On 04/04/2013 10:00 AM, Alexander E. Patrakov wrote: > David Henningsson <david.henningsson at canonical.com> wrote: > >> I think the primary objection was not that there was a use case or need >> for the mono-upmix-only option. The objection was mostly that having a >> "enable-remixing = no" option that actually did remixing would be quite >> confusing. > >> http://www.sersc.org/journals/IJSIP/vol2_no4/7.pdf > > Good document, thanks. And independent from Dolby. And describes more than one upmixing method. > > So, can we call the following proposal a consensus? > > 1. Rename the enable-remixing options to something (e.g. remixing-method) that does not look boolean. Obviously, rename its values. If we already have enable-remixing and enable-lfe-remixing, perhaps we should add another y/n option named enable-mono-upmixing ? > 2. If there is still time, propose the implementation of all upmixing methods described in that paper as a GSoC project. I don't think it makes sense to implement *all* the upmixing methods. I think it's better to select one and implement that one. -- David Henningsson, Canonical Ltd. https://launchpad.net/~diwic
