> It is not a talent to remember your own code. ;-) I do have to object here: Remembering where to find a specific fragment in thousands lines of code may indeed look like a talent to someone, who can't even remember where his car key is, until he finds it in his left hand... ;)
> Yeah, you only wrote part of the sample data, because the Write() > method is > ignorant as well. It simply assumes 16 bit in this case without > complaining: > > http://svn.linuxsampler.org/cgi-bin/viewvc.cgi/libgig/trunk/src/gig.cpp?revision=3979&view=markup#l1329 Ah, I see. > There is one clear difference between the gig engine and sfz engine > in LS: the > gig engine is much more efficient. I have seen a report on the ML by > somebody > who wrote he easily got CPU saturation with the sfz engine, unlike > with gig > and same patches. However he was not motivated enough to deliver > useful > profiling data so I could identify the issue. > > In the end I am just maintaining the sfz engine, but I am personally > not using > it. So if people don't care enough there, then I don't either. Fair enough! I have no clue, how those sampler engines really compare regarding playback-performance but always felt like using Gigasampler would be the better choice. That's why I started programming my tool in a way that it might be expanded to convert e.g. sfz to gig. That's something I have on my list after my next release, since I want it to make myself a 'true' replica of the Ivy-Piano sfz and some of its articulations are not represented in the individual filenames. > No problem, no hurry. :) This sounds like an alternative version of 'No woman, no cry'... ;) Cheers, Kolja _______________________________________________ Linuxsampler-devel mailing list Linuxsampler-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linuxsampler-devel
