently buried in some thread somewhere or stated in the (ephemeral, no public logs) IRC channel. In other words, it's effectively invisible to most people. This puts prospective testers, especially those on platforms like Windows where setting up a build environment takes knowledge and effort, at a real disadvantage. It is an unnecessary barrier, and it causes confusion, frustration, and useless bug reports.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
jmvalin
post Apr 9 2013, 03:21
Post #35


Xiph.org Speex developer


Group: Developer
Posts: 473
Joined: 21-August 02
Member No.: 3134



QUOTE (jensend @ Apr 8 2013, 17:41) *
QUOTE (jmvalin @ Apr 8 2013, 11:20) *
Actually, I recommended that people stop testing babyeater, but testing of 1.1-alpha and git is still very appreciated.
I'm confused. By starting with 'Actually,' you give the impression that I said something false which you're correcting, but you apparently go on to repeat what I just said. Maybe by "pre-1.1" you thought I meant "1.0.x"? I meant "development versions leading up to 1.1," as could be seen from my mention of the innovations in git master.


Yeah, I thought you meant 1.0.x. Sorry for the confusion.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

2 Pages V  < 1 2
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 18th April 2014 - 17:42