On Nov 23, 2010, at 9:54 PM, Ross Bencina wrote:
>
>> it seems to me that with 50 ms of jitter, you would need to have a minimum
>> latency of 50 ms. but, there is obviously something that i continue to
>> fail to understand about the problem.
>
> You're right. If there is 50ms of jitter y
robert bristow-johnson wrote:
On Nov 23, 2010, at 7:35 PM, Ross Bencina wrote:
... there's lots of timing jitter to contend with. Some current
research on network time synchronisation involves timestamping IP
packets in the driver as soon as they arrive at the interface. I don't
have that
On Nov 23, 2010, at 7:35 PM, Ross Bencina wrote:
... there's lots of timing jitter to contend with. Some current
research on network time synchronisation involves timestamping IP
packets in the driver as soon as they arrive at the interface. I
don't have that option.
but you can timest
Theo Verelst wrote:
I mean: a wireless network probably can contain tcp/ip sockets, and unless
you´re doing a live amplification system, why not allow some buffering on
those, including restransmission, I mean udp is the lowest transport
protocol, and just begging to be replaced with some flow
On Nov 22, 2010, at 10:03 AM, Theo Verelst wrote:
PIDs, that´s in digital domain usually in need of some integration,
or think about it that the PID theory doesn´t take aliasing into
account which will happen when the actually sampled PID path is not
quite a bit oversampled.
i don't thi
Taking all this stuff in and shortly contemplating about it teaches me
only that there once again are EE subjects being either difficult or not
accessable enough to do fun stuff with easily enough and that no
research should be wasted on them all too much.
I mean: a wireless network probably c
Greatly enjoying this discussion. Please edit
with a running tail so that it makes sense in
the archives. I am sure this will be valuable
to future readers.
a.
On Mon, 22 Nov 2010 22:43:46 +1100
"Ross Bencina" wrote:
> [ i suspect my previous reply got bounced for size reasons. here's one wi
[ i suspect my previous reply got bounced for size reasons. here's one with
less context.. and a few edits minor.. sorry about duplicates if the prevous
one makes it in the end]
robert bristow-johnson wrote (at the end):
well, i admit that i don't totally understand what is going on here. are
robert bristow-johnson wrote (at the end):
well, i admit that i don't totally understand what is going on here. are
the incoming packets all containing uniformly sampled audio (even if the
packets come in all jittery)?
Yes.
who determines when an output packet goes out? you or the recipi
On Nov 21, 2010, at 6:10 AM, Ross Bencina wrote:
robert bristow-johnson wrote:
i don't think you want any D, but you probably want some P and I.
Yeah, that's why I said "I'm using a PI controller"
one thing to remember, because this becomes the rate input to an
NCO (essentially the outpu
robert bristow-johnson wrote:
On Nov 20, 2010, at 4:46 PM, Ross Bencina wrote:
I'm implementing a low-latency audio-over-wi-fi system with UDP
transport. The packet period is somewhere between 5 and 30ms. I'm doing
clock-recovery on the client to keep the buffering in sync. Since it's a
low
On Nov 20, 2010, at 4:46 PM, Ross Bencina wrote:
robert bristow-johnson wrote
On Nov 20, 2010, at 3:00 AM, Ross Bencina wrote:
Nigel Redmon wrote:
Synchronization (between equipment not locked to a master clock).
I've heard that called "asynchronous sample rate conversion" a lot
lately.
>Ross Bencina wrote:
> From my point of view the more difficult thing is recovering a stable
> wordclock from a jittery packet stream -- and getting this to start up
> quickly enough to be useful. In the past I've used an Ordinary Least
> Squares
> regression on packet timestamps to estimate the in
robert bristow-johnson wrote
On Nov 20, 2010, at 3:00 AM, Ross Bencina wrote:
Nigel Redmon wrote:
Synchronization (between equipment not locked to a master clock).
I've heard that called "asynchronous sample rate conversion" a lot
lately... I have to implement some this week as it happens :
On 11/20/2010 01:00 AM, Ross Bencina wrote:
Nigel Redmon wrote:
Synchronization (between equipment not locked to a master clock).
I've heard that called "asynchronous sample rate conversion" a lot
lately... I have to implement some this week as it happens :/
Been there, but not in an audio c
On Nov 20, 2010, at 3:00 AM, Ross Bencina wrote:
Nigel Redmon wrote:
Synchronization (between equipment not locked to a master clock).
I've heard that called "asynchronous sample rate conversion" a lot
lately... I have to implement some this week as it happens :/
then, besides interpolat
A discussion list for music-related DSP wrote:
>> As for waveguides, for what it is worth, I've used such simple
>linear interpolation with great > success for tuning the
>waveguides in flute model experiments.
>
>
>Depending on how far the interpolation point is from the distinct samples you
>
As for waveguides, for what it is worth, I've used such simple linear
interpolation with great
success for tuning the waveguides in flute model experiments.
Depending on how far the interpolation point is from the distinct samples you
end up with a low pass filter.
The result being, at a guess
Nigel Redmon wrote:
> Synchronization (between equipment not locked to a master clock).
Years ago I implemented a sampling rate converter for nearly identical rates
based on a fractional delay. The delay was made with a 64 (I think it was)
times upsampler done with an FIR polyphase filter. The n
Sampo Syreeni wrote:
This is even more basic, but did you ever make them compete with each
other about the best way to *shift* a static delay from one value to
another? That's a very simple problem DSP-wise, of course, often used, not
at all something our ears are equipped to handle, yet necess
Nigel Redmon wrote:
Synchronization (between equipment not locked to a master clock).
I've heard that called "asynchronous sample rate conversion" a lot lately...
I have to implement some this week as it happens :/
R
--
dupswapdrop -- the music-dsp mailing list and website:
subscription i
Talking about tempo-synced delays following tempo changes, something that
the end user often expects & thinks to be easy, I wonder if the best method
(afterall it would make no sense for an echo to timestretch) isn't to manage
a pool of delays, creating a new delay line once the tempo changes,
On 2010-11-20, Ross Bencina wrote:
Another requirement of precision delay might be tempo-synced delays or
using a delay line with unity feedback to create a loop with exact
duration -- I gave that to my users at one stage.
This is even more basic, but did you ever make them compete with each
A discussion list for music-related DSP wrote:
>
>On Nov 19, 2010, at 6:33 PM, Scott Gravenhorst wrote:
>
>> https://ccrma.stanford.edu/~jos/Interpolation/
>> Lagrange_Interpolation.html
>>
>> Linear interpolation over 1 sample delay time.
>
>
>two notes:
>
>1. "linear interpolation" while not s
On Nov 19, 2010, at 6:33 PM, Scott Gravenhorst wrote:
https://ccrma.stanford.edu/~jos/Interpolation/
Lagrange_Interpolation.html
Linear interpolation over 1 sample delay time.
two notes:
1. "linear interpolation" while not sounding as sophisticated as
"first-order Lagrange interpolatio
Synchronization (between equipment not locked to a master clock).
On Nov 19, 2010, at 1:07 PM, robert bristow-johnson wrote:
> i can't think of another effect, offhand, that would definitely need a
> fractional delay filter in it, but i am sure they exist.
--
dupswapdrop -- the music-dsp maili
A discussion list for music-related DSP wrote:
>
>On Nov 19, 2010, at 6:09 PM, Scott Gravenhorst wrote:
>
>> A discussion list for music-related DSP > d...@music.columbia.edu> wrote:
>>> Which makes me think of a specialisation of this: waveguides for
>>> physical modeling.
>>>
>>
>> Yes inde
On Nov 19, 2010, at 6:09 PM, Scott Gravenhorst wrote:
A discussion list for music-related DSP d...@music.columbia.edu> wrote:
Which makes me think of a specialisation of this: waveguides for
physical modeling.
Yes indeed, I've first order Lagrange interpolators to fine tune
digital wavegui
A discussion list for music-related DSP wrote:
>Which makes me think of a specialisation of this: waveguides for
>physical modeling.
>
>Ian
Yes indeed, I've first order Lagrange interpolators to fine tune digital
waveguide instruments.
-- ScottG
_
Which makes me think of a specialisation of this: waveguides for
physical modeling.
Ian
On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 3:41 PM, Ross Bencina
wrote:
> robert bristow-johnson wrote:
>>
>> there is a basic audio process called a "precision delay".
>
> Another requirement of precision delay might be tempo
robert bristow-johnson wrote:
there is a basic audio process called a "precision delay".
Another requirement of precision delay might be tempo-synced delays or using
a delay line with unity feedback to create a loop with exact duration -- I
gave that to my users at one stage.
Ross.
--
du
A Leslie emulation (or effect similar to that) might well need one,
depending on how you modeled it. Same statement applies for tape delay
style effects too. As you say, I bet there's plenty of others, too.
Anyone else got any other effects to add to the list?
Ian
On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 1:07 PM
On Nov 19, 2010, at 3:42 PM, Alan Wolfe wrote:
i fear to post a question being the OP of this huge 100+ message
thread but...
it was mentioned here and in a previous email that for digital
flangers you want to interpolate between samples for best results.
Would you want to do this for all s
33 matches
Mail list logo
