Author Topic: Support for G.722  (Read 1011 times)

tekbees

  • Beta Club Members
  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 22
    • View Profile
Support for G.722
« on: August 31, 2016, 06:56:25 AM »
It should support codec G.722

Shawn-GSSupport424

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 813
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Support for G.722
« Reply #1 on: August 31, 2016, 12:50:39 PM »
I'm not sure why HT812 doesn't support G722, it looks like is extended from HT5xx of Grandstream series, I'm confirming with SW team if we will add support of G722 in future, thanks

MaxFax

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 25
    • View Profile
Re: Support for G.722
« Reply #2 on: September 03, 2016, 08:50:19 AM »
Hi,

for my perspective it makes no sense to implement the G.722. It doesn´t improve the voice quality by analog telephones or the transmitting quality by fax.
But, it is your choice ...  ;)

Regards, Max

m.kambic

  • Beta Club Members
  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 12
    • View Profile
Re: Support for G.722
« Reply #3 on: September 05, 2016, 08:19:27 AM »
Hi,

for my perspective it makes no sense to implement the G.722. It doesn´t improve the voice quality by analog telephones or the transmitting quality by fax.
But, it is your choice ...  ;)

Regards, Max

If your VOIP provider supports this this your call can be twice the normal quality (7kHz vs 3.4kHz). Some VOIP PBX support this as well.

scottsip

  • Beta Club Members
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 126
  • SCOTT's IP - connecting you anywhere
    • View Profile
    • SCOTTS IP
    • Email
Re: Support for G.722
« Reply #4 on: September 14, 2016, 05:49:01 AM »
Analogue transmission

When it comes to an analogue circuit—what we also refer to as a voice-grade line—we need to also define the frequency band in which it operates. The human voice, for example, can typically generate frequencies from 100Hz to 10,000Hz, for a bandwidth of 9,900Hz. But the ear does not require a vast range of frequencies to elicit meaning from ordinary speech; the vast majority of sounds we make that constitute intelligible speech fall between 250Hz and 3,400Hz. So, the phone company typically allotted a total bandwidth of 4,000Hz for voice transmission.

At present, all current normal analogue devices are set to a 3 to 4KHz voice bandwidth, the inclusion of G722 wouldn't seem needed and just an expense to incorporate it for a somewhere down the future CPE device.

Since Analogue devices are deemed Legacy devices, what is the life span of a device that has no intelligent capabilities outside of Caller ID, ETSI/Bellcore/V23/DTMF/Differential Ring/Polarity Reversal/Reversal On Idle and anything else I have missed.

Surely the digital age and feature rich devices are better... Let the Analogue telephony die, it is time....

My 2 cents worth.
Regards,

Kevin

www.scottsip.com.au
(03) 9008-5696
Open 8:30 am to 5:00 pm
Monday to Friday - excludes public holidays

CyFo

  • Beta Club Members
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1354
  • CyFo Solutions
    • View Profile
    • CyFo Solutions
    • Email
Re: Support for G.722
« Reply #5 on: September 14, 2016, 07:06:06 AM »
It doesn’t make sense to have G722 in an ATA.

And if we are starting a grim list let me through to the pit that guy name “Fax”. He can’t understand that email is way better. Lol
Certified Grandstream Reseller
www.cyfosol.com
Boston, MA

scottsip

  • Beta Club Members
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 126
  • SCOTT's IP - connecting you anywhere
    • View Profile
    • SCOTTS IP
    • Email
Re: Support for G.722
« Reply #6 on: September 16, 2016, 05:03:26 PM »
Fax = Legacy

Faxes can be sent by anyone including people that are not even the sender ie

I am a distribution company - I receive an order of 300 x purple coloured socks from a company I deal with week by week. I start a run to create 350 purple socks extra in case of error, bleed in colour etc.

Once the socks are ready, I call the business letting them know their order is ready. Customer says they didn't order anything. I find out on the grape vine a competitor has sent the order through to tie up my resources.

I have no come back; however if I had a Document with a Digital Signature capability. The Document would be signed by the customer, It will identify the credentials, it would identify the customer and make them legally responsible. If the order was a fraud, the document signature provider repays the debt, or has just ordered those purple socks.  ;)

Digital Signatures = Todays' Technology

digital signature
nounComputing
plural noun: digital signatures

  a digital code (generated and authenticated by public key encryption) which is attached to an electronically transmitted document to verify its contents and the sender's identity.
Regards,

Kevin

www.scottsip.com.au
(03) 9008-5696
Open 8:30 am to 5:00 pm
Monday to Friday - excludes public holidays

greenhorn

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 2
    • View Profile
Re: Support for G.722
« Reply #7 on: December 06, 2017, 10:39:46 AM »
I would also like to see support for G.722 on HT8XX devices.
From what I've read here: http://goughlui.com/2016/11/20/teardown-review-grandstream-ht802-voip-analog-telephone-adapter/ HT8XX hardware chipset supports G.722.
Some people say that there is no point to do that, since voice has to traverse through analogue phone which will lower the quality anyway.
But if that's the case, then why there's a support for currently the most popular HD Voice codec - Opus?
I would like to do the tests and check if the quality would really deteriorate to the point that it doesn't matter if you choose G.711 or G.722. If the quality for G.722 would be even slightly better, then I would go for it.
Unfortunately I can't test it with Opus, since my PBX doesn't support it, but it supports G.722.
That's why I would like to see support for G.722 on HT8XX devices.