Re: [SoX-users] AMR support in SoX

[Chris B. <ch...@cn...>]

On Sun, Jul 3, 2011 at 6:20 AM, Jan Stary <ha...@st...> wrote:
> SoX 14.3.2 has support for the AMR speech codec.
> The comments in sox's AMR code say:
>
> amr-nb.c-/* In order to use this format with SoX, first build & install:
> amr-nb.c: *   http://ftp.penguin.cz/pub/users/utx/amr/amrnb-w.x.y.z.tar.bz2
> amr-nb.c- * or install equivalent package(s) e.g. marillat.
> --
> amr-wb.c-/* In order to use this format with SoX, first build & install:
> amr-wb.c: *   http://ftp.penguin.cz/pub/users/utx/amr/amrwb-w.x.y.z.tar.bz2
> amr-wb.c- * or install equivalent package(s) e.g. marillat.
>
> Besides libamr[nw]b, SoX recognizes the opencore-amr implementation.
> Is one of those considered superior to the other? When both are
> installed and I either specify --with-amrnb (or leave the AMR support
> to autodetection), ./configure seems to pick up opencore-amr. Note that
> ./configure has no way to specify which AMR implementation to use
> if more then one are present.
>
> Is this intentional? If so, should the amr*.c comment be edited?
>
> (I prepared an OpenBSD port opencore-amr to have AMR support in SoX;
> http://stare.cz/~hans/.tmp/opencore-amr-0.1.2.tar.gz
> I might need to prepare a port of libamr[nw]b too.)
>

The reason Opencore is preferred is because of its licenses (Apache).
I forget what the reference implementation license is but if I recall
it was not granted redistribution rights.

Opencore is missing AMR-WB encoding support so for people that want
that will want to somwhow use that version.

Chris