On 2015-02-17 23:22, Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:
17.02.2015 17:29, David Henningsson wrote:
Changes since v1:
- Fix according to Alexander's comments
- A new patch has been added that removes dead code imported from
Chrome OS.
For easier reviewing, I will also send a total of the first three
patches.
Also note that the current routing logic are not optimal, e g,
when on 2.1 speakers, plug headphones in, then unplug headphones
again, the
result might be that the stereo profile is selected instead of the
expected 2.1
profile. This is not an error with this patch set but might limit its
usefulness.
David Henningsson (5):
lfe-filter: Import code from the Chrome OS audio server
lfe-filter: Enable LFE filter in the resampler
lfe-filter: Cleanup and refactor
lfe-filter: Add rewind support
resampler: Make some basic functions for rewinding
Hui Wang (2):
daemon-conf: enable the lfe remixing by default
lfe-filter: change the crossover frequency as a parameter
Well, I have tested this quantitatively using a null sink.
pacmd load-module module-null-sink rate=44100
channel_map=front-left,front-right,lfe
parec --fix-format --fix-rate --fix-channels --file-format=wav
--format=s16le --rate=44100 --channels 3 -d null.monitor response.wav &
paplay -d null sweep.wav ; killall parec ; wait # where sweep.wav is a
mono file containing a sine wave sweep
audacity response.wav # look at the waveform
Result: the crossover frequency should be at 120 Hz by default, the
filter should attenuate the signal by 6 dB at this frequency, and it
indeed behaves this way. If I mix the right channel and the LFE channel
together, the result corresponds to a flat frequency response.
However, I have some doubts about the correct normalization. Let's
consider this use case.
Someone prefers to use his full 5.1 system when watching DVDs and
BluRays, but does not like that PulseAudio uses rear and center speakers
for stereo content like CDs. Still, he needs a subwoofer and a software
crossover, because the satellite speakers just don't reproduce bass well
enough. So he switches manually between 5.1 and 2.1 profiles as needed
depending on the content.
Now consider a passage on a music CD that contains e.g. some drums in
the left channel and nothing on the right. PulseAudio averages the left
and right channels, then filters the result, and gives that to the
subwoofer. I.e., 50% of the bass from drums get there in this example,
and 100% of high-frequency content get to the left speaker. Without the
crossover, in the stereo profile, 100% of both bass and non-bass from
drums get to the left speaker - and that is definitely balanced in terms
of frequency content if the speaker reproduces all frequencies
accurately. So, for the example with the LR4 crossover to sound
balanced, the subwoofer must be 6 dB more sensitive than the left
speaker. The important thing to take back is the 100%/50% ratio of
non-bass in the left speaker and bass coming to subwoofer, and the
presumably-balanced result.
Now consider the same passage on a DVD in the 5.0 arrangement (i.e.
there is no LFE channel in the soundtrack). The drums are in the front
left channel, and there is nothing in the other channels. PulseAudio
upmixes this to 5.1, and the LFE is synthesized as an average of all
channels. Thus, it gets 20% of the bass from the drums, while the
front-left speaker still gets 100% of non-bass. As these amplitudes are
not in the same proportion as in the CD case, the system that sounded
balanced previously would not do so now.
So this looks like an "average vs sum of channels" question regarding
the LFE filter input. Of course, without the filter, we just have to use
the average to avoid clipping on typical music material.
But the clipping should be avoided in the LFE filter case too. E g, a 70
Hz sine wave played back in all source channels would make the LFE clip
(in the case of using sum rather than average).
If you play back stereo material through a 5.1 system, the left channel
gets duplicated to both front left, rear left, and 50% in center and LFE
channels. Thus, the 100%/50% ratio applies to "front left + rear left +
half of center". The 100%/20% ratio applies to front left only.
If you decide to change your speaker setup so that you have a 2.1 system
only, (and thus change your "front left" speaker to become a "left"
speaker) then naturally you should adjust the balance between speakers too.
I think it is impossible to come up with an balance algorithm that
completely satisfies both the "I want my stereo as 2.1" and "I want my
stereo as 5.1" crowds, but for making these transitions easier: if we
don't already do so, I think we should save volume per port+profile
combo, so that the user can setup balance once per port+profile and
don't have to adjust volume when changing profiles.
Alternatively, the answer may be just "don't switch profiles like that".
I don't know how hardware 5.1 AV receivers react to this use case,
because I don't have one yet (and maybe, depending on the listening
tests, will spend money on a really good stereo system instead).
I think that the definite answer to this balance paradox will come from
measurements of the individual frequency response of each laptop speaker
for a laptop with a built-in subwoofer. It would also be interesting to
see what Windows does here.
--
David Henningsson, Canonical Ltd.
https://launchpad.net/~diwic
_______________________________________________
pulseaudio-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/pulseaudio-discuss
