6 Feb
2003
6 Feb
'03
11:06 a.m.
On Thu, 6 Feb 2003 14:07:06 +0000, Steve Harris wrote
On Thu, Feb 06, 2003 at 12:18:47 +0100, Dave Griffiths
wrote:
ahah, I was hoping for an explanation :) any ideas on how to combat this, what
the squashing threshold should be?
dave
I had a vague attempt at doing something like
this (after noticing that
filters filtering silence uses up a lot of cpu). Each sample buffer object
OT: Thats probably because the zeros weren't 0.0, they were probably
denormal numbers. If you squash them the filter will run at the same
cost as when its processing any other data.