[Flightgear-devel] Doppler effect
Hi, I've implemented a check for implementations that need a Doppler effect adjustment to be able to hear them but there might be implementations that sound exaggerated now. If so, please specify which ones and I'll update the check procedure. Erik -- Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with Crystal Reports now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] doppler volume
James Sleeman wrote Hi Maik, Maik Justus wrote: the effect you are discussing is not the Doppler effect, but just the Yes, I know it's not a function of the Doppler itself, but I was thinking more along the lines of the volume drop off, if it were better, might help the convincingness of the Doppler, if you see what I mean. volume as a function of the distance. Every aircraft has its own sound definition including the distance, where the volume is halved (reference-dist) and the distance where the volume is cutted off (max-dist). Hmm, interesting. It seems that a great many aircraft do not define these values at all. Is there a default definition for these somewhere, is one calculated by openal maybe in the absence of these specific settings? At the end of this message is a quick grep showing the aircraft which do not define reference-dist. Quite a list. Just to clarify on the reference-dist, is it that this value is a diminishing effect, that is for reference-dist of 1 after distance 1 the volume is half original, after distance 2 the volume is 1/4 original (half of a half), distance 3 it's an 1/8th (half of a quarter). Or is it simply that at that specific distance, and for infinity beyond until max-dist the volume is always half the original? snip ... In simgear\source\simgear\sound\xmlsound.cxx I see that default values for reference-dist and max-dist seem to be specifed. It seems possible that these default values are no longer honoured. I think they worked at one time. It is going to be extremely tedious and time consuming to explicitly apply specific values to _every_ sound in fg. I would think that the attenuation of sound in air is amenable to mathematical calculation. Surely we shouldn't be guessing at some arbitrary reference distance? Vivian -- This SF.net email is sponsored by: SourcForge Community SourceForge wants to tell your story. http://p.sf.net/sfu/sf-spreadtheword ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] doppler volume
Hello, James Sleeman schrieb am 22.01.2009 01:14: Hi Maik, ... Just to clarify on the reference-dist, is it that this value is a diminishing effect, that is for reference-dist of 1 after distance 1 the volume is half original, after distance 2 the volume is 1/4 original (half of a half), distance 3 it's an 1/8th (half of a quarter). yes, exactly. Maik -- This SF.net email is sponsored by: SourcForge Community SourceForge wants to tell your story. http://p.sf.net/sfu/sf-spreadtheword ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] doppler volume
Hi, Maik Justus schrieb am 22.01.2009 13:45: Hello, James Sleeman schrieb am 22.01.2009 01:14: Hi Maik, ... Just to clarify on the reference-dist, is it that this value is a diminishing effect, that is for reference-dist of 1 after distance 1 the volume is half original, after distance 2 the volume is 1/4 original (half of a half), distance 3 it's an 1/8th (half of a quarter). yes, exactly. not exactly, it's 1/8th at distance 4 (doubled distance result in half volume). Maik -- This SF.net email is sponsored by: SourcForge Community SourceForge wants to tell your story. http://p.sf.net/sfu/sf-spreadtheword ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] doppler volume
Hi Vivian, Vivian Meazza schrieb am 22.01.2009 11:17: I would think that the attenuation of sound in air is amenable to mathematical calculation. Yes it is. (at lest if your distance to the sound source is large compared to the size of the source). Surely we shouldn't be guessing at some arbitrary reference distance? The problem is, we don't know, which distance the author was thinking about, as he defined/recorded the sound. For in-cockpit sounds the distance from the sound source to the cockpit may be a good guess, for out-of cockpit sounds the typical viewing distance of the aircraft could be a good guess, too. Therefore we will have two different guesses for e.g. the engine sound (as long as there are no different sounds defined for cockpit and external view)... Vivian Maik -- This SF.net email is sponsored by: SourcForge Community SourceForge wants to tell your story. http://p.sf.net/sfu/sf-spreadtheword ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] doppler volume
* Maik Justus -- Thursday 22 January 2009: Vivian Meazza schrieb am 22.01.2009 11:17: I would think that the attenuation of sound in air is amenable to mathematical calculation. Yes it is. But it depends on the frequency pattern, no? So we'd need to analyze the spectrum ... time to use libfftw3. :-) I don't see why adding these values to the sound config should be such a problem. Don't we specify animation parameters to the smallest detail? Why should sound be different? OTOH, I would support global default values max-dist and reference-dist in preferences.xml, which an aircraft could override. And finally, every sound definition can still define its own values like before. JFTR: The bo105 sets these values since a while. :-P m. -- This SF.net email is sponsored by: SourcForge Community SourceForge wants to tell your story. http://p.sf.net/sfu/sf-spreadtheword ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] doppler volume
Melchior FRANZ Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] doppler volume * Maik Justus -- Thursday 22 January 2009: Vivian Meazza schrieb am 22.01.2009 11:17: I would think that the attenuation of sound in air is amenable to mathematical calculation. Yes it is. But it depends on the frequency pattern, no? So we'd need to analyze the spectrum ... time to use libfftw3. :-) Well even taking some arbitrary mid frequency would be better than a wild guess. I don't see why adding these values to the sound config should be such a problem. Don't we specify animation parameters to the smallest detail? Why should sound be different? And usually there are default values. OTOH, I would support global default values max-dist and reference-dist in preferences.xml, which an aircraft could override. And finally, every sound definition can still define its own values like before. I don't see any particular merit is setting the value in preferences.xml, but it would be nice if the default values worked as designed, no matter where they are set. JFTR: The bo105 sets these values since a while. :-P Well done, but what do you base the values on? Vivian -- This SF.net email is sponsored by: SourcForge Community SourceForge wants to tell your story. http://p.sf.net/sfu/sf-spreadtheword ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] doppler volume
* Vivian Meazza -- Thursday 22 January 2009: Melchior FRANZ I don't see any particular merit is setting the value in preferences.xml, but it would be nice if the default values worked as designed, no matter where they are set. It's always nice to have default values changeable, rather than hard-coded. So a property is the right choice. And preferences.xml is the place to initialize properties. And then, these values might have to be changed at runtime: Sound propagation also depends on the atmosphere, the terrain, etc. Probably nobody would ever bother, but having the possibility doesn't hurt either. JFTR: The bo105 sets these values since a while. :-P Well done, but what do you base the values on? Real life experience and guessing. That's not much worse than an unscientific calculation. If somebody doesn't like the values, just complain and I might change them. m. -- This SF.net email is sponsored by: SourcForge Community SourceForge wants to tell your story. http://p.sf.net/sfu/sf-spreadtheword ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] doppler volume
The doppler effect (which I currently have working through the USE_SOFTWARE_DOPPLER define) has never sounded very real to my ear. Recently I've wondered if it might be to do with the volume dropoff not being enough. It's hard to subjectively quantify the dropoff in the flyby, but for example if we switch to tower view, it seems you can always hear the aircraft no matter how far away you get, for example, I was 100 miles from the tower and yet I had no trouble hearing the aircraft at all. Is the dropoff (if there is one at all, perhaps my mind is filling in the blank and making one), configurable at all through some property, I couldn't find one? It would be good to be able to play around with the numbers and see if it makes an improvement to the subjective convincingness of the doppler effect. --- James Sleeman -- This SF.net email is sponsored by: SourcForge Community SourceForge wants to tell your story. http://p.sf.net/sfu/sf-spreadtheword ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] doppler volume
Hi James, the effect you are discussing is not the Doppler effect, but just the volume as a function of the distance. Every aircraft has its own sound definition including the distance, where the volume is halved (reference-dist) and the distance where the volume is cutted off (max-dist). The volume as a function of the distance is calculated by Openal. Therefore we need to know the aircraft, with wich you have the wrong effect and the kind of sound (most probably the engine sound?). If the sound configuration for this specific sound has reasonable definition for reference-dist we need to know your operating system and openal version. With this information other users can check, if they have the same problem. Maybe we can drill it down to a openal problem or maybe the distance passed to openal is wrong... Unfortunately I actually do not have a running flightgear; therefore I can not perform tests. Maik James Sleeman schrieb am 21.01.2009 13:46: The doppler effect (which I currently have working through the USE_SOFTWARE_DOPPLER define) has never sounded very real to my ear. Recently I've wondered if it might be to do with the volume dropoff not being enough. It's hard to subjectively quantify the dropoff in the flyby, but for example if we switch to tower view, it seems you can always hear the aircraft no matter how far away you get, for example, I was 100 miles from the tower and yet I had no trouble hearing the aircraft at all. Is the dropoff (if there is one at all, perhaps my mind is filling in the blank and making one), configurable at all through some property, I couldn't find one? It would be good to be able to play around with the numbers and see if it makes an improvement to the subjective convincingness of the doppler effect. --- James Sleeman -- This SF.net email is sponsored by: SourcForge Community SourceForge wants to tell your story. http://p.sf.net/sfu/sf-spreadtheword ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel -- This SF.net email is sponsored by: SourcForge Community SourceForge wants to tell your story. http://p.sf.net/sfu/sf-spreadtheword ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] doppler volume
Hi Maik, Maik Justus wrote: the effect you are discussing is not the Doppler effect, but just the Yes, I know it's not a function of the Doppler itself, but I was thinking more along the lines of the volume drop off, if it were better, might help the convincingness of the Doppler, if you see what I mean. volume as a function of the distance. Every aircraft has its own sound definition including the distance, where the volume is halved (reference-dist) and the distance where the volume is cutted off (max-dist). Hmm, interesting. It seems that a great many aircraft do not define these values at all. Is there a default definition for these somewhere, is one calculated by openal maybe in the absence of these specific settings? At the end of this message is a quick grep showing the aircraft which do not define reference-dist. Quite a list. Just to clarify on the reference-dist, is it that this value is a diminishing effect, that is for reference-dist of 1 after distance 1 the volume is half original, after distance 2 the volume is 1/4 original (half of a half), distance 3 it's an 1/8th (half of a quarter). Or is it simply that at that specific distance, and for infinity beyond until max-dist the volume is always half the original? Here is the list, checking for max-dist yields basically the same result. for file in *; do fgrep -r reference-dist $file /dev/null; if [ $? != 0 ]; then echo $file - no reference-dist; fi; done 14bis - no reference-dist 707 - no reference-dist 737 - no reference-dist 737-300 - no reference-dist 747 - no reference-dist 747-200 - no reference-dist 787 - no reference-dist a10 - no reference-dist A-10 - no reference-dist A300 - no reference-dist A320 - no reference-dist A320-family - no reference-dist A380 - no reference-dist a4 - no reference-dist A-6E - no reference-dist A6M2 - no reference-dist airwaveXtreme150 - no reference-dist Albatross - no reference-dist Alphajet - no reference-dist an225 - no reference-dist AN-225 - no reference-dist AR-234 - no reference-dist as350 - no reference-dist ASK21 - no reference-dist asw20 - no reference-dist ATC - no reference-dist B-17 - no reference-dist B-1B - no reference-dist B-2 - no reference-dist b29 - no reference-dist b52 - no reference-dist B-52F - no reference-dist BAC-TSR2 - no reference-dist beaufighter - no reference-dist bell206 - no reference-dist Bernard-HV220 - no reference-dist bf109 - no reference-dist bleriot-XI - no reference-dist bocian - no reference-dist Buccaneer - no reference-dist Bugatti - no reference-dist c172x - no reference-dist c182 - no reference-dist c182rg - no reference-dist C-2A - no reference-dist c310u3a - no reference-dist C550B - no reference-dist C684 - no reference-dist CanberraBI8 - no reference-dist Caravelle - no reference-dist Carreidas - no reference-dist Citation - no reference-dist colditz - no reference-dist couzinet70 - no reference-dist dc3 - no reference-dist DerKleineUhu - no reference-dist DH-88 - no reference-dist DH-89 - no reference-dist DO-335 - no reference-dist DO-X - no reference-dist Dragonfly - no reference-dist E3B - no reference-dist ec130 - no reference-dist eurofighter - no reference-dist f104 - no reference-dist F-106-dart - no reference-dist f-14b - no reference-dist f15 - no reference-dist f15c - no reference-dist f16 - no reference-dist f18 - no reference-dist F4U - no reference-dist F80C - no reference-dist F-86 - no reference-dist F-8E - no reference-dist F-8E-Crusader - no reference-dist Farman-IV - no reference-dist fkdr1 - no reference-dist fokker100 - no reference-dist fokker50 - no reference-dist fw190 - no reference-dist harrier - no reference-dist He162 - no reference-dist HondaJet - no reference-dist Hornet - no reference-dist Hunter - no reference-dist Instruments - no reference-dist Instruments-3d - no reference-dist j22 - no reference-dist j3cub - no reference-dist j7w - no reference-dist jeep - no reference-dist ju52 - no reference-dist KC135 - no reference-dist Ki-84 - no reference-dist Lightning - no reference-dist Lockheed-SR71 - no reference-dist Macchi-Castoldi-MC72 - no reference-dist Malolo1 - no reference-dist marchetti - no reference-dist MD11 - no reference-dist MIBS - no reference-dist MiG-15 - no reference-dist Mig-29 - no reference-dist mirage2000 - no reference-dist MPCarrier - no reference-dist NTPS - no reference-dist ogel - no reference-dist OH-1 - no reference-dist ornithopter - no reference-dist OV10_USAFE - no reference-dist P-38-Lightning - no reference-dist p51d - no reference-dist paraglider - no reference-dist payen-pa100 - no reference-dist PC-6 - no reference-dist pc7 - no reference-dist pushback - no reference-dist Rascal - no reference-dist SaabJ35Draken - no reference-dist santa - no reference-dist seahawk - no reference-dist SeaVixen - no reference-dist sgs126 - no reference-dist sgs233 - no reference-dist shuttle - no reference-dist Skyvan - no reference-dist snowplow - no reference-dist
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Doppler
* Maik Justus -- Saturday 20 December 2008: Is there any chance to get to know at compile time, that openal-soft is used? I haven't found anything specific in the header files. At runtime, alGetString(AL_VERSION) should contain ALSOFT . m. -- ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Doppler
Csaba Halász wrote: http://kcat.strangesoft.net/openal.html Some distributions (notably debian) have switched to this version from the original implementation. Ahh I see, using Ubuntu here and yes it appears to be this soft version. -- ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Doppler
Hi James, James Sleeman schrieb am 20.12.2008 13:21: Csaba Halász wrote: http://kcat.strangesoft.net/openal.html Some distributions (notably debian) have switched to this version from the original implementation. Ahh I see, using Ubuntu here and yes it appears to be this soft version. I think the Doppler effect even should work with openal-soft. Can you check, what is defined after #ifndef HAVE_WINDOWS_H #ifdef AL_VERSION_1_2 #define USE_OPEN_AL_DOPPLER should work #else #define USE_OPEN_AL_DOPPLER_WITH_FIXED_LISTENER better than nothing #endif #else // the Open_AL Doppler calculation seems to be buggy on windows #define USE_SOFTWARE_DOPPLER seem to be necessary #endif (file simgear/sound/sample_openal.hxx lines 65ff) and evaluate if Doppler works for you if you define one of the other two USE_ macros (and undefine the defined one). Best regards, Maik -- ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Doppler
* Maik Justus -- Saturday 20 December 2008: #ifndef HAVE_WINDOWS_H #ifdef AL_VERSION_1_2 #define USE_OPEN_AL_DOPPLER should work My openal-soft (svn/head) defines AL_VERSION_1_1 (and _1_0), but not _1_2. I just defined USE_OPEN_AL_DOPPLER after that #if* group, but Doppler didn't work. m. -- ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Doppler
* Melchior FRANZ -- Saturday 20 December 2008: I just defined USE_OPEN_AL_DOPPLER after that #if* group, but Doppler didn't work. PS: not just after the group, but instead of it, so the other optional symbols weren't defined. m. -- ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Doppler
Hi Melchior, Melchior FRANZ schrieb am 20.12.2008 15:56: * Melchior FRANZ -- Saturday 20 December 2008: I just defined USE_OPEN_AL_DOPPLER after that #if* group, but Doppler didn't work. PS: not just after the group, but instead of it, so the other optional symbols weren't defined. m. Did you try to #define USE_SOFTWARE_DOPPLER instead? Maik -- ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Doppler
* Maik Justus -- Saturday 20 December 2008: Did you try to #define USE_SOFTWARE_DOPPLER instead? No, AFAICS that enables your manual Doppler calculations, which you added for openal implementations with broken Doppler (or with correct Doppler that doesn't work with our broken setup ;-). I only wanted to know if openal-soft's Doppler works with fgfs, and apparently it doesn't. (Though, as you know, the openal-soft maintainer claims that his version is correct and that some of the others are buggy. So our code might be tuned for broken openals and, thus, not support openal-soft.) m. -- ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Doppler
Hi Melchior, Melchior FRANZ schrieb am 20.12.2008 17:54: * Maik Justus -- Saturday 20 December 2008: Did you try to #define USE_SOFTWARE_DOPPLER instead? No, AFAICS that enables your manual Doppler calculations, which you added for openal implementations with broken Doppler (or with correct Doppler that doesn't work with our broken setup ;-). Yes, that is the actual state under windows. And the manual calculation works quite fine. And if it works with openal-soft we should use it with openal-soft. I only wanted to know if openal-soft's Doppler works with fgfs, and apparently it doesn't. (Though, as you know, the openal-soft maintainer claims that his version is correct and that some of the others are buggy. So our code might be tuned for broken openals and, thus, not support openal-soft.) Yes I know. Unfortunately I do not have a openal implementation with working Doppler here; therefore I can not investigate, what need to be changed, to get it working with openal-soft. I had a quick look over the code and couldn't find any suspicious line. m. Maik -- ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Doppler
* Maik Justus -- Saturday 20 December 2008: And the manual calculation works quite fine. And if it works with openal-soft we should use it with openal-soft. Ah, ok. I re-tried with USE_SOFTWARE_DOPPLER, and that only worked for a very short time (less a minute), and then there was no sound at all. m. -- ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Doppler
Melchior FRANZ schrieb am 20.12.2008 18:29: * Maik Justus -- Saturday 20 December 2008: And the manual calculation works quite fine. And if it works with openal-soft we should use it with openal-soft. Ah, ok. I re-tried with USE_SOFTWARE_DOPPLER, and that only worked for a very short time (less a minute), and then there was no sound at all. m. Strange, in this mode I only modify the pitch value in the same range any sound.xml file can do even without Doppler. Maik -- ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Doppler
* Maik Justus -- Saturday 20 December 2008: Melchior FRANZ schrieb am 20.12.2008 18:29: I re-tried with USE_SOFTWARE_DOPPLER, and that only worked for a very short time (less a minute), and then there was no sound at all. Strange, in this mode I only modify the pitch value in the same range any sound.xml file can do even without Doppler. Good point. Turns out I had just used the wrong aircraft for this test. Apparently the f-14b has another funny feature that I hadn't encountered before. :-} Yes, USE_SOFTWARE_DOPPLER works with openal-soft. Unfortunately, the sound isn't muted when pausing ... m. -- ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Doppler
* Melchior FRANZ -- Saturday 20 December 2008:
Unfortunately, the sound isn't muted when pausing ...
Pfff ...
| /*
| alcSuspendContext
|
| Not functional
| */
| ALCAPI ALCvoid ALCAPIENTRY alcSuspendContext(ALCcontext *pContext)
| {
| // Not a lot happens here !
| (void)pContext;
| }
No, not a lot, indeed.
m.
--
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Doppler
Hi, Melchior FRANZ schrieb am 20.12.2008 20:01: Yes, USE_SOFTWARE_DOPPLER works with openal-soft. Is there any chance to get to know at compile time, that openal-soft is used? If not: is there any chance to get to know at runtime, that openal-soft is used? if yes: we need to change the concept of choosing the Doppler algorithm at compile time to do so at runtime. Maik -- ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] Doppler
Some time ago there was discussion on the list regarding the loss of doppler sound effect in the fly-by view, I was sure I read that it had been resolved? I still have no doppler in the fly-by with a fresh build last night, am I the only one, or is it still broken? --- James Sleeman -- ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Doppler
On Fri, Dec 19, 2008 at 4:55 PM, James Sleeman flightg...@gogo.co.nzwrote: Some time ago there was discussion on the list regarding the loss of doppler sound effect in the fly-by view, I was sure I read that it had been resolved? I still have no doppler in the fly-by with a fresh build last night, am I the only one, or is it still broken? This should be resolved. Can you tell me which aircraft doesn't have the doppler sound effect? What frame rates are you experiencing when you have no doppler effect? Curt. -- Curtis Olson: http://baron.flightgear.org/~curt/ -- ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Doppler
Curtis Olson wrote: This should be resolved. Can you tell me which aircraft doesn't have the doppler sound effect? What frame rates are you experiencing when you have no doppler effect? I have no doppler on any aircraft and havn't for quite a while. As I type this I have usually around 40fps in fly-by. Is there perhaps an option or something I have inadvertantly switched off? -- ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Doppler
* James Sleeman -- Saturday 20 December 2008: I have no doppler on any aircraft and havn't for quite a while. As I type this I have usually around 40fps in fly-by. Is there perhaps an option or something I have inadvertantly switched off? AFAIK, Doppler doesn't work in fgfs if you are using openal-soft. m. -- ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Doppler
On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 1:04 AM, James Sleeman flightg...@gogo.co.nz wrote: Melchior FRANZ wrote: AFAIK, Doppler doesn't work in fgfs if you are using openal-soft. Forgive my ignorance, but as opposed to using what? Is there Open AL in hardware on some devices? Melchior is referring to a particular implementation of openal. They call themselves openal soft. See: http://kcat.strangesoft.net/openal.html Some distributions (notably debian) have switched to this version from the original implementation. -- Csaba/Jester -- ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Doppler oddness
On Friday 06 July 2007 18:03, John Denker wrote: 1) Where I'm coming from: Different people are interested in different parts of FlightGear. I consider it a strength of the project that it can be put to disparate purposes. I'm sure we all agree about that, anyway. 1a) As for me personally, and for more than a few others, there is interest in using it as a complex-aircraft procedures trainer, and as an IFR procedures trainer. I'm sure virtually all of us want FG to be suitable for that purpose. YMMV, but for my purposes the whole Doppler-shift thing is unhelpful. But there's no reason whatsoever for it to be so, that I can imagine; it's in everyone's interest that it works properly. The cases where the existing Doppler model works are features I don't use, while features I do use are cases where the existing Doppler modle fails. For example: -- It is comical that the ILS middle marker is strongly shifted. -- It is not so comical that the ATIS broadast is redshifted into unintelligibility. These bugs actually have been worked out already. The necessary fixes have been made and with Maik's last patch (which was posted to the dev list, I'm pretty sure) I'm not aware of any significant problems. Maybe you could try that? I expect it will be committed soon, anyway. Cheers, AJ - This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Doppler oddness
On 07/06/2007 01:08 PM, AJ MacLeod wrote: These bugs actually have been worked out already. Excellent! The necessary fixes have been made and with Maik's last patch (which was posted to the dev list, I'm pretty sure) I'm not aware of any significant problems. Maybe you could try that? I expect it will be committed soon, anyway. It's been ten days now with no CVS-commit nor even any discussion of a CVS-commit AFAICT. If you send me the appropriate patch [off list or otherwise] I'll be happy to try it. - This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Doppler oddness
1) Where I'm coming from: Different people are interested in different parts of FlightGear. I consider it a strength of the project that it can be put to disparate purposes. 1a) As for me personally, and for more than a few others, there is interest in using it as a complex-aircraft procedures trainer, and as an IFR procedures trainer. 1b) If you want to use it for other things, that's fine. 2) Back on 06/26/2007 03:06 PM, Jon Stockill wrote: With a cvs build checked out about half an hour ago I've just noticed something very strange - with external views the doppler shift appears to be related to the view angle rather than the approach speed. If you select the chase view then you'll find that the sound is extremely slow from behind the aircraft, and ridiculously fast from in front. This also still seems to affect the radio chatter, resulting in some highly comical, but not too realistic radio messages. I did not participate in the previous discussion of this topic. The thread died ten days ago in a pillar of flame. The program bugs, however, have lived on. YMMV, but for my purposes the whole Doppler-shift thing is unhelpful. The cases where the existing Doppler model works are features I don't use, while features I do use are cases where the existing Doppler modle fails. For example: -- It is comical that the ILS middle marker is strongly shifted. -- It is not so comical that the ATIS broadast is redshifted into unintelligibility. Therefore I ask: Is there a nice way for the pilot, if he chooses, to disable Doppler effects, at least until the bugs are worked out? Perhaps a property that can be set? I grepped through the current property tree and didn't notice such a thing. 3) See item 1. - This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Doppler oddness
Am Freitag 06 Juli 2007 19:27 schrieb John Denker: It's been ten days now with no CVS-commit nor even any discussion of a CVS-commit AFAICT. That's definitely not true (generally spoken). Which branch are you using? Thomas -- PhD Student, Dept. Animal Physiology, HU Berlin Tel +49 30 2093 6173, Fax +49 30 2093 6375 - This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Doppler oddness
On 07/06/2007 01:50 PM, Thomas Förster wrote: That's definitely not true (generally spoken). Which branch are you using? CVS OSG, up to date as of late yesterday (the 5th). Has something happened since then? With this version I observe: -- Middle marker audio is strongly shifted. -- ATIS audio is strongly shifted. - This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Doppler oddness
Am Freitag 06 Juli 2007 20:33 schrieb John Denker: On 07/06/2007 01:50 PM, Thomas Förster wrote: That's definitely not true (generally spoken). Which branch are you using? CVS OSG, up to date as of late yesterday (the 5th). Has something happened since then? Hmm, rereading your post this probably was a misunderstanding. You were referring to doppler effect related commits, weren't you? Thomas -- PhD Student, Dept. Animal Physiology, HU Berlin Tel +49 30 2093 6173, Fax +49 30 2093 6375 - This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Doppler oddness
On Friday 06 July 2007 18:27, John Denker wrote:
It's been ten days now with no CVS-commit nor even any
discussion of a CVS-commit AFAICT.
That's probably about right. I and a few others on IRC were testing various
patches for Maik for a while... I thought that the results of that made it to
the devel list, but to remove any doubt about, I'll attach (what I think is)
the last one here.
If you send me the appropriate patch [off list or otherwise]
I'll be happy to try it.
If I'm not mistaken, attached is the patch I'm currently using and I haven't
noticed any problems with other than the slightly odd (but expected, and no
doubt correct) effect one gets if one moves the view really quickly when in
external view.
Let us know if you find otherwise...
Cheers,
AJ
Index: sound/sample_openal.cxx
===
RCS file: /var/cvs/SimGear-0.3/source/simgear/sound/sample_openal.cxx,v
retrieving revision 1.27
diff -u -p -r1.27 sample_openal.cxx
--- sound/sample_openal.cxx 21 Jun 2007 21:46:21 - 1.27
+++ sound/sample_openal.cxx 28 Jun 2007 19:22:14 -
@@ -75,12 +75,17 @@ SGSoundSample::SGSoundSample() :
reference_dist(500.0),
max_dist(3000.),
loop(AL_FALSE),
-playing(false)
+#ifdef USE_SOFTWARE_DOPPLER
+doppler_pitch_factor(1),
+doppler_volume_factor(1),
+#endif
+playing(false),
+no_Doppler_effect(true)
{
}
// constructor
-SGSoundSample::SGSoundSample( const char *path, const char *file) :
+SGSoundSample::SGSoundSample( const char *path, const char *file , bool _no_Doppler_effect ) :
buffer(0),
source(0),
pitch(1.0),
@@ -88,8 +93,13 @@ SGSoundSample::SGSoundSample( const char
reference_dist(500.0),
max_dist(3000.),
loop(AL_FALSE),
-playing(false)
-{
+#ifdef USE_SOFTWARE_DOPPLER
+doppler_pitch_factor(1),
+doppler_volume_factor(1),
+#endif
+playing(false),
+no_Doppler_effect(_no_Doppler_effect)
+{
SGPath samplepath( path );
if ( strlen(file) ) {
samplepath.append( file );
@@ -145,7 +155,7 @@ SGSoundSample::SGSoundSample( const char
}
// constructor
-SGSoundSample::SGSoundSample( unsigned char *_data, int len, int _freq ) :
+SGSoundSample::SGSoundSample( unsigned char *_data, int len, int _freq , bool _no_Doppler_effect ) :
buffer(0),
source(0),
pitch(1.0),
@@ -153,7 +163,12 @@ SGSoundSample::SGSoundSample( unsigned c
reference_dist(500.0),
max_dist(3000.),
loop(AL_FALSE),
-playing(false)
+#ifdef USE_SOFTWARE_DOPPLER
+doppler_pitch_factor(1),
+doppler_volume_factor(1),
+#endif
+playing(false),
+no_Doppler_effect(_no_Doppler_effect)
{
SG_LOG( SG_GENERAL, SG_DEBUG, In memory sounds sample );
@@ -247,14 +262,23 @@ SGSoundSample::bind_source() {
}
alSourcei( source, AL_BUFFER, buffer );
+#ifndef USE_SOFTWARE_DOPPLER
alSourcef( source, AL_PITCH, pitch );
alSourcef( source, AL_GAIN, volume );
+#else
+print_openal_error(bind_sources return);
+alSourcef( source, AL_PITCH, pitch *doppler_pitch_factor );
+alGetError(); //ignore if the pitch is clamped by the driver
+alSourcef( source, AL_GAIN, volume *doppler_volume_factor );
+#endif
alSourcefv( source, AL_POSITION, source_pos );
alSourcefv( source, AL_DIRECTION, direction );
alSourcef( source, AL_CONE_INNER_ANGLE, inner );
alSourcef( source, AL_CONE_OUTER_ANGLE, outer );
alSourcef( source, AL_CONE_OUTER_GAIN, outergain);
+#ifdef USE_OPEN_AL_DOPPLER
alSourcefv( source, AL_VELOCITY, source_vel );
+#endif
alSourcei( source, AL_LOOPING, loop );
alSourcei( source, AL_SOURCE_RELATIVE, AL_TRUE );
@@ -273,8 +297,13 @@ SGSoundSample::set_pitch( double p ) {
if ( p 2.0 ) { p = 2.0; }
pitch = p;
if (playing) {
+#ifndef USE_SOFTWARE_DOPPLER
alSourcef( source, AL_PITCH, pitch );
print_openal_error(set_pitch);
+#else
+alSourcef( source, AL_PITCH, pitch * doppler_pitch_factor );
+alGetError(); //ignore if the pitch is clamped by the driver
+#endif
}
}
@@ -282,7 +311,11 @@ void
SGSoundSample::set_volume( double v ) {
volume = v;
if (playing) {
+#ifndef USE_SOFTWARE_DOPPLER
alSourcef( source, AL_GAIN, volume );
+#else
+alSourcef( source, AL_GAIN, volume * doppler_volume_factor );
+#endif
print_openal_error(set_volume);
}
}
@@ -313,6 +346,7 @@ SGSoundSample::set_source_pos( ALfloat *
sgAddVec3( final_pos, source_pos, offset_pos );
alSourcefv( source, AL_POSITION, final_pos );
+print_openal_error(set_source_pos);
}
}
@@ -327,6 +361,7 @@ SGSoundSample::set_offset_pos( ALfloat *
sgAddVec3( final_pos, source_pos, offset_pos );
alSourcefv( source, AL_POSITION, final_pos );
+print_openal_error(set_offset_pos);
}
}
@@ -350,13 +385,88 @@ SGSoundSample::set_orientation( ALfloat
}
void
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Doppler oddness
On 07/06/2007 02:56 PM, Thomas Förster wrote: Hmm, rereading your post this probably was a misunderstanding. You were referring to doppler effect related commits, weren't you? Yes. Perhaps I clipped too much context; I thought the Subject: line would be sufficient contex. Sorry. To repeat: I am using CVS OSG, up to date as of late yesterday (the 5th). With this version I observe: -- Middle marker audio is strongly shifted. -- ATIS audio is strongly shifted. Please tell me where to find whatever patches are needed to deal with these bugs. - This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Doppler oddness
Hi John, I posted the patch which should fix your problem on June 1st, 22:16 (German time). (If you do not have archived this EMail: just drop me a note, I will email it to you). I think the patch will be commited soon. But I am modifying files, which are not mine, therefore it is ok, to give the file-owner some time. On IRC we discussed to commit it tomorrow if nobody complains up to then. Maik P.S.: for plib-branch-users: June 3rd, 23:21 John Denker schrieb am 06.07.2007 21:04: On 07/06/2007 02:56 PM, Thomas Förster wrote: Hmm, rereading your post this probably was a misunderstanding. You were referring to doppler effect related commits, weren't you? Yes. Perhaps I clipped too much context; I thought the Subject: line would be sufficient contex. Sorry. To repeat: I am using CVS OSG, up to date as of late yesterday (the 5th). With this version I observe: -- Middle marker audio is strongly shifted. -- ATIS audio is strongly shifted. Please tell me where to find whatever patches are needed to deal with these bugs. - This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel - This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Doppler oddness
Hi, ups. Is it really July? Please replace June by July in my last post. Thanks to John. Maik Maik Justus schrieb am 06.07.2007 21:23: Hi John, I posted the patch which should fix your problem on June 1st, 22:16 (German time). (If you do not have archived this EMail: just drop me a note, I will email it to you). I think the patch will be commited soon. But I am modifying files, which are not mine, therefore it is ok, to give the file-owner some time. On IRC we discussed to commit it tomorrow if nobody complains up to then. Maik P.S.: for plib-branch-users: June 3rd, 23:21 - This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Doppler oddness
I got the .diff from Maik Justus. I merged it into the _Sport Model_. It works fine; ATIS and marker beacons are no longer Doppler shifted. In addition to the two files patched by the .diff, I had to make some trivial and obvious edits in two other files, to bring them into compliance with the new interface. If anybody wants to see the details they can pull the _Sport Model_ and do a git-diff. For details on that, see http://www.mail-archive.com/flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net/msg11530.html - This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Doppler oddness
Hello Martin, just didn't got the point of my posting. Maik Martin Spott schrieb am 27.06.2007 01:14: Maik Justus wrote: [...] But I only will start to work on that patch if there is a chance to get it into cvs. Therefore I will wait, if the windows patch will be accepted. The original author of the OpenAL publicly objects implementing things in FlightGear that OpenAL usually should take care of and apparently the issue with OpenAL is still open. How do you _dare_ to expect people to commit your windows patch !? Such behaviour is highly disrespectful. Please comply with the same measures of fairness that you expect from other people (on this list) and refrain from such attempts unless the OpenAL issue is closed. Martin. - This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] Doppler oddness
With a cvs build checked out about half an hour ago I've just noticed something very strange - with external views the doppler shift appears to be related to the view angle rather than the approach speed. If you select the chase view then you'll find that the sound is extremely slow from behind the aircraft, and ridiculously fast from in front. This also still seems to affect the radio chatter, resulting in some highly comical, but not too realistic radio messages. Jon - This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Doppler oddness
Hi Jon,
thanks for pointing that out. And thanks to you and AJ for the debugging
on IRC.
Here is a patch (the same you already got via EMail (ok, one debug
message is different)), which could fix it. If the bug is still present,
please comment out line 56 (#define USE_OPEN_AL_DOPPLER should work) in
file simgear\sound\sample_openal.hxx to use the own calculations.
This patch has some debug code and is not intended to go into cvs.
Due to pitch-limits on older OpenAL versions I am thinking of a patch
for these versions. The pitch limitation on old OpenAL versions limit
the Doppler effect depending on the pitch value without Doppler effect,
which could sound odd on some aircrafts. But I only will start to work
on that patch if there is a chance to get it into cvs. Therefore I will
wait, if the windows patch will be accepted.
(It could be, that you get warnings about pitch values 2. Even some
OpenAL1.1 versions seem to be limited in pitch while the OpenAL1.1
specification says they aren't)
Maik
Jon Stockill schrieb am 26.06.2007 21:06:
With a cvs build checked out about half an hour ago I've just noticed
something very strange - with external views the doppler shift appears
to be related to the view angle rather than the approach speed. If you
select the chase view then you'll find that the sound is extremely slow
from behind the aircraft, and ridiculously fast from in front. This also
still seems to affect the radio chatter, resulting in some highly
comical, but not too realistic radio messages.
Jon
-
This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express
Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take
control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now.
http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Index: sound/sample_openal.cxx
===
RCS file: /var/cvs/SimGear-0.3/source/simgear/sound/sample_openal.cxx,v
retrieving revision 1.27
diff -u -p -r1.27 sample_openal.cxx
--- sound/sample_openal.cxx 21 Jun 2007 21:46:21 - 1.27
+++ sound/sample_openal.cxx 26 Jun 2007 21:57:20 -
@@ -75,12 +75,17 @@ SGSoundSample::SGSoundSample() :
reference_dist(500.0),
max_dist(3000.),
loop(AL_FALSE),
-playing(false)
+#ifndef USE_OPEN_AL_DOPPLER
+doppler_pitch_factor(1),
+doppler_volume_factor(1),
+#endif
+playing(false),
+no_Doppler_effect(true)
{
}
// constructor
-SGSoundSample::SGSoundSample( const char *path, const char *file) :
+SGSoundSample::SGSoundSample( const char *path, const char *file , bool
_no_Doppler_effect ) :
buffer(0),
source(0),
pitch(1.0),
@@ -88,7 +93,12 @@ SGSoundSample::SGSoundSample( const char
reference_dist(500.0),
max_dist(3000.),
loop(AL_FALSE),
-playing(false)
+#ifndef USE_OPEN_AL_DOPPLER
+doppler_pitch_factor(1),
+doppler_volume_factor(1),
+#endif
+playing(false),
+no_Doppler_effect(_no_Doppler_effect)
{
SGPath samplepath( path );
if ( strlen(file) ) {
@@ -145,7 +155,7 @@ SGSoundSample::SGSoundSample( const char
}
// constructor
-SGSoundSample::SGSoundSample( unsigned char *_data, int len, int _freq ) :
+SGSoundSample::SGSoundSample( unsigned char *_data, int len, int _freq , bool
_no_Doppler_effect ) :
buffer(0),
source(0),
pitch(1.0),
@@ -153,7 +163,12 @@ SGSoundSample::SGSoundSample( unsigned c
reference_dist(500.0),
max_dist(3000.),
loop(AL_FALSE),
-playing(false)
+#ifndef USE_OPEN_AL_DOPPLER
+doppler_pitch_factor(1),
+doppler_volume_factor(1),
+#endif
+playing(false),
+no_Doppler_effect(_no_Doppler_effect)
{
SG_LOG( SG_GENERAL, SG_DEBUG, In memory sounds sample );
@@ -254,7 +269,9 @@ SGSoundSample::bind_source() {
alSourcef( source, AL_CONE_INNER_ANGLE, inner );
alSourcef( source, AL_CONE_OUTER_ANGLE, outer );
alSourcef( source, AL_CONE_OUTER_GAIN, outergain);
+#ifdef USE_OPEN_AL_DOPPLER
alSourcefv( source, AL_VELOCITY, source_vel );
+#endif
alSourcei( source, AL_LOOPING, loop );
alSourcei( source, AL_SOURCE_RELATIVE, AL_TRUE );
@@ -273,8 +290,22 @@ SGSoundSample::set_pitch( double p ) {
if ( p 2.0 ) { p = 2.0; }
pitch = p;
if (playing) {
+#ifdef USE_OPEN_AL_DOPPLER
alSourcef( source, AL_PITCH, pitch );
-print_openal_error(set_pitch);
+#else
+ #ifdef AL_VERSION_1_1
+alSourcef( source, AL_PITCH, pitch * doppler_pitch_factor );
+ #else
+p*=doppler_pitch_factor;
+if ( p 0.01 ) { p = 0.01; }
+if ( p 2.0 ) { p = 2.0; }
+alSourcef( source, AL_PITCH, p );
+ #endif
+#endif
+//print_openal_error(set_pitch);
+char t[256];
+sprintf(t,set_pitch:
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Doppler oddness
Maik Justus wrote: [...] But I only will start to work on that patch if there is a chance to get it into cvs. Therefore I will wait, if the windows patch will be accepted. The original author of the OpenAL publicly objects implementing things in FlightGear that OpenAL usually should take care of and apparently the issue with OpenAL is still open. How do you _dare_ to expect people to commit your windows patch !? Such behaviour is highly disrespectful. Please comply with the same measures of fairness that you expect from other people (on this list) and refrain from such attempts unless the OpenAL issue is closed. Martin. -- Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are ! -- - This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Doppler oddness
On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 23:14:08 + (UTC) Martin Spott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Maik Justus wrote: [...] But I only will start to work on that patch if there is a chance to get it into cvs. Therefore I will wait, if the windows patch will be accepted. The original author of the OpenAL publicly objects implementing things in FlightGear that OpenAL usually should take care of and apparently the issue with OpenAL is still open. So the problem is being dealt with then ??? How do you _dare_ to expect people to commit your windows patch !? Such behaviour is highly disrespectful. Please comply with the same measures of fairness that you expect from other people (on this list) and refrain from such attempts unless the OpenAL issue is closed. This kind of answer is highly disrespectful too , considering the amount of work Maik has done to improve Flightgear! -- SydSandy [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
