I'd like to ask people have relations to FG sound development.
Have yours seen osgAL library(plugin) http://www.vrlab.umu.se/research/osgAL/
?
It seems to have add OpenAL functionality and transparent bindings to
OSG objects
right into OSG. An the other end - it produces yet another
Maik Justus wrote:
no. The Doppler problems are due to OpenAL bugs and limitations. On most
systems (at least at all which are using Open AL software Doppler
calculation) I got strange effects. On Linux systems a workaround was to
use only the relative velocity of listener and sound,
* Maik Justus -- Thursday 23 October 2008:
Melchior sent me a note, that actual Open AL might be less buggy,
but he still noticed strange effects.
I guess we have to define what actual means here. As far as I
know by now, there are three variants:
(a) original OpenAL by Loki (as Erik pointed
Melchior FRANZ wrote:
I guess we have to define what actual means here. As far as I
know by now, there are three variants:
(a) original OpenAL by Loki (as Erik pointed out recently)
(b) official OpenAL by Creative (continued from (a)). Development
I have tot state that the Creative
* Erik Hofman -- Friday 24 October 2008:
(d) A complete rewrite of OpenAL done by me, not released yet
and still figuring out how to best push this. I've used this
one for at least half a year now when running FlightGear.
Frankly, I don't see how (d) can compete with (c), which is
used and
Melchior FRANZ wrote:
Frankly, I don't see how (d) can compete with (c), which is
used and cared for by several Linux distributions as well as
used and tested by several million people. Do we really want
to pull in maintainership of our own OpenAL implementation
(for no good reason)? And
Did I say I'd shut up now? Bah ... ;-)
* Erik Hofman -- Friday 24 October 2008:
I never said I wanted to put my own implementation into
FlightGear. Still, there is a new option available soon.
True, I'm sorry. The ultimate question is really only: can
we drop our current workarounds for
Melchior FRANZ wrote:
Frankly, I don't see how (d) can compete with (c), which is
Yeah yeah, By the second time I got the message ;)
Erik
(Sorry, I couldn't resist)
-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your
* Melchior FRANZ -- Friday 24 October 2008:
Should/can we remove all workarounds and require (c)?
Just for clarification: all versions should really be
compatible, anyway. So there wouldn't be a requirement
to install a particular one. The question is only, if
one implementaiton is fully spec
Melchior FRANZ wrote:
True, I'm sorry. The ultimate question is really only: can
we drop our current workarounds for buggy implementations,
and rely on a clean spec-compliant (i.e. working) OpenAL
version, and point people to an URL where this can be found
for optimal results. Ideally, this
* Erik Hofman -- Friday 24 October 2008:
Yeah yeah, By the second time I got the message ;)
In case you are referring to mail duplicates: As you can see
on the message ids, I didn't send it twice. This is a bug
in the sourceforge.net mail handling:
* Erik Hofman -- Friday 24 October 2008:
the remaining problem might be hardware accelerated 3d
audio support from the Creative drivers. If that version
fails, then what?
Ugh ... no idea about that. Wouldn't implementations like
openal-soft care for that as well? (Not that I've found any
Melchior FRANZ wrote:
* Erik Hofman -- Friday 24 October 2008:
the remaining problem might be hardware accelerated 3d
audio support from the Creative drivers. If that version
fails, then what?
Ugh ... no idea about that. Wouldn't implementations like
openal-soft care for that as well?
Melchior FRANZ wrote:
* Erik Hofman -- Friday 24 October 2008:
Yeah yeah, By the second time I got the message ;)
In case you are referring to mail duplicates: As you can see
on the message ids, I didn't send it twice. This is a bug
in the sourceforge.net mail handling:
On 22 Oct 2008, at 22:00, Vladimir Karmishin wrote:
Right now, I'm not completely understand how does FGFX class work, it
seems it standing for some kind
of global sound proxy between FG and SimGear.
If somebody has worked with or on this class - then I'd like to ask
him for a little help.
Hi James !
Thank you for your help !
In fact, i'm thought about extending FGFX functionality with some
members, like
adding some members to it, like FGFX::ConvertGLCoordinates,
FGFX::BindToModelNode, etc...
That little hack I published before - is based at approach like you
told, but at my
Vladimir Karmishin wrote:
Hello !
I'm still digging into FlightGear sound subsystem. :-)
Today, I make a small modification in AI Aircrafts, to let them
produce some noise.
This encouraged me to look at the FGFX change I made before but which
turned out to be less than ideal. I think
On Oct 23, 2008, at 11:12 AM, Erik Hofman wrote:
This encouraged me to look at the FGFX change I made before but which
turned out to be less than ideal. I think I'm slowly getting at what
is
happening. If I get this sorted out adding sound effects to models
should be easy. I'll let you
Vladimir Karmishin wrote:
Can you rememer back, is SGSoundMgr::set_source_pos_all( ALfloat
*pos ); is sort of hack, assuming
everything is happening inside cabin, or it's just sources enumerator,
which pass through a map
of loaded sounds updating their positions ? Of course I can play
On Thu, 23 Oct 2008 10:10:42 +0200, Vladimir wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hi James !
Thank you for your help !
In fact, i'm thought about extending FGFX functionality with some
members, like
adding some members to it, like FGFX::ConvertGLCoordinates,
FGFX::BindToModelNode,
..keep in mind sound moves thru the airframe structure too, and much
faster than it does thru the air flowing around the aircraft, imagine
e.g. propeller noise heard in a F-16 from a Tu-95, or heard in a Spit
from a FW-190 playing chicken, or in a B-17 combat box formation.
Lovely can of
Vladimir Karmishin wrote:
I need any thoughts,
imaginations about which way can it be modified to let it work with
multiple 3d sound emitters.
Reading this again there might be some confusion; aircraft can have
multiple 3d sound emitters already, they are just tied to the main
aircraft
On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 11:47 AM, Erik Hofman wrote:
Vladimir Karmishin wrote:
I need any thoughts,
imaginations about which way can it be modified to let it work with
multiple 3d sound emitters.
Reading this again there might be some confusion; aircraft can have
multiple 3d sound
On Thu, 23 Oct 2008 18:05:30 +0200, Vladimir wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
..keep in mind sound moves thru the airframe structure too, and much
faster than it does thru the air flowing around the aircraft,
imagine e.g. propeller noise heard in a F-16 from a Tu-95, or heard
in a
Hi Erik,
Erik Hofman schrieb am 23.10.2008 18:47:
Vladimir Karmishin wrote:
I need any thoughts,
imaginations about which way can it be modified to let it work with
multiple 3d sound emitters.
Reading this again there might be some confusion; aircraft can have
multiple 3d
25 matches
Mail list logo
