On 02/07/2014 11:49 PM, Robin Gareus wrote: I'm sorry. It turns out, I only got this half right (wrong number of samples to line things up). Just read the API documenation, explains it all: http://kokkinizita.linuxaudio.org/linuxaudio/zita-resampler/resampler.html ciao, robin

Hey guys, I've read the API documentation and I realize that I wasn't completing the input buffer with some zeros. So, I tried to add those zeros, but I'm still having an unexpected output. I'm attaching the code that I wrote, I would be very happy if anyone could say what I am doing wrong. greets, André 2014-02-07 21:50 GMT-02:00 Fons Adriaensen <fons(a)linuxaudio.org>rg>:

On 02/12/2014 09:34 PM, Robin Gareus wrote: mmh. I'm sorry. I was too quck and wrong, again :( zita-resampler-1.3.0/libs/resampler.cc:193 does catch that. /me crawls back under his stone.

Thank you very much, guys, you helped a lot. Now it's working well, with the little 'transient' at the end. I have only one doubt: will this little 'transient' disturb the result if I use it for a real-time application, like a lv2 distortion plugin? greets 2014-02-12 19:25 GMT-02:00 Fons Adriaensen <fons(a)linuxaudio.org>rg>:

Thank you very much, guys You really helped a lot =) greets 2014-02-13 17:19 GMT-02:00 Fons Adriaensen <fons(a)linuxaudio.org>rg>:

On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 05:24:52PM +0100, Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote: IIRC, you tend to use this phrase on the sursound list, after having stated your (possibly controversial) opinion in very clear terms :-) Ciao, -- FA A world of exhaustive, reliable metadata would be an utopia. It's also a pipe-dream, founded on self-delusion, nerd hubris and hysterically inflated market opportunities. (Cory Doctorow)

On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 06:29:24PM -0200, André Garnier Coutinho wrote: #ifdef TRY1 int z1 = over.inpsize()/2 - 1; int z2 = over.inpsize()/2; over.inp_count = z1; over.inp_data = 0; over.out_count = n_samples * n_over; over.out_data = buffer_over; over.process (); over.inp_count = n_samples; over.inp_data = buffer; // The following line is not necessary, but it doesn't // harm since no output samples have been produced yet. // If you keep this line, it would be logical to write // 'out_count' as well. But neither is necessary. over.out_data = buffer_over; over.process(); over.inp_count = z2; over.inp_data = 0; // This is wrong: you _overwrite_ the samples already // output. Just delete this line. over.out_data = buffer_over; over.process (); #endif With the line indicated above deleted you will get the correct output. The strange looking transient at the end *is* correct, you get this because the input signal stops with a sharp step. The 'ringing' is just the result of the bandwidth being lower than Fs_out / 2. Note: process() modifies 'inp_data' and 'out_data'. On return both will point to the first unused sample. If either buffer is not fully used, you can just continue with it for the next process(). Or you can provide a new one, that's up to you. But if you reset the output buffer as you did, you need of course to read it first. Ciao, -- FA A world of exhaustive, reliable metadata would be an utopia. It's also a pipe-dream, founded on self-delusion, nerd hubris and hysterically inflated market opportunities. (Cory Doctorow)