Talk:G.722

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.Software: Computing Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Software, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of software on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.

Telecommunications Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Telecommunications, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Telecommunications on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Technology

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.

Sampling rate vs "clarity" =

"G.722 sample audio data at a rate of 16 kHz (using 14 bits), double that of traditional telephony interfaces, which results in superior audio quality and clarity." - This is unclear. Increasing sample rate above Nyquist-frequency makes for cheaper implementation, not for "superior audio quality". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.53.77.220 (talk) 10:10, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Human voice contains frequencies way above 4kHZ, so G.711 is way below what is required for high quality speech. Also dynamic range is superior in G.722, which further improves clarity. And I'm pretty sure higher sampling rate, especially with the higher algorithmic complexity is going to (or used to) cost more, unless you try to compensate for G.711's lower quality with expensive algorithms and then end up requiring a more expensive DSP, although in the general case I can't see an implementation of either differ in cost with today's hardware. Even the cheapest 8bit microcontroll you can buy should have no problem with G.722.