On Tuesday 16 September 2008 01:54:53 pm Kjetil S. Matheussen wrote:
> Can you clarify this? Do you think wav>2ch is
> less supported than wavex>2ch? I'm not going
> to set default format based on ideological reasons.
I think it's a question of specification. With the original RIFF/WAVE format,
at channels>2, elements of the data layout (specifically, the sample packing
in the 'data' chunk) were explicitly declared to be undefined (essentially
meaning, left up to the implementor), whereas in WAVE-EX they are explicitly
defined. Thus, you have a much better chance of achieving successful
inter-operability for channels>2 with WAVE-EX.
Cheers!
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Frederick F. Gleason, Jr. | Chief Developer |
| | Paravel Systems |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| beta test, v: |
| To voluntarily entrust one's data, one's livelihood and one's |
| sanity to hardware or software intended to destroy all three. |
| In earlier days, virgins were often selected to beta test |
| volcanoes. |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------|
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Received on Wed Sep 17 00:15:01 2008
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Sep 17 2008 - 00:15:02 EEST