Topic 'Call quality GV vs voip.ms on Android.' in forum 'VOIP Tech Chat' - dslreports.com

Re: Call quality GV vs voip.ms on Android.

Sun, 31 Mar 2013 22:51:14 EDT

JeanInNepean posted :

said by conwaytwt:

1) capitalization counts, so the ping command should be ping -i 0.02 -s 192 -c 500 server.voip.ms (lowercase "i")

Oops... Indeed. That was my tablet trying to correct me...

Re: Call quality GV vs voip.ms on Android.

Sun, 31 Mar 2013 09:53:04 EDT

conwaytwt posted :

said by JeanInNepean:

You should ping the voip.ms servers you are using and report your numbers... on Linux, I use ping -I 0.02 -s 192 -c 500 server.voip.ms. this is the same throughput as a G.711u call.

I've been following the discussion and thought I would note two things --

1) capitalization counts, so the ping command should be ping -i 0.02 -s 192 -c 500 server.voip.ms (lowercase "i") [well, it is in Ubuntu. It might be different in other distros.]

2) I have had some weird one-way packet loss between my ISP and voip.ms servers in Texas that ONLY seems to affect UDP, so you would never see the problem occur with a ping. Switching traceroute between UDP (default on linux) and TCP makes the strangeness show up, and seems to indicate the problem is in an intermediate server at one of the hops. Nobody at voip.ms has been able to see the problem, and I haven't brought it to the attention of my ISP. I just work around it by avoiding the houston and dallas servers.

Re: Call quality GV vs voip.ms on Android.

Sun, 31 Mar 2013 09:06:18 EDT

JeanInNepean posted : The tunnel sound is usually caused by echo at both ends of the communication when the latency is very short. Try toggling your echo cancellation to see if it helps. Software echo cancellation can cause more echo than it eliminates in some cases...

But when you say words are skipped, this is probably because you have high packet losses. Not sure why you would only have this problem with voip.ms though (is Google Voice using a redundant protocol?) You should ping the voip.ms servers you are using and report your numbers... on Linux, I use ping -I 0.02 -s 192 -c 500 server.voip.ms. this is the same throughput as a G.711u call.

I'm with voip.ms running CSipSimple on Android. Audio quality has been excellent so far. I've turned off echo cancellation and, since I'm on DSL, my packet loss is pretty much 0% all the time...

Re: Call quality GV vs voip.ms on Android.

Sun, 31 Mar 2013 03:15:12 EDT

SCADAGeo posted : Have you considered performing a site survey?

Google play: Wifi Analyzer by farproc is a nice tool (free, no adware).

Another nice tool is Google play: WiFi Radar by Paul Girsas (free, adware).

Re: Call quality GV vs voip.ms on Android.

Sat, 30 Mar 2013 22:38:25 EDT

dks7 posted : ts wifi for sure as I have no cellular plan on the phone. And its not an overload issue as I have tried it after a fresh boot with very little stuff running.

Re: Call quality GV vs voip.ms on Android.

Sat, 30 Mar 2013 22:32:13 EDT

JoeSchmoe007 posted :

said by dks7:

So for a month or so I have been a voip.ms subscriber, and have been less than pleased with call quality. I am using the premium routing, but the call quality is the same using either. Very lackluster.

People sometimes have a hard time hearing me, sometimes words are skipped, I've been told it often sounds like I am talking in a tunnel or something.

I have tried sipdroid, csipsimple, 3cx, bria and the likes. All have been identical. I am now using GrooVe IP using google voice and a free number, and the sound quality using the same phone and same wifi at home is outstandingly clear on both ends.

I do not know what to make of this, I am sorely dissapointed in voip.ms, or VOIP in general, except GV. I am not sure if its the protocol, codec, provider, or what but something is sorely amiss. I have 30/4mbit bandwidth and excellent pings and low jitter to losangeles and seattle pops. Both provide the exact same quality, I am hoping maybe one of you fine fellas can shed some light on this situation and help me to get the call quality to an acceptable level, as it is now its almost unusable.

I am using an HTC Droid Incredible, the original from verizon.

I have the same phone as you and Callcentric and Anveo have very good sound quality (I use 3CXPhone). My internet connection is 15/2.

Could this be something with your phone (CPU overloaded or memory starvation) and/or WiFi?

Just to double-check: you are sure you are connecting via WiFi? Because over 3G results are never going to be good.

Re: Call quality GV vs voip.ms on Android.

Sat, 30 Mar 2013 21:31:48 EDT

cb14 posted : GV has been charging for calls to other countries than US/CAN from the very beginning. I just found neither their rates nor the call quality convincing.
People from other countries can easily sign up for free GV accounts either when they visit US or using their friends/relatives in the US. Also, getting Obi is not a problem in most countries, you just may pay significantly more for it.
I found the call quality AND service reliability surprising and certainly not worse than from SIP providers.
Their choice of numbers/exchanges got worse but when i signed up, it was better than from just about any SIP provider.
It is a piece of cake even for a complete layman to configure Obi for GV- if you can write and send an e-mail you can do that. Not so with some SIP providers. It can be very frustrating and turned off a lot of people.
GV on Obi seems to be far less susceptible for NAT issues( which can be extremely frustrating with some VOIP hostile routers/gateways)) than SIP providers, another very important point for an average plug and play user.
On the down side, I experienced the GV call treatments and all other whistles and bells to be to unreliable for my purposes and simply use the service for plain calls in and out( especially out).
As mentioned, there is NO customer service whatsoever.
And off course, the issue of a corporate mogul killing the business of small and innovative VOIP providers.

Re: Call quality GV vs voip.ms on Android.

Sat, 30 Mar 2013 20:14:32 EDT

PX Eliezer1 posted :

said by WhyADuck:

....Google Voice is a pretty popular service, unlike Google Reader. I'd be surprised if Google discontinues it. They may try to charge for it someday, but they have to be VERY careful....

Your post and analysis is excellent. I would just observe that GV already does charge (for calls outside US/Canada for example).

said by WhyADuck:

But that said, one wonders what's happening to commercial VoIP companies. There's someone in my family that's had phone service with a particular VoIP provider for years, and never had a bit of trouble with them, until this last year. Suddenly he's seeing a high rate of non-completed calls, both incoming and outgoing.

Here I must disagree with you.

Your relative has trouble with ONE company (you said a "particular" provider) and you are impugning the whole field (you said "commercial VoIP companies"---plural). :hmm:

This is the very reason that I dislike underachieving providers---they give everyone else a bad name.

Perhaps your relative should try a different provider. As you know, this can be done without yet having to port their current number. :)

I have no problem with making or receiving calls with CallCentric, used at 2 locations with different equipment.

I also have had no problems recently making calls on CallWithUs (2 locations), or Vitelity (one location).

If folks are not getting satisfaction,
it is up to them to take some action.
--
CallCentric business and home, CallWithUs, Gizmo5, Swiftvox, Windows PX, PaleMoon browser, Gigaset A580IP, Panasonic KX-TGP551, Linksys, Grandstream, Ixquick search, Detroit, Norfolk, Metropolis NY, Gotham City NJ.

Re: Call quality GV vs voip.ms on Android.

Sat, 30 Mar 2013 02:10:22 EDT

WhyADuck posted : You're asking a question that to a few people is akin to asking whether one religion is better than another. They have already made a choice and they are going to cite any reason they can to defend it. And then there are the Google haters, who will try anything they can to dissuade you from using anything Google. They may in fact have some valid points, but you can find reasons to hate almost every large corporation without trying too hard.

Google Voice is a pretty popular service, unlike Google Reader. I'd be surprised if Google discontinues it. They may try to charge for it someday, but they have to be VERY careful because they could easily cross the line into fitting the definition of a "telephone company" and that would bring a number of issues that they've not had to deal with (such as the need to offer 911 service, and the need to have an actual, responsive customer service department).

But that said, one wonders what's happening to commercial VoIP companies. There's someone in my family that's had phone service with a particular VoIP provider for years, and never had a bit of trouble with them, until this last year. Suddenly he's seeing a high rate of non-completed calls, both incoming and outgoing. On some days if he tries to use that service he has to dial three or four times before the call will actually go through, assuming it will go through at all. By the way, we verified it's not the VoIP device the company provided, because on the days when the problem is at its worst, even when he turns on call forwarding incoming calls don't go through.

Only reason he hasn't dropped the service yet is because he doesn't want to lose the number he's had for years. Google Voice considers it a landline number and won't port it (in fact they won't even port mobile numbers in his area) and he really doesn't want to jump to another commercial VoIP provider and maybe wind up in a similar situation, but if there was a way he could port that number to some service that would translate it to SIP for a reasonable one time fixed porting charge I'm sure he'd do it. I don't know what Google's aversion is to porting landlines is but we wish they'd get over it, particularly since they seem to have completely run out of numbers in many phone exchanges and even some entire area codes.

He and I both have Obihai devices now and we have found Google Voice to be pretty reliable for incoming and outgoing (in his case, much more than the commercial provider), with the caveat that they (Google Voice) don't do 911, don't have anything resembling a functional customer service department, and won't pass "early media" (voice information before actually "answering" the call, such as telephone company number change announcements). I'm not saying that's what you should do but they have worked out pretty well for us, and unlike Google Voice, Obihai actually does have good customer service.

Re: Call quality GV vs voip.ms on Android.

Sat, 30 Mar 2013 00:09:15 EDT

OZO posted :

said by dks7:

csimple worked ok except when a call came in i cannot answer it, the green icon moves and aknowledges im touching it, but still refuses to answer the call using android 2.3.4. So I refuse to use it.

Running CSipSimple on Android 2.2 I can see, that when phone is in deep sleep mode CSS can miss incoming calls. Later on it may start to ring, but the time for accepting the call is already gone... :( I've tired it with Android 4.1.2 and it looks like it can finally handle it. Too bad that I can not run Android 4.1.2 for many other reasons and have to return back to 2.2, where CSipSimple is not a reliable phone at all...
--
Keep it simple, it'll become complex by itself...

Re: Call quality GV vs voip.ms on Android.

Fri, 29 Mar 2013 22:14:30 EDT

XCOM posted :

said by VexorgTR:

Google voice creeps me out.........

»youtu.be/hrontojPWEE

And you creep out google.
--
[nUll@dcypher ~]$

Re: Call quality GV vs voip.ms on Android.

Fri, 29 Mar 2013 21:45:48 EDT

dks7 posted : csimple worked ok except when a call came in i cannot answer it, the green icon moves and aknowledges im touching it, but still refuses to answer the call using android 2.3.4. So I refuse to use it.

Re: Call quality GV vs voip.ms on Android.

Fri, 29 Mar 2013 20:38:22 EDT

brawney posted : I have only begun to tinker with voip.ms and csipsimple on my Motorola Photon. It seems to work ok. I used the voip.ms "built-in" configuration in csipsimple. voip.ms is in the app's "world wide provider" list.

I have it configured to use PCMU codec and I have only tested using wifi (not 3g or 4g). csipsimple has a lot of settings you can tinker with and you might want to check on their google group for help.

I have not used this setup a lot, so I could run into troubles too. I just wanted to give you the info I know about csipsimple. Good luck.

Re: Call quality GV vs voip.ms on Android.

Fri, 29 Mar 2013 20:25:22 EDT

VexorgTR posted : Google voice creeps me out.........

»youtu.be/hrontojPWEE

Re: Call quality GV vs voip.ms on Android.

Fri, 29 Mar 2013 14:59:39 EDT

PX Eliezer1 posted :

said by OZO:

I've heard (but it could be wrong), that Groove IP uses speex codec, which is more appropriate to use over WiFi connections. That may explain the difference in call quality...

QFT and a good point.

said by OZO:

VoIP.ms offers very limited set of codecs.

Pretty similar to their peers, they offer G.711u, G.729, and GSM. That should cover the basics for most VoIP users other than for WiFi.

Few if any of the typical VoIP providers offer the Speex codec....

Re: Call quality GV vs voip.ms on Android.

Fri, 29 Mar 2013 14:40:33 EDT

OZO posted :

said by dks7:

Call quality, using both volume and premium routing, is the same. You pay premium for the routing, not for the call quality.

Call quality depends on the codecs used. VoIP.ms offers very limited set of codecs. I've heard (but it could be wrong), that Groove IP uses speex codec, which is more appropriate to use over WiFi connections. That may explain the difference in call quality...
--
Keep it simple, it'll become complex by itself...

Re: Call quality GV vs voip.ms on Android.

Fri, 29 Mar 2013 11:55:58 EDT

PX Eliezer1 posted :

said by DaveSin:

Like Mazilo, I'm curious why folks are paying for residential VOIP services, when it can be had for free.

Well, Toro laid out several good reasons.

A few more I can think of---

a) What Google doth give, it can take away. [Recent example: Google Reader].
»bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2 ··· -uproar/

b) I'd prefer to pay my own way, rather than depend on the fickleness of a corporate boardroom.

c) TANSTAAFL (popularized by Robert A. Heinlein and Milton Friedman).

d) GV does not provide 911.

e) GV is an indirect service unless one also uses the services of Obi or Simonics, which are not officially acknowledged or endorsed by Google and which Google could choose to block at any time for reasons of their own.

f) GV has not even a pretense of customer service.

g) GV has done no further innovation at all.

h) The companies that DO innovate, such as Anveo, CallCentric, Voip.MS, and others, should be supported.

i) Those companies offer lots of services that GV does not.

j) Last but not least:
»Internet and/or GoogleVoice Security Issue

Re: Call quality GV vs voip.ms on Android.

Fri, 29 Mar 2013 11:21:35 EDT

DaveSin posted : As far as reliability goes, Google Voice has been more reliable than most paid VOIP providers mentioned on this Forum. Since I have used GV on an OBI110, I can't remember once not be able to place or receive calls via GV. I know there was one issue with VM notification. I have also use GV with Asterisk and there were one or two points in time where a patch was required.

Like Mazilo, I'm curious why folks are paying for residential VOIP services, when it can be had for free. I still use VOIP.ms for business lines, but have multiple GV accounts on my IP Phone and OBi110!

Re: Call quality GV vs voip.ms on Android.

Fri, 29 Mar 2013 10:49:10 EDT

mazilo posted : I could understand your points. If one wants something to work reliably, then go with some VoSP that doesn't support BYOD. of course, that will be more expensive. But then, WHY PAY FOR SOMETHING THAT CAN BE HAD FOR FREE.
--
don't and stop are the ONLY two 4-letter words considered offensive to men, but not when used together.

Re: Call quality GV vs voip.ms on Android.

Fri, 29 Mar 2013 10:17:13 EDT

toro posted : I can think of a few reasons:
- not everybody trusts Google to handle their calls
- not everybody lives in US, and can get a number local to them through GV
- not everybody has access easily to to buy an OBi ATA
- not everybody has the skills or wants to build an Asterisk or Freeswitch PBX and keep patching it every time Google changes something in their protocol
- some people don't care if they have to pay a few cents for a call, especially if it's low volume
That's just my opinion though.

Edit: a couple more :)
- for some people the phone is extremely important and needs to be reliable. When they pick up the phone there needs to be a dial tone and the call should get connected. They don't want to learn something has just changed and they need to patch their PBX or upgrade their OBi firmware to fix it. Or maybe they don't mind this but their non-technical wifes don't want to put up with that :)
- some people (like me) make few or no calls to US/Canada destinations and much more to overseas destinations that may be more expensive with GV than with other providers

--
Providers (through asterisk): voip.ms, freephoneline, smartcall.ro, ipcomms, callcentric. Hardware: Vonage VDV21, Moto VT2x42, Linksys SPA series, Grandstream HT series, Panasonic KX-TGP5x0
»www.voipfan.net

Re: Call quality GV vs voip.ms on Android.

Fri, 29 Mar 2013 09:59:49 EDT

mazilo posted : I just never understand why anyone wants pay for something of a less quality service while a better quality service can be had for free. For me (YMMV), I have been using GV (formerly GrandCentral) since day one and never pay for all the calls. AFAICT, the quality of a GV call is far better than the quality of a pure traditional PSTN (analog to analog) phone call, particularly on a call across continents. I have friends who use FreeSWITCH + an ATA and OBi-1x0 devices with GV service live in Asia and Australia. The calls I made to their GV lines are very good with an exception of some admissible delays.
--
don't and stop are the ONLY two 4-letter words considered offensive to men, but not when used together.

Re: Call quality GV vs voip.ms on Android.

Fri, 29 Mar 2013 04:05:03 EDT

dks7 posted : Dang 55 views, and no thoughts? :( lol

Call quality GV vs voip.ms on Android.

Thu, 28 Mar 2013 20:32:59 EDT

dks7 posted : So for a month or so I have been a voip.ms subscriber, and have been less than pleased with call quality. I am using the premium routing, but the call quality is the same using either. Very lackluster.

People sometimes have a hard time hearing me, sometimes words are skipped, I've been told it often sounds like I am talking in a tunnel or something.

I have tried sipdroid, csipsimple, 3cx, bria and the likes. All have been identical. I am now using GrooVe IP using google voice and a free number, and the sound quality using the same phone and same wifi at home is outstandingly clear on both ends.

I do not know what to make of this, I am sorely dissapointed in voip.ms, or VOIP in general, except GV. I am not sure if its the protocol, codec, provider, or what but something is sorely amiss. I have 30/4mbit bandwidth and excellent pings and low jitter to losangeles and seattle pops. Both provide the exact same quality, I am hoping maybe one of you fine fellas can shed some light on this situation and help me to get the call quality to an acceptable level, as it is now its almost unusable.

I am using an HTC Droid Incredible, the original from verizon.