soundcheck wrote: > OK. Finally: Flexible phase adjustments are not supported (yet?). > Thx for the feedback. > > I think it would be nice if C-3PO would offer a simple free configurable > field > to be able to tailor a complete sox "effect" string. > (That would also make Marco's live easier on the long run. ;) ) > > It'd make the plugin much more flexible.
mhhh... C-3PO does not have that specific option (yet), but you could use one of the Additional effects slot instead, as I reported in my previous comment, is that not you are looking for? Why? Please describe your mind in the github request, so I will find it easily when I'll found the time to work on it. soundcheck wrote: > > > comparison to squeezelite: > > C-3PO uses the sox binary and not libsoxr directly. That's limiting the > plugin. > squeezelite, using libsoxr, can offer a broader scope of resampling > options as being offered by libsoxr. AFAIK, SOX isn't limited in respect to libsoxr, C-3PO is limited in the option it exposes, but you could easily override them, as explained. soundcheck wrote: > > > Beside that, using libsoxr directly would allow to run 64bit DSP. Are you sure of that? I was thinking SOX is running 64bit, actually. soundcheck wrote: > > Obviously DSD would be an issue. sox could still be used for special > purposes. NOt only that, every and all the effects that are not in libsoxr. soundcheck wrote: > > Of course getting direct access to libsoxr would require to write a > resampling application. > That's not too difficult though. (Even I managed to write such an app ; > )) Il looks strange, but SOX is not 'using' libsoxr by itself, they have two different code base and for many reason I found SOX a better choice. soundcheck wrote: > > > When it comes to the Archimago stuff. > As much as I question most of his findings on numerous topics, he IMO > got a point on the resampling part. > I'm not saying that I consider his resampling config the best of all > choices. He IMO is pointing into the right direction though. > Don't forget resampling (or any other DSP) will always be a compromise. > > The main problem is, using squeezelite & resampling on a RPI is a NoGo. In my opiinion 'extreme' is too extreme. A filter starting at 99.7 and ending at 100% is too steep. Other than this, 3.05db are too little, I use 6db instead and -h option. I normally use Linear phase, but some recording sounds better with Intermediate or even Minimal, I agree, so 45% could make some difefrence. What I could really not understand in Archimago approach is that is looking at this littte things when denying the possibility of effects that produces much more difference in sound, just becouse he could not 'measure ' them, as the difference in doing conversion/resampling server side, for instance. ________________________________________________________________________ Author of C-3PO plugin, Squeezelite-R2, Falcon Web interface - See www.marcoc1712.it ------------------------------------------------------------------------ marcoc1712's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=34842 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105309 _______________________________________________ Squeezecenter mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/squeezecenter
