Home AMX User Forum AMX General Discussion

CODECs best choice?

I'm looking for a videoconference codec to propose it to our customer. I would like to know your experience with them, how easy or dificult is to control it; some choices are Polycom, Tandberg and Sony. I would prefer Tandberg for its easy customizable installation (standard XLR microphone input, separate cam, etc.) but Sony has went down with their prices so now they become a serious option to consider.
Any idea?

Comments

  • ericmedleyericmedley Posts: 4,177
    JJCC wrote:
    I'm looking for a videoconference codec to propose it to our customer. I would like to know your experience with them, how easy or dificult is to control it; some choices are Polycom, Tandberg and Sony. I would prefer Tandberg for its easy customizable installation (standard XLR microphone input, separate cam, etc.) but Sony has went down with their prices so now they become a serious option to consider.
    Any idea?

    Tandberg seems a little more 'Pro' as far as it's design and interface with other hardware. (balanced audio, etc...) However, Polycom is pretty much the most common player out there. Polycom is a pretty solid setup and is more powerful dollar-for-dollar. I also think you can actually build bigger point-to-point systems. Tandberg's max out at 4 connections without going to a MPU. Polycom can do a total of 8 PTP connectinos (with the exteneded license) without the MPU.

    I've done side by side comparisons between Tandberg and Polycom and I feel the Polycom has a little better A/V quality. As an installer, however, the Tandberg did seem much more integrater friendly. If you have the bandwidth (and budget), both the Polycom and Tandberg HD setups look really good and sound great. Once you get to that point, the comparisons are the same.

    I cannot speak about Sony as I've never seen one in actual use before.

    If it were me, I'd pick Polycom. But that's just me. You know what they say about opinions...
  • HedbergHedberg Posts: 671
    We had a Polycom with a C$tron system not too long ago and it made my head explode. We were using two inputs -- a video input, which was connected to a Sony camera, and a VGA input. The difficulty was trying to figure out how to reliably switch to the VGA input and send that video to the far site. You wouldn't think that this would be difficult; you would suspect that there would be a string you could send to the damned thing to switch inputs. It turns out that if you want to send the video from the VGA to the far site that you have to "play" something called "vs" (something like: "'vsbutton play',13,10"). I can't recall what the 'vs' stands for -- something which makes absolutely no sense in context, something like 'venereal consort' .

    I haven'[t checked to see if there is an AMX module for the Polycom codecs -- if there is, perhaps it includes a Polycom to English/English to Polycom dictionary.

    My experience with the Tandberg codecs is pretty good. They work and the documentation is helpful. Also, there are a couple AMX modules that seem to be OK.
  • NMarkRobertsNMarkRoberts Posts: 455
    My only exposure is Tandberg. The gear is great, the support is great. There are two protocol manuals describing two different protocols. One is XML madness and should be ignored - seriously, if you read that one first, you will think "no way". The other protocol is more trad and fine to implement but enormous and perhaps therefore tough to find your way around. If you choose to roll your own module, start from some code that works eg mine.

    The big challenge isn't the comms module, it's the fact that codecs are a law unto themselves just because of what they are. They act very spontaneously, eg line failure, or call failure, or call loss, or incoming call, or negotiating down to audio-only. Plus they take so long to establish a call that you can forget the call request you have sent, and just treat the new call as equally spontaneous. This all gets very interesting when you want to handle multiple calls or mix in audio-only calls or mix incoming and outgoing calls.

    Meanwhile the user can see what the codec is doing on the monitor screen, so the most useful feedback loop is via the user's eyes rather than via the torrent of strings that come from the codec while it's negotiating a call with full disclosure switched on. You should therefore not repeat a failed command, nor attempt to track the codec's reported state and correct it to the desired state. Let the user decide.

    Unlike most devices, the Tandberg's feedback (with everything switched on) is undocumented and massively varied with no single clear structure; and if you reboot the codec you get kilobytes of drivel. I wrote code to try to parse everything, and one of the classes of keyword my code looks for is the one that means "ignore all the rubbish after this".
  • I've done many Polycom VSX series, several Tandberg MXP systems, and one Sony PCSG70 codec. Let me say that I believe that the Sony cameras are great and leave it at that.

    My experience with Polycom started with the PictureTel 970 and 680 systems. Those were really cranky.

    Both the VSX and the MXP systems are fairly easy to code for. There are both non-Duet and Duet modules for both.

    The command that Hedberg is talking about is VCButton Play and Stop. VC is Visual Concert which is the VGA interface unit for the system. Generally, the Visual Concert unit is a small triangle-shaped device with VGA and audio connectors and a blue button on top. VCButton PLAY tells the system to start sending the PC image and VCButton STOP tells it to go back to the camera - simulating the button press. There were some issues in the original AMX module for the VSX systems that caused this not to work, so I got really familiar with those commands when working around the issue. One issue is that if you did not have a VGA signal on the line and sent the VCButton Play command, the VSX will think something is wrong and immediately issue a VCButton Stop. This is odd when the user is connecting a laptop that does not automatically send the signal when the external monitor cable is plugged in. (Or if you are going through a switch and issue the Play command before switching the input).

    The Tandberg's have their own issues. There is no real halfway that I have found with the on-screen menus. We have wanted to eliminate the menus, but keep things like the mic mute icons and system messages. So far it seems to be all or nothing. And I'm still trying to figure out how Duo-Video is useful when the customer has a mixed bag of codec brands.

    I've not played with the Polycom HD systems yet, but the Tandberg systems are pretty sharp. My only complaint is that the Tandberg camera is noisy when zooming in or out. Also, while you have a full-range pan, the tilt up and down is very limited.

    We have had users not really know what kind of communications lines they would end up with. I believe that the Tandbergs have to be ordered with either a PRI or BRI interface. The Polycoms need to be ordered that way too, but if things get reversed, the Polycom has a small module that pops in/out to let you change. Sure beats unwiring everything and taking the unit out of the rack. Most of the systems I work with now use IP so this isn't a big deal.

    The Sony unit I worked with did work, but we have had many problems. For one, when the camera is connected directly to the codec, it would stop responding to commands. Generally I like to control the camera from the AMX rather than through the codec. You end up with a smoother pan and tilt even with the Tandberg and Polycom systems.
  • JeffJeff Posts: 374
    I run a building with around 30 Polycom VSX endpoints of varying models, most of which I've integrated into control systems.

    The Polycom API has so many commands in it that it seems from first glance that you can do anything. This is true. You can do anything. The problem is, most of the commands make no sense. The VC Button Play thing is a great example. I hate it. Instead of switching inputs like a switcher from camera to computer and back, you have to "Play" content. I've got a VGA switcher in several rooms switching from a laptop to a desktop. If you do the switch, it shows black screen for a few seconds inbetween. The Polycom interprets this as the computer turning off, issues a VC Button Stop command, and goes back to the camera. This means every time you switch computers you have to hit VC Button Play again. How incredibly obnoxious, eh?

    In a nutshell, Polycom can be integrated with anything, and the commands are there to do just about anything, but it doesn't seem to be well thought out. It seems to me like polycom designed their systems to be used exclusively with their remote controls, and that they then just put the same commands from the remote into the API, and didn't stop to consider that in integrated systems people might want to do things differently.

    Oh well. Enough practice with a system and you can probably integrate anything.

    J
  • Chip MoodyChip Moody Posts: 727
    Work with both Polycom and Tandberg a lot. Both have their quirks. Polycom just has more of them.

    Go with Tandberg if you can, and not just because you can call up the VGA input the same way you call up every other input.

    - Chip
  • GSLogicGSLogic Posts: 562
    I like the new Polycom but the Tandberg is still the easiest to work with.
  • JohnMichnrJohnMichnr Posts: 279
    Polycom seems to have a habit of fixing bugs in their systems, and creating new ones in the control protocol. I have had a volume control ont eh touchpanel stop working cause the polycom had just been updated and the new protocol didn't respond back like the old one did. But I have done a bunch of both of them and not had too many problems. never any with the Tandberg.
  • galayegalaye Posts: 28
    i think polycom!!

    all said before is right and some of it is just rong!!

    the api commands are not as problemtic as said hear ,no body said anything about the api commands of the tandberg that is a little bit like controling with infar red compering to polycom!!

    polycom i think is more advaced and every year or monthes try to be with supported protocols of all kind and stay pro all the time.

    i think polycom is a stady company and has several system that is working and working for years no problem ,they are very easy to work with and very logical comparing to tandberg.

    i dont think that chnging inputs online is what make the diffrence between them , i think the exprience and dealing with every aspect of a client equtment on site is the diffrence...

    u can see it by looking on inputs of each products, tandberg has all pro inputs and dont offer the midd client much the go only on high level ones.polycom offer product to all!!

    o.k this what i think from a videoconferancig engeneer who works with both from big intergrated for clients polycom @ tandberg product.
    so for me in the meen time polycom wins!!

    have a nice week!!
  • adimexadimex Posts: 21
    Such an old thread

    I have my days with both CODECs. Polycom's customer support is great, we had mechanical problems with an EagleEye camera and we received a replacement next day. Polycom's API is somewhat limited. Also, I can't get a way to get rid of that stupid message "PC NOT CONNECTED" when the vsbutton play is pushed, the user "has" to hit OK.

    Tandberg was a pain when we tried to integrate the Tandberg HD video switch. They had to send a rep on site, he and support did not know anything about the video switch. Once we got it to work, it was beautiful. Tandberg's API is wide, extended, alot can be done with it. The CODEC also works on eCos OS which I had a great experience working with in the past.

    Tandberg is my choice since I love the freedom of doing alot. I don't know much about AMX modules for CODECs, I have tendency of writing my own all the time...

    Cheers
Sign In or Register to comment.