Re: [linux-audio-dev] what's wrong with glame

New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view Other groups

Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] what's wrong with glame
From: delire (delire_AT_selectparks.net)
Date: Thu Jul 26 2001 - 19:18:52 EEST


>
> So if we pop up the waveeditor right away you would be happy?

ohhh yes ; )

and as for all that's below - look great so far - richards comments earlier
seemed clear-headed also. you guys already know this stuff! i'll pick
through it all and get back to you tommorrow.

de|

>
> > And the waveform view is nothing to smile about - black and white is a
bad
> > choice of rendering. High contrast schemes like this make a 10 hour
session
> > in the editor a strain, though the wearing of sunglasses indoors is
> > particular to this field.
>
> Agreed :)
>
> > At this stage I realise that I loaded the wrong file[s], to get rid of
it
> > from the project list i have to [delete] [as opposed to the inuitive,
> > 'close'] and then 'empty the
> > trash' [what trash? and why should i [?] - implying that i have the
option
> > to revoke my decision once it's in the trash].
>
> Thats actually a new feature because I delete some samples I made
> accidentially before I saved them. But this could be made configurable in
> the preferences menu.
> Or a popup "Really delete file"? But that last option IMHO suxx.
>
> > I find that there aren't even samples, rms, or 'beats' as alternative
timing
> > schemes - many other media packages require these time scalings for sync
> > up - in this way glame further rarifies it's position as a
stand-alone-tool.
>
> Ok that goes hand in hand with the still bad wavewidget which lacks
> support for all that stuff.
>
> > There needs to be an option for resampling file in conjunction with
shifitng
> > bit-rates.
> > eg: 48khz / 24bit > 22.05khz / 8bit. preferably with dithering and
> > noise-shaping in order to maintain the integrity of the signal.
> > this would enable the multimedia community to use glame for web and
cdrom
> > without fscking around in other apps.
>
> Actually you can resample with rather good quality. But you have to setup
> a network for that purpose. Just stream the audio into FFT->FFT_RESAMPLE->
> IFFT. IMHO the quality is better than sox with polyphase resampling which
> produces glitches.
> Saving with other resolution than 16bit would go into exporting features.
>
> > [looks like a recycle symbol] that I assumed probably meant 'loop' -
that
> > strangely means 'view all'. I couldn't and still can't find how to loop
on a
> > selection in glame...
>
> You can't :(
>
> > I can't do it in either install of glame. For this reason i can't really
use
> > it at all. Similarly all editors have a key-bind for play and stop!!!
Why
> > doesn't glame??
>
> hmm, ok, you'll find the default keybindings in default-accels. On the
> other hand it should be easy to add keybindings for that stuff. Are you
> on glame-users yet?
>
> > enough i have to then hit a second play button in a strange play control
> > that pops up!!! That i found really frustrating.
>
> Yupp :) It is.
>
> > representation of commonly expected envelope based amplitude fade, with
> > presets for bell, curved and the requisite attack/decay.
>
> Ok, if you can explain to me in detail how that fader should look like
> I happily extend it.
>
> > useless. The worst case here is 'volume adjust', which uses [instead of
> > 'dB', or 'percent'!!] 'factor' whatever that is. Here information is use
> > with confidence.
>
> True, what do you like better, dB or percent or both? Factor is just the
> multiplication factor. So 1.5 = 50% increase.
>
> Ok thanks, you're the first to actually give some decent feedback. Without
> that we just don't know what's missing, what people want. And I haven't
> used all those windows software on a regular basis.


New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view Other groups

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Thu Jul 26 2001 - 19:21:42 EEST