[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [fluid-dev] Re: Changes checked into CVS
From: |
Josh Green |
Subject: |
Re: [fluid-dev] Re: Changes checked into CVS |
Date: |
Sun, 10 Dec 2006 16:28:52 +0000 |
Your dithering patch at this point isn't complete, so I wanted to get it
right before next release :) Therefore, returning to this discussion..
On Fri, 2006-11-24 at 21:19 +0200, Mihail Zenkov wrote:
>
> Yes you right, but in case without roundf we have two time bigger
> amplitude and imho bigger THD (i see it when compare spectrum in
> audacity). See attach to more undersend.
Sounds like it would be good to use roundf. I'll need to add
a ./configure detection for it though, since I imagine it wont be
available on Windows and possibly OSX? Not sure. I was thinking of
just making a macro like:
#define FLUID_ROUNDF roundf
Which gets defined if roundf is truly available. Any ideas of a
semi-efficient equivalent that could be used in place of this macro if
roundf() is not available? I suppose it does not need to be as good as
roundf, just as long as it is improving things in regards to dithering.
> > Yeah, I'll throw together some example. Its not related to your patch
> > though. If you wanted to check it out though, I'd be happy to provide
> > an example case.
>
> I interested in better sound quality. If i can help - i try.
>
Haven't gotten around to this just yet.
Best regards,
Josh
- Re: [fluid-dev] Re: Changes checked into CVS,
Josh Green <=