On 03/21/2007 04:34 PM, Jean-Marc Valin wrote: >> Users of these distributions would then have to be fairly familiar with >> alsa to know they could improve sound by recompiling alsa-lib against >> the speex libraries, but given that it's (also) dirt cheap soundcards >> that need the resampling, their users aren't too likely to _be_ fairly >> familiar. They'd just observe (still) that their sound is "much better >> on windows". > > Oh, I meant using a copy of the pph code in the mean time, not the > current linear interpolation resampler. Mmm, I believe Takashi Iwai was though. If I interpreted him correctly he proposed to optionally link libasound against libspeex (libresample?) if so ./config-ured and found at alsa-lib compile time but to keep using the current resampler when not. Given the idea that distributions probably don't want their alsa-lib package dependent on their speex package (alsa-lib is right above the kernel and mandatory on any Linux system wanting to do anything with sound while speex is significantly higher up on the chain) I worried this would mean your code wouldn't be used in practice. >> If the standard code is as lousy as I've read in this thread, >> keeping it as default is probably not the best thing. > > It's worse than you think :-) Try playing an 8 kHz file to a > soundcard that only does 44.1/48. It's just horrible. Trouble is that I don't have a soundcard that can only do 44.1/48. I'll go hack up a driver to pretend I do though and try. Have a nice 8 kHz file I can try with? :) Rene. _______________________________________________ Alsa-devel mailing list Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
