On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 11:08 AM, Russell Ryan <[email protected]> wrote: > Awesome Phil, how does it sound w.r.t. Soundtouch? Have you tried a sue by > side comparison for CPU usage ? Compared to SoundTouch RB sounds pretty good. It is also quite a bit quicker. It's a happy middle ground between VE and PITS. I still haven't tried a side by side CPU usage comparison but I think there within an order of magnitude from each other.
> As I remember rb only supports noninterleaved sample buffers so we pay the > cost of deinterleaving / reinterleaving. We pay the same cost w ladspa. Does > it make sense to rework the engine to deal in deinterleaved buffers? Yes, it is true that we have to deinterleave to use RB. This is also true for liblame (for SHOUTcast) and several other libraries. If we want to switch from interleaved to deinterleaved we might want to think about first creating a matrix on the wiki that shows what library supports what format, pick the best fit and stick with it. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF.net email is sponsored by Make an app they can't live without Enter the BlackBerry Developer Challenge http://p.sf.net/sfu/RIM-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Mixxx-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mixxx-devel
