On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 04:16:11AM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Wed, 27.05.09 12:02, Finn Thain (fth...@telegraphics.com.au) wrote:
On Wed, 27 May 2009, Lennart Poettering wrote:
You are misunderstanding the flat volume logic.
Probably.
But since attenuator knobs don't tweak each
On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 02:05:23AM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Thu, 28.05.09 01:47, CJ van den Berg (c...@vdbonline.com) wrote:
On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 01:33:48AM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Thu, 28.05.09 00:53, CJ van den Berg (c...@vdbonline.com) wrote:
Well, I think
'Twas brillig, and Jud Craft at 27/05/09 04:06 did gyre and gimble:
Actually, wait. There is one last thing that might clue me in.
Let's say I have, relative to each other, Firefox/youTube set to 100%
and Banshee set to 80%.
Now, imagine I'm listening to Banshee and my volume is 100%. Does
Colin Guthrie a écrit :
Essentially, whenever possible pulse is off-loading the scaling to the
h/w, meaning less work in software = less load, and better quality audio
due to the use of the full range of the DAC.
Slightly off-topic: is there a way to keep the flat-volume behavior but
with
On Wed, 27.05.09 11:07, Colin Guthrie (gm...@colin.guthr.ie) wrote:
In essence...applying my per-app ratios automatically on the fly,
whenever something comes up? I'll be honest, I didn't really think of
it like -that-. That sounds awesome enough that I might need to give
it another chance.
On Wed, 27.05.09 14:28, Rémi Cardona (r...@gentoo.org) wrote:
Colin Guthrie a écrit :
Essentially, whenever possible pulse is off-loading the scaling to the
h/w, meaning less work in software = less load, and better quality
audio due to the use of the full range of the DAC.
Slightly
On Wed, 27.05.09 09:13, Jud Craft (craft...@gmail.com) wrote:
On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 5:07 AM, Colin Guthrie gm...@colin.guthr.ie wrote:
The way I understand it, and apologies if I'm wrong here, is that Banshess
want's 80% and it's the only app playing. In order to achieve that result,
On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 10:23 AM, Lennart Poettering
lenn...@poettering.net wrote:
Mate, please just read those mails I wrote yesterday.
I'm working on it, I think I'm getting better. Note the end of this email...
PA is not storing stream volumes relative to each other but relative
to the
On Wed, 27.05.09 13:28, Jud Craft (craft...@gmail.com) wrote:
On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 10:23 AM, Lennart Poettering
lenn...@poettering.net wrote:
Mate, please just read those mails I wrote yesterday.
I'm working on it, I think I'm getting better. Note the end of this email...
PA is
On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 2:27 PM, Lennart Poettering
lenn...@poettering.net wrote:
Side-effect of the logic? The fact that all volumes are saved/restored
relatively to the reference volume is the very core of the logic.
No, no, I didn't mean to say the side effect wasn't that the volumes
were
On Thu, 28.05.09 00:11, CJ van den Berg (c...@vdbonline.com) wrote:
On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 12:47:28AM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
Volume control UIs show the sink's virtual volume in the sink
slider. You can change the reference volume by changing the sink slider
position. In which
On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 12:31:29AM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
I still think that my suggestion to drop the virtual volume altogether
in the UI and have the sink volume slider display the reference volume
is the right solution.
I am not convinced. Think about this scenario: you have
On Wednesday 27 May 2009 23:31:29 Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Thu, 28.05.09 00:11, CJ van den Berg (c...@vdbonline.com) wrote:
On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 12:47:28AM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
Volume control UIs show the sink's virtual volume in the sink
slider. You can change the
On Thu, 28.05.09 00:53, CJ van den Berg (c...@vdbonline.com) wrote:
I am not convinced. Think about this scenario: you have one stream
playing. Reference sink volume, virtual sink volume and stream volume
are at -inf dB. Now you move stream volume to 0 dB. This would not
change the
On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 01:33:48AM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Thu, 28.05.09 00:53, CJ van den Berg (c...@vdbonline.com) wrote:
I am not convinced. Think about this scenario: you have one stream
playing. Reference sink volume, virtual sink volume and stream volume
are at -inf
On Thu, 28.05.09 01:47, CJ van den Berg (c...@vdbonline.com) wrote:
On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 01:33:48AM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Thu, 28.05.09 00:53, CJ van den Berg (c...@vdbonline.com) wrote:
I am not convinced. Think about this scenario: you have one stream
playing.
On Mon, 25.05.09 12:51, Jud Craft (craft...@gmail.com) wrote:
I understand how audacious it would be to post and tell you that
Pulseaudio is doing the volume scaling wrong, but let me demonstrate a
problem. I won't post twice -- I know you guys are busy on this list
-- but I've really wanted
Long post coming, I apologize ahead of time. I really do appreciate
you taking the time to explain it, even if I am a little frustrated
(and you may be as well if I drag this thread on for much longer).
First, I'm not sure what you mean by reference volume and virtual
volume. My Internal Audio
Lennart wrote:
Now, I must admit that this all is a bit hard to grasp. And thus not
exactly the definition of easy to use. We had a couple of discussions on
this very ML about this. So far noone came up with a way to fix this in
a way that would be completely convincing.
I can't claim
On Tue, 26.05.09 19:47, Jud Craft (craft...@gmail.com) wrote:
Long post coming, I apologize ahead of time. I really do appreciate
you taking the time to explain it, even if I am a little frustrated
(and you may be as well if I drag this thread on for much longer).
First, I'm not sure
On Wed, 27.05.09 11:10, Finn Thain (fth...@telegraphics.com.au) wrote:
Lennart wrote:
Now, I must admit that this all is a bit hard to grasp. And thus not
exactly the definition of easy to use. We had a couple of discussions on
this very ML about this. So far noone came up with
On Wed, 27 May 2009, Lennart Poettering wrote:
You are misunderstanding the flat volume logic.
Probably.
But since attenuator knobs don't tweak each other (rather I am in
control), I think you can read what I wrote as arguing against flat volume
logic, on the grounds of intuitive
On Wed, 27.05.09 12:02, Finn Thain (fth...@telegraphics.com.au) wrote:
On Wed, 27 May 2009, Lennart Poettering wrote:
You are misunderstanding the flat volume logic.
Probably.
But since attenuator knobs don't tweak each other (rather I am in
control), I think you can read what
On Tue, 26.05.09 21:25, Jud Craft (craft...@gmail.com) wrote:
So, reading these as linear factors. If X is 0.75 and Y is 0.8, then,
yes, the virtual sink volume and hence the hw volume control is
configured to 0.8, which is then shown in the UI on the volume slider
of the sink. As I said
No, genuinely. I really assumed that flat-volume was a different way
of presenting the relative volumes, rather than a truly different
method of managing stream volume.
Truthfully, I insist upon my point about Vista. They may do the same
things on the inside, but in Vista, the only thing that
Actually, wait. There is one last thing that might clue me in.
Let's say I have, relative to each other, Firefox/youTube set to 100%
and Banshee set to 80%.
Now, imagine I'm listening to Banshee and my volume is 100%. Does
flat volume mean that if I start to play a Firefox video...that
Firefox
I understand how audacious it would be to post and tell you that
Pulseaudio is doing the volume scaling wrong, but let me demonstrate a
problem. I won't post twice -- I know you guys are busy on this list
-- but I've really wanted to mention this. I've seen Redhat Bugzilla
#494112, but it seems
27 matches
Mail list logo
