Well Well Well Rtp
WELL WELL WELL (UK) LIMITED - Free company information from Companies House including registered office address, filing history, accounts, annual return, officers, charges, business activity. Dog Park There is a dog park located next to Boxyard RTP, as well as water bowls and other comfortable locations for animals to rest. Boxyard RTP map. To NC-54 / Bus Stop To Parking Lot To Frontier RTP. It’s pretty easy, you just type in the name of the slot you’re interested in as well as “RTP” and hit the search button. You’ll see the results. You’ll see the results. Any slot offering an RTP higher than 97% is a good return, while 96-97% can also be acceptable. Both Zelle and RTP payments are considered real-time payments. Real-time transactions cannot be stopped or cancelled once they are submitted. Zelle is designed for customers to send money to other people they know and trust.Zelle uses a mobile phone number or email address as an option to identify the recipient.
The Real-time Transport Protocol (RTP) specifies a general-purpose data format and network protocol for transmitting digital media streams on Internet Protocol (IP) networks. The details of media encoding, such as signal sampling rate, frame size and timing, are specified in an RTP payload format. The format parameters of the RTP payload are typically communicated between transmission endpoints with the Session Description Protocol (SDP), but other protocols, such as the Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP) may be used.
Audio and video payload types[edit]
RFC 3551, entitled RTP Profile for Audio and Video (RTP/AVP), specifies the technical parameters of payload formats for audio and video streams.
The standard also describes the process of registering new payload types with IANA; additional payload formats and payload types are defined in the following specifications:
- RFC3551, Standard 65, RTP Profile for Audio and Video Conferences with Minimal Control
- RFC4856, Media Type Registration of Payload Formats in the RTP Profile for Audio and Video Conferences
- RFC3190, RTP Payload Format for 12-bit DAT Audio and 20- and 24-bit Linear Sampled Audio
- RFC6184, RTP Payload Format for H.264 Video
- RFC3640, RTP Payload Format for Transport of MPEG-4 Elementary Streams
- RFC6416, RTP Payload Format for MPEG-4 Audio/Visual Streams
- RFC2250, RTP Payload Format for MPEG1/MPEG2 Video
- RFC7798, RTP Payload Format for High Efficiency Video Coding (HEVC)
- RFC2435, RTP Payload Format for JPEG-compressed Video
- RFC4587, RTP Payload Format for H.261 Video Streams
- RFC2658, RTP Payload Format for PureVoice Audio Video
- RFC4175, RTP Payload Format for Uncompressed Video
- RFC7587, RTP Payload Format for the Opus Speech and Audio Codec
Payload identifiers 96–127 are used for payloads defined dynamically during a session. It is recommended to dynamically assigned port numbers, although port numbers 5004 and 5005 have been registered for use of the profile when a dynamically assigned port is not required.
Applications should always support PCMU (payload type 0); previously, DVI4 (payload type 5) was also recommended, but this was removed in 2013 by RFC 7007.
Payload type (PT) | Name | Type | No. of channels | Clock rate (Hz)[note 1] | Frame size (ms) | Default packet size (ms) | Description | References |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0 | PCMU | audio | 1 | 8000 | any | 20 | ITU-T G.711 PCM μ-Law audio 64 kbit/s | RFC 3551 |
1 | reserved (previously FS-1016CELP) | audio | 1 | 8000 | reserved, previously FS-1016CELP audio 4.8 kbit/s | RFC 3551, previously RFC 1890 | ||
2 | reserved (previously G721 or G726-32) | audio | 1 | 8000 | reserved, previously ITU-T G.721ADPCM audio 32 kbit/s or ITU-T G.726 audio 32 kbit/s | RFC 3551, previously RFC 1890 | ||
3 | GSM | audio | 1 | 8000 | 20 | 20 | European GSM Full Rate audio 13 kbit/s (GSM 06.10) | RFC 3551 |
4 | G723 | audio | 1 | 8000 | 30 | 30 | ITU-T G.723.1 audio | RFC 3551 |
5 | DVI4 | audio | 1 | 8000 | any | 20 | IMAADPCM audio 32 kbit/s | RFC 3551 |
6 | DVI4 | audio | 1 | 16000 | any | 20 | IMAADPCM audio 64 kbit/s | RFC 3551 |
7 | LPC | audio | 1 | 8000 | any | 20 | Experimental Linear Predictive Coding audio 5.6 kbit/s | RFC 3551 |
8 | PCMA | audio | 1 | 8000 | any | 20 | ITU-T G.711 PCM A-Law audio 64 kbit/s | RFC 3551 |
9 | G722 | audio | 1 | 8000[note 2] | any | 20 | ITU-T G.722 audio 64 kbit/s | RFC 3551 - Page 14 |
10 | L16 | audio | 2 | 44100 | any | 20 | Linear PCM 16-bit Stereo audio 1411.2 kbit/s,[2][3][4] uncompressed | RFC 3551, Page 27 |
11 | L16 | audio | 1 | 44100 | any | 20 | Linear PCM 16-bit audio 705.6 kbit/s, uncompressed | RFC 3551, Page 27 |
12 | QCELP | audio | 1 | 8000 | 20 | 20 | Qualcomm Code Excited Linear Prediction | RFC 2658, RFC 3551 |
13 | CN | audio | 1 | 8000 | Comfort noise. Payload type used with audio codecs that do not support comfort noise as part of the codec itself such as G.711, G.722.1, G.722, G.726, G.727, G.728, GSM 06.10, Siren, and RTAudio. | RFC 3389 | ||
14 | MPA | audio | 1, 2 | 90000 | 8–72 | MPEG-1 or MPEG-2 audio only | RFC 3551, RFC 2250 | |
15 | G728 | audio | 1 | 8000 | 2.5 | 20 | ITU-T G.728 audio 16 kbit/s | RFC 3551 |
16 | DVI4 | audio | 1 | 11025 | any | 20 | IMAADPCM audio 44.1 kbit/s | RFC 3551 |
17 | DVI4 | audio | 1 | 22050 | any | 20 | IMA ADPCM audio 88.2 kbit/s | RFC 3551 |
18 | G729 | audio | 1 | 8000 | 10 | 20 | ITU-T G.729 and G.729a audio 8 kbit/s; Annex B is implied unless the annexb=no parameter is used | RFC 3551, Page 20, RFC 3555, Page 15 |
19 | reserved (previously CN) | audio | reserved, previously comfort noise | RFC 3551 | ||||
25 | CELB | video | 90000 | Sun CellB video[5] | RFC 2029 | |||
26 | JPEG | video | 90000 | JPEG video | RFC 2435 | |||
28 | nv | video | 90000 | Xerox PARC's Network Video (nv)[6] | RFC 3551, Page 32 | |||
31 | H261 | video | 90000 | ITU-T H.261 video | RFC 4587 | |||
32 | MPV | video | 90000 | MPEG-1 and MPEG-2 video | RFC 2250 | |||
33 | MP2T | audio/video | 90000 | MPEG-2 transport stream | RFC 2250 | |||
34 | H263 | video | 90000 | H.263 video, first version (1996) | RFC 3551, RFC 2190 | |||
72–76 | reserved | reserved because RTCP packet types 200–204 would otherwise be indistinguishable from RTP payload types 72–76 with the marker bit set | RFC 3550, RFC 3551 | |||||
77–95 | unassigned | note that RTCP packet type 207 (XR, Extended Reports) would be indistinguishable from RTP payload types 79 with the marker bit set | RFC 3551, RFC 3611 | |||||
dynamic | H263-1998 | video | 90000 | H.263 video, second version (1998) | RFC 3551, RFC 4629, RFC 2190 | |||
dynamic | H263-2000 | video | 90000 | H.263 video, third version (2000) | RFC 4629 | |||
dynamic (or profile) | H264 AVC | video | 90000 | H.264 video (MPEG-4 Part 10) | RFC 6184, previously RFC 3984 | |||
dynamic (or profile) | H264 SVC | video | 90000 | H.264 video | RFC 6190 | |||
dynamic (or profile) | H265 | video | 90000 | H.265 video (HEVC) | RFC 7798 | |||
dynamic (or profile) | theora | video | 90000 | Theora video | draft-barbato-avt-rtp-theora | |||
dynamic | iLBC | audio | 1 | 8000 | 20, 30 | 20, 30 | Internet low Bitrate Codec 13.33 or 15.2 kbit/s | RFC 3952 |
dynamic | PCMA-WB | audio | 1 | 16000 | 5 | ITU-T G.711.1 A-law | RFC 5391 | |
dynamic | PCMU-WB | audio | 1 | 16000 | 5 | ITU-T G.711.1 μ-law | RFC 5391 | |
dynamic | G718 | audio | 32000 (placeholder) | 20 | ITU-T G.718 | draft-ietf-payload-rtp-g718 | ||
dynamic | G719 | audio | (various) | 48000 | 20 | ITU-T G.719 | RFC 5404 | |
dynamic | G7221 | audio | 16000, 32000 | 20 | ITU-T G.722.1 and G.722.1 Annex C | RFC 5577 | ||
dynamic | G726-16 | audio | 1 | 8000 | any | 20 | ITU-T G.726 audio 16 kbit/s | RFC 3551 |
dynamic | G726-24 | audio | 1 | 8000 | any | 20 | ITU-T G.726 audio 24 kbit/s | RFC 3551 |
dynamic | G726-32 | audio | 1 | 8000 | any | 20 | ITU-T G.726 audio 32 kbit/s | RFC 3551 |
dynamic | G726-40 | audio | 1 | 8000 | any | 20 | ITU-T G.726 audio 40 kbit/s | RFC 3551 |
dynamic | G729D | audio | 1 | 8000 | 10 | 20 | ITU-T G.729 Annex D | RFC 3551 |
dynamic | G729E | audio | 1 | 8000 | 10 | 20 | ITU-T G.729 Annex E | RFC 3551 |
dynamic | G7291 | audio | 16000 | 20 | ITU-T G.729.1 | RFC 4749 | ||
dynamic | GSM-EFR | audio | 1 | 8000 | 20 | 20 | ITU-T GSM-EFR (GSM 06.60) | RFC 3551 |
dynamic | GSM-HR-08 | audio | 1 | 8000 | 20 | ITU-T GSM-HR (GSM 06.20) | RFC 5993 | |
dynamic (or profile) | AMR | audio | (various) | 8000 | 20 | Adaptive Multi-Rate audio | RFC 4867 | |
dynamic (or profile) | AMR-WB | audio | (various) | 16000 | 20 | Adaptive Multi-Rate Wideband audio (ITU-T G.722.2) | RFC 4867 | |
dynamic (or profile) | AMR-WB+ | audio | 1, 2 or omit | 72000 | 13.3–40 | Extended Adaptive Multi Rate – WideBand audio | RFC 4352 | |
dynamic (or profile) | vorbis | audio | (various) | (various) | Vorbis audio | RFC 5215 | ||
dynamic (or profile) | opus | audio | 1, 2 | 48000[note 3] | 2.5–60 | 20 | Opus audio | RFC 7587 |
dynamic (or profile) | speex | audio | 1 | 8000, 16000, 32000 | 20 | Speex audio | RFC 5574 | |
dynamic | mpa-robust | audio | 1, 2 | 90000 | 24–72 | Loss-Tolerant MP3 audio | RFC 5219 (previously RFC 3119) | |
dynamic (or profile) | MP4A-LATM | audio | 90000 or others | MPEG-4 Audio | RFC 6416 (previously RFC 3016) | |||
dynamic (or profile) | MP4V-ES | video | 90000 or others | MPEG-4 Visual | RFC 6416 (previously RFC 3016) | |||
dynamic (or profile) | mpeg4-generic | audio/video | 90000 or other | MPEG-4 Elementary Streams | RFC 3640 | |||
dynamic | VP8 | video | 90000 | VP8 video | RFC 7741 | |||
dynamic | VP9 | video | 90000 | VP9 video | draft-ietf-payload-vp9 | |||
dynamic | L8 | audio | (various) | (various) | any | 20 | Linear PCM 8-bit audio with 128 offset | RFC 3551 Section 4.5.10 and Table 5 |
dynamic | DAT12 | audio | (various) | (various) | any | 20 (by analogy with L16) | IEC 61119 12-bit nonlinear audio | RFC 3190 Section 3 |
dynamic | L16 | audio | (various) | (various) | any | 20 | Linear PCM 16-bit audio | RFC 3551 Section 4.5.11, RFC 2586 |
dynamic | L20 | audio | (various) | (various) | any | 20 (by analogy with L16) | Linear PCM 20-bit audio | RFC 3190 Section 4 |
dynamic | L24 | audio | (various) | (various) | any | 20 (by analogy with L16) | Linear PCM 24-bit audio | RFC 3190 Section 4 |
dynamic | raw | video | 90000 | Uncompressed Video | RFC 4175 | |||
dynamic | ac3 | audio | (various) | 32000, 44100, 48000 | Dolby AC-3 audio | RFC 4184 | ||
dynamic | eac3 | audio | (various) | 32000, 44100, 48000 | Enhanced AC-3 audio | RFC 4598 | ||
dynamic | t140 | text | 1000 | Text over IP | RFC 4103 | |||
dynamic | EVRC EVRC0 EVRC1 | audio | 8000 | EVRC audio | RFC 4788 | |||
dynamic | EVRCB EVRCB0 EVRCB1 | audio | 8000 | EVRC-B audio | RFC 4788 | |||
dynamic | EVRCWB EVRCWB0 EVRCWB1 | audio | 16000 | EVRC-WB audio | RFC 5188 | |||
dynamic | jpeg2000 | video | 90000 | JPEG 2000 video | RFC 5371 | |||
dynamic | UEMCLIP | audio | 8000, 16000 | UEMCLIP audio | RFC 5686 | |||
dynamic | ATRAC3 | audio | 44100 | ATRAC3 audio | RFC 5584 | |||
dynamic | ATRAC-X | audio | 44100, 48000 | ATRAC3+ audio | RFC 5584 | |||
dynamic | ATRAC-ADVANCED-LOSSLESS | audio | (various) | ATRAC Advanced Lossless audio | RFC 5584 | |||
dynamic | DV | video | 90000 | DV video | RFC 6469 (previously RFC 3189) | |||
dynamic | BT656 | video | ITU-R BT.656 video | RFC 3555 | ||||
dynamic | BMPEG | video | Bundled MPEG-2 video | RFC 2343 | ||||
dynamic | SMPTE292M | video | SMPTE 292M video | RFC 3497 | ||||
dynamic | RED | audio | Redundant Audio Data | RFC 2198 | ||||
dynamic | VDVI | audio | Variable-rate DVI4 audio | RFC 3551 | ||||
dynamic | MP1S | video | MPEG-1 Systems Streams video | RFC 2250 | ||||
dynamic | MP2P | video | MPEG-2 Program Streams video | RFC 2250 | ||||
dynamic | tone | audio | 8000 (default) | tone | RFC 4733 | |||
dynamic | telephone-event | audio | 8000 (default) | DTMF tone | RFC 4733 | |||
dynamic | aptx | audio | 2 – 6 | (equal to sampling rate) | 4000 ÷ sample rate | 4[note 4] | aptX audio | RFC 7310 |
- ^The 'clock rate' is the rate at which the timestamp in the RTP header is incremented, which need not be the same as the codec's sampling rate. For instance, video codecs typically use a clock rate of 90000 so their frames can be more precisely aligned with the RTCP NTP timestamp, even though video sampling rates are typically in the range of 1–60 samples per second.
- ^Although the sampling rate for G.722 is 16000, its clock rate is 8000 to remain backwards compatible with RFC 1890, which incorrectly used this value.[1]
- ^Because Opus can change sampling rates dynamically, its clock rate is fixed at 48000, even when the codec will be operated at a lower sampling rate. The
maxplaybackrate
andsprop-maxcapturerate
parameters in SDP can be used to indicate hints/preferences about the maximum sampling rate to encode/decode. - ^For aptX, the packetization interval must be rounded down to the nearest packet interval that can contain an integer number of samples. So at sampling rates of 11025, 22050, or 44100, a packetization rate of '4' is rounded down to 3.99.
Text messaging payload[edit]
- RFC4103, RTP Payload Format for Text Conversation
MIDI payload[edit]
- RFC6295, RTP Payload Format for MIDI
- RFC4696, An Implementation Guide for RTP MIDI
See also[edit]
References[edit]
- ^RFC 3551, RTP Profile for Audio and Video Conferences with Minimal Control, H. Schulzrinne, S. Casner, The Internet Society (July 2003).
- ^'RFC 2586 - The Audio/L16 MIME content type'. May 1999. Retrieved 2010-03-16.
- ^'RFC 3108 - Conventions for the use of the Session Description Protocol (SDP) for ATM Bearer Connections'. May 2001. Retrieved 2010-03-16.
- ^'RFC 4856 - Media Type Registration of Payload Formats in the RTP Profile for Audio and Video Conferences - Registration of Media Type audio/L16'. March 2007. Retrieved 2010-03-16.
- ^XIL Programmer's Guide, Chapter 22 'CellB Codec'. August 1997. Retrieved on 2014-07-19.
- ^nv - network video on Henning Schulzrinne's website, Network Video on The University of Toronto's website, Retrieved on 2009-07-09.
External links[edit]
Return to player (RTP) is very important in regard to the long-term chances of winning with slots. RTP (a.k.a. payback) refers to how much slot machines are programmed to pay out in the long run.
Higher payback means that a game gives you a stronger chance of winning. Therefore, you’ll do well to know the RTP behind any game that you play.
You’ll discover that it’s really easy to find payout percentages for online slot machine games. A simple Google search will produce the RTP for most internet games.
Unfortunately, you’ll have a much tougher time figuring out the RTP of land-based machines. In fact, this information is rarely available.
Is there still a way for you to determine payout percentages for slot machines in brick-and-mortar casinos? I’ll answer this question by covering more on the difficulties of finding RTP for land-based slots and if it’s ultimately possible.
Why Isn’t RTP Available for Land-Based Slots?
Unlike with many online slots, you can’t just find the RTP for land-based slot machines through Google. Your efforts will turn up little to no results.
The problem with slots in brick-and-mortar casinos is that they don’t have uniform payback across every casino. Instead, game developers allow casinos to select payout percentages based on a list of options.
Here’s an example on how this works:
- WMS is offering Monopoly Party Train slot to Vegas casinos.
- They feature the following RTP options: 92.5%, 93.5%, and 94.5%.
- Caesars Palace orders this game at 93.5% payback.
- The Venetian orders Monopoly Party Train at 92.5% RTP.
- Treasure Island orders this slot at 94.5% RTP.
You can see the obvious challenge in trying to provide payback numbers for such games. A website could list Monopoly Party Train at 93.5% RTP, which is middle ground.
Well Well Well Peter Paul & Mary Youtube
Most online slot providers differ because they offer their games at a uniform RTP across every casino. For example, Rival Gaming will feature Spy Game with 95.1% payback at each online casino it serves.
Some exceptions do exist in the online gambling world. RealTime Gaming (RTG), for instance, allows its casino clients to choose 91.5%, 95%, or 97.5% RTP for a given game.
You can’t find payout percentages for RTG games either. Nevertheless, you can still learn the payback for the vast majority of internet slots.
How Can You Figure Out the RTP?
You won’t be able to find the exact payout percentages for most land-based slot machines. But you can at least get a good idea on the matter through a few different methods. Here are some ways to learn the RTP for brick-and-mortar casino slots.
Make General Guesses Based on Coin Denominations
Casinos like to reward gamblers who are willing to risk more money per bet. Therefore, they order higher RTP for games with larger coin denominations.
Here’s an example on how this works:
- Penny slot machines = 88% to 90% RTP
- Nickel slot machines = 91% to 94% RTP
- Quarter slot machines = 93% to 95% RTP
- Dollar slot machines = 94% to 96% RTP
- $5 slot machines = 95% to 97% RTP
Penny slot machines are almost always the worst games with regard to payout percentages. Larger denominations ranging from a nickel to $5 are all closer in terms of payback.
Your theoretical losses will be higher on nickel games and up just because you’re betting more per spin. Nevertheless, you can still get more value per dollar wagered with the higher-denomination machines.
Read State Gaming Reports
Rather than making generalizations about coin sizes, you can always check out state gaming reports. These reports show the average payout percentages (or house edges) for each coin denomination within a given state’s casinos.
For example, you might look at a Nevada Gaming Commission (NGC) release and see that dollar slot machines are offering 94.79% RTP on average.
Interestingly enough, the NGC reports specific payout information for Megabucks. This IGT product is the most popular slot in all the popular Las Vegas casinos and warrants more detailed info.
You won’t find the exact payout percentage for an individual game, but you’ll at least have a better guideline with these reports.
Email a Casino and Ask
One more option involves emailing a casino directly and asking them about their RTP for a specific slot machine.
The problem here is that customer service will often state that they don’t have this information available. But in certain cases, you may actually receive a real answer.
You shouldn’t count on this method majority of the time. It’s at least worth trying, though, if you’re desperate to find out the RTP for certain slots.
What to Avoid When Searching for Land-Based Slots Payback
You can see that there are a few different options for determining the payback for land-based slot machines. But there are also measures that you want to avoid on your payback-finding quest, including the following.
Relying on Signs Inside of Casinos
Many casinos hang signs above a bank of slot machines that will read something like, “Pays up to 99%.”
These signs are very effective at drawing players to slot machines. After all, who wouldn’t want to play a slot that only has a 1% house edge?
Well Well Well Podcast
Unfortunately, these signs are also very misleading. Only one of the machines within the section has to offer 99% RTP.
The rest could pay as low as 90% RTP and still make the sign valid. Therefore, you can’t rely on much information that the casino supplies you with.
Using One Good Session to Determine Quality Payback
Slots are extremely volatile games that may pay a lot one session, then offer very few prizes for the next five sessions. Therefore, you can never use any single outing to judge how a game pays.
Well Well Well Rock You
Many gamblers still make this very mistake. They’ll have one hot session with a game and believe that it offers a high payout percentage.
It would be great if finding RTP for land-based slot machines was really this simple. The reality, though, is that it’s anything but.
Blindly Believing Ads for the “Loosest Slots”
I’ve seen plenty of ads for loose slot machines when driving on the interstate. These billboards suggest that a given casino features slots with high RTP or frequent payouts.
However, “loose” is a broad term that doesn’t really mean anything. State gaming laws don’t put parameters on what constitutes a loose game.
Casinos can make this claim, regardless of whether it’s true or not. That said, you should take any such advertisement with a grain of salt.
Well Well Well Rtp Jobs
Conclusion
You may think negatively about land-based casinos upon being unable to find RTP for their slots. After all, you don’t have to spend much time at all finding payback for online slots.
However, providers are the ones who choose whether to or not to release payout percentages. They can’t accurately do this with slot machines at brick and mortar casinos, because providers feature different RTP options.
One casino may order a slot at 93% payback, while the next orders it at 95% RTP. Developers are therefore unable to offer a uniform payout percentage for each slot.
The good news, though, is that you don’t have to give up hope. Instead, you have a few options for finding general RTP figures.
The easiest method is to make generalizations based on coin denominations. Simply put, the higher coin denominations usually offer better payback.
Well Well Well Picture
You can also read state gaming reports. These releases show the average amount that each coin denomination pays out within a given state’s gambling venues.
Well Well Well Rtp Drilling
Finally, you can always email a casino directly and ask about a specific game. You won’t get the desired answer most of the time, but it’s worth trying.
In summary, finding the RTP for an individual land-based slot is impossible in most cases. But you’ll still have a general idea on how much these slots pay by following the previously covered tips.