On Wed, Feb 05, 2025 at 04:23:17PM +0100, SoX NG wrote: > `echos` is a bizarre effect that has never worked due to a bug > that overwrote the input samples before using them). I used it but never for anything intense, and I never knew that! But see below. > It's been "fixed" in sox_ng to do what it says in the manual and comments but > > 1) It's odd, not a classic effect and seems more like a coding enthusiasm than > a useful effect > > 2) It is exactly the same as "echo" with different (and more) parameters I thought it differed from echo in that successive echos created by "echos" are included in what is fed into the next echo in the effect. This would indeed mean that inputs to second and subsequent echos are replaced, as part of the function of the effect. Given this, I wonder if what you found is a bug or a feature. :-) > I'm thinking of removing it as useless and distracting baggage. I don't have a strong opinion on that, since I've rarely used it and not for anything critical. > There are other reasons to start thinking of a major release 15.0.0; > > nothing startling but a few non-backward-compatible changes are beckoning > > like making `silence` trim from the silence point instead of 0.02 seconds > after it, Didn't know that either, but I do use the silence effect often, and probably sometimes with unusual parameters - like durations of 0. > not something we can put in 14.X because at least one artist has already > used this discrepancy to achieve the result they wanted. This is where I will briefly whine (good-naturedly of course) about my failure to weigh in before the "filter" effect was removed, because I subsequently tried to use the FM broadcast filter example out of the manual only to find I didn't know how to replace that effect in the example. > `chorus` has also never worked and has been fixed. Twice. > > See the waveform images in comment > > https://codeberg.org/sox_ng/sox_ng/issues/276#issuecomment-2581801 > > but it is not a chorus, which is the addition of delayed and detuned version > of the same signal; > > it is a simple flanger, of which we already have a much better one by Rob > Sykes, > > which can probably be parameterized to do the same as `chorus`, Can't speak to that, but I *can* say that chorus has baffled me for years because it never seemed to do what I intuitively expected. -- Doug Lee dgl@xxxxxxxx http://www.dlee.org In laughter, love is found; but in tears, it is forged. (12/09/01) _______________________________________________ Sox-users mailing list Sox-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sox-users
