Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] Additional LADSPA hints
From: Paul Davis (paul_AT_linuxaudiosystems.com)
Date: Thu Jan 16 2003 - 17:58:40 EET
>On Wed, 15 Jan 2003 18:13:35 +0000
>Steve Harris <S.W.Harris_AT_ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote:
>
>> AUDIO_RATE_CONTROL. Hints than an audio control should/could be controlled
>> by a high time res. slider or control data, but shouldn't be connected to
>> the next audio signal by default. I can't think of any simple examples off
>> hand, but combined with MOMENTARY it could be used for sample accurate
>> tempo tapping.
>>
>> My comments: I really like MOMENTARY and RANDOMISABLE. AUDIO_RATE_CONTROL
>> could be useful, but might be painful for hosts to implement. I dont have
>> any particular use for it right now.
>
>Not to mention that AUDIO_RATE_CONTROL would completely useless in JACK?
>You'd have a buffer-full of samples and apply frequency shift to them, which w
>ould change the length of that buffer, which you couldn't give to JACK unless
>you do some rebuffering.
this is true of *any* output paradigm. the audio interface only
accepts N frames per second. if you had N frames to deliver in one
second, then stretched them to N*2 frames, it will necessarily take
you twice as long to deliver them - the interface isn't going to speed
up for you.
>Correct me if I'm wrong. We have similar issue with ecasound's Pitch Shifter
>operator in connection with JACK.
steve has written LADSPA pitch shifters and they work just fine with
the fixed-sized buffer paradigm.
--p
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Thu Jan 16 2003 - 18:00:34 EET