[opus] Opus for ASR - update and questions

Young, Milan Milan.Young at nuance.com
Thu Dec 6 18:42:01 PST 2012

Thank you for the answers Tim.

One more follow-up question regarding the decoder's "packet-loss" parameter.  What distribution model is being used to simulate packet loss?  Is this a uniform model, or something that resembles the bursty nature of real world conditions?


> -----Original Message-----
> From: opus-bounces at xiph.org [mailto:opus-bounces at xiph.org] On Behalf Of
> Timothy B. Terriberry
> Sent: Friday, November 30, 2012 3:57 PM
> To: opus at xiph.org
> Subject: Re: [opus] Opus for ASR - update and questions
> Young, Milan wrote:
> > have contained redundancy).  If there is a better term (eg
> > "segments"), please let me know.  If not I'll continue using "packet".
> The official term used in RFC 6716 is "Opus frame", and there can be several
> such frames in a packet. This is distinct from a "SILK frame"...
> there can be several of these in an Opus frame. I.e., 40 and 60 ms Opus frames
> are composed of multiple 20 ms SILK frames. Any redundant frames exist only
> at the SILK layer, so while they are independent SILK frames, they are
> packaged together in a single Opus frame.
> > *Is the decision to copy information from N-1 into N binary?  In other
> > words, is it ever the case that a partial copy occurs, or is it all or
> > nothing decision?
> LBRR is only used on active SILK frames or the SILK portion of Hybrid frames,
> and the copy is generally lower bitrate than the original frame.
> So no, it's not really "binary".
> > *Does packet N ever contain information from more than one previous
> > packets (eg N-2), or is it always a single?
> A 40 or 60 ms Opus frame may contain 40 or 60 ms of redundancy, which may
> cover several SILK frames. This could potentially cover multiple prior packets if
> they were, e.g., only 20 ms long (but this would be unusual, and the current
> encoder does not include redundancy right after a frame size change, because
> it greatly simplifies the implementation).
> There is no way to, e.g., always send redundancy for the previous two packets
> instead of just one previous packet.
> > *What is the limit of the redundancy provided by this feature?  Is it
> > simply that every packet contains the previous packet's data, or does
> > it go further than this by sending duplicate copies of each individual
> > packet (which themselves contain the previous packet data).
> It is more like, "Some packets contain some of the previous packet's data."
> There are general mechanisms in RTP for sending duplicates of whole packets
> (e.g,. RFC 2198). These can be used for any payload type, if the RTP stack
> supports it. The advantage of the redundancy provided by Opus natively is
> that it does _not_ require duplication of entire packets, so it imposes bitrate
> overheads that are less than 100%.
> > *Continuing on the above, how does one trigger that maximum mode.
> > Perhaps one should set expect-loss to 100%, but that has some odd
> > implications. If all packets will be dropped, the situation seems
> > hopeless J.
> Think of 100% as "100% minus epsilon".
> > *When setting these parameters, any advice for Ethernet frame sizes?
> > I'm not much of a networking guy, but it seems that the risk of
> > failure would climb dramatically if a packet spanned multiple frames.
> Individual Opus packets will almost always fit inside an MTU. Even assuming a
> minimum MTU equal to the minimum IPv4 datagram size (576 bytes), with 20
> ms frames you can fit over 214 kbps of audio on top of the RTP headers. We've
> actually discussed mandating the packets fit in the MTU in the payload draft
> specification (in fact I thought the text was already there, but I couldn't find it
> when I just went to look for it).
> _______________________________________________
> opus mailing list
> opus at xiph.org
> http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/opus

More information about the opus mailing list