Talk:Code-excited linear prediction

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information 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.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Software (assessed as Low-importance).

Sorry about the aggressive changes. I think it was needed, but let me know if you think I removed something that shouldn't have been. Layout may not be 100% WP-conformant. Jmvalin 12:58, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Don't apologize, it's a major improvement! Be Bold! --QEDquid 14:40, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Verbatim copying from selected reading

FYI, the first paragraph of the CELP encoder section is copied verbatim without attribution from the first selected reading: Introduction to CELP Coding. I don't know if this is considered bad practice for Wikipedia. 2A02:1811:3707:B900:A8ED:55C6:983A:9C94 (talk) 18:05, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Could You Define More of the Terms

I'm having trouble understanding this explanation. The immediately obvious reason for this is that there are some terms (e.g. "codebook") that are not defined and do not seem to be obvious from context.

I would think (not having any background in this area) that a codebook is some fixed data that I use in the algorithm. But it appears that it means some kind of dynamic data (maybe the codebook is a particular block of the dynamic data) -- either the input data or data that's been decoded already.

This request is unreasonable if this article is intended only for people who already know about codecs in general but who don't know about CELP -- although that seems like a fairly narrow audience since CELP is apparently pretty common. Still, I acknowledge that "dumbing it down" could harm it as much as making it too "smart", although it looks to me like there is some space to expand the audience a bit (perhaps in both directions).

I have to admit that I may not be the best test case since I looked up the terms that WERE defined and I'm not sure I understand THEM either! :)

Thanks

Dave

Merging

I think it would be a bad idea to merge with Linear Predictive Coding. I think there's enough to be say about CELP alone that we don't want to mix that with all the LPC vocoders and what not. To give an idea, I estimate that once complete, the article should be about 5 times the length it currently has. Jmvalin 04:56, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed a bad Idea to merge

celp represents foundation for complete family of codecs like Vselp RELP etc

I agree - please do NOT merge the CELP and LPC articles --mcld 20:12, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]