On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 10:58 PM, Claudio Freire klaussfre...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 5:16 PM, Rostislav Pehlivanov
atomnu...@gmail.com wrote:
+if (spread NOISE_SPREAD_THRESHOLD
+((sce-zeroes[w*16+g] energy = threshold) ||
+
On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 5:16 PM, Rostislav Pehlivanov
atomnu...@gmail.com wrote:
+if (spread NOISE_SPREAD_THRESHOLD
+((sce-zeroes[w*16+g] energy = threshold) ||
+energy threshold*(NOISE_LAMBDA_NUMERATOR/lambda))) {
+
As lambda increases (more quality) the chance to get PNS decreases with
your suggestion to use spread (NOISE_SPREAD_THRESHOLD * 120.f /
lambda). It's more correct to have
spread (NOISE_SPREAD_THRESHOLD * (lambda / 120.0f))
here. The spectrums showed a hole right in between the PNS and normal
