On Fri, 2006-05-12 at 13:14 -0500, Richard Smith wrote: > > If you are a superior programmer then you can get better audio results > > using fixed point, AND you can do it in less time with simpler code. Not > > to mention that a floating point unit uses a lot more gates than a fixed > > point unit. > > > > For any given number of bits floating point is worse, uses more gates, > > and is slower. > > Is this for the on-board mixer?
I have no idea. I think the idea of putting audio on a card is a terrible one. I can already point to FPGA based audio cards that work on Linux and are well supported by open source projects. The cards in question are made by people that understand the problems inherent in audio engineering and have solved them pretty well before. I do not think that is the case for people on this list. For example, I doubt I will ever see a meaningful discussion on clock recovery on this list, and such an omission would automatically guarantee any card produced would be ignored by the professional market. > If not then from what I read on the Linux Audio Dev list you guys may > be splitting hairs. The serious audio processing guys on that list > use the host CPU for all the effect work not anthing on the sound > card. A modern athlon blows away all but the really expensive DSPs I agree. I think that an audio card is a bad idea, but if people are insistent on doing it, I feel obligated to point out when they are making rookie mistakes. Cheers, Ray _______________________________________________ Open-graphics mailing list [email protected] http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)
