Charles Henry wrote: > On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 2:17 AM, IOhannes m zmoelnig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote:
> I think linear upsampling is a bit more intuitive for users than a > zero-interleaved upsampling as a default behavior. For most scenarios > I can think of involving upsampling (filtering), there's only > "incompatibility" by having a gain factor of the upsampling ratio > (using default of linear interpolation instead of zero-interleaving). my main argument when using zero-padding as default was to force users to think about what they are doing rather than providing non-optimal defaults. i think that the actual resampling/filtering algorithm is very specific to your application, so i wouldn't come up with clock-burning defaults that don't fit the needs of a user anyhow. and anything more sophisticated would have introduced additional delays, which i wanted to avoid at all cost: it's easy to do filtering, gain adjustment whatever - but it is still impossible to go back in time.... using a semi-good approach (like linear interpolation) might also give you acceptable results with cheap laptop speakers and then give you big surprise on a good PA. (note that the whole re-sampling thing made it into Pd in 2001) maybe i had other thoughts as well fgmar IOhannes _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
