Kjetil Svalastog Matheussen wrote:
> My impression is that the more maths an audio professional knows, the
> > more
> sure the audio professional is that higher sampling rates is a
> bad thing. (unless you are recording sounds that is later going to be
> downsampled a lot of course)
> Perhaps its impossible for us non-skilled-mathematicians to
> understand properly why 96 kHz is a bad thing...
96kHz is not bad, 192kHZ IS bad. 96 pushes side effects of filters in
the A/D/A chain beyond out hearing. However, it's suspected that 192 is
not so good as there isn't sufficient time between samples to allow
components (e.g. caps) to function correctly. I think I've said this
before but read Dan Lavry's paper on the subject at
http://lavryengineering.com/documents/Sampling_Theory.pdf
Yes, Dan Lavry does makeand sell ADCs but this subject has been
discussed to death on a number of audio lists and forums frequented by
many eminent engineers. It is the concensus that 96kHZ is a Good Thing
(tm).
Greg
___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - sooooo many all-new ways to express yourself http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
Just wondering what the consensus is on the new lib_fst and recent
updates to vst server...is it getting easier to install for example?
I spent a LOT of time last round to no avail. I really want to be able
to use my VST's on linux but I also need SLEEP! :)
Thanks
R~
I didn't hear of the product until yesterday, so I really don't know of
anyone who would have it.
The manual on the webpage doesn't even say FireWire, so I really don't what
kind of hoax that interface is...
Sampo
Quoting RickTaylor(a)speakeasy.net:
>
> On 06-Jul-2004 Robert Jonsson wrote:
> }
> } For the moment the Terratec is probably not supported, it seems to be
> } Firewire
> } based and there's no support for firewire audio devices yet :-/.
> Firewire
> } seems to be what is used in many new hardwares so I hope we can get
> support
> } for the standard soon. (Though, this only means that the products
> which
> } adhere to the standard will work, it seems several products do not use
> the
> } standard)
>
> http://www.linux1394.org/hcl.php?class_id=9
>
> If it weren't going to cost you I'd suggest just trying it.
>
> {There's much to be said for standards}
>
> Know anyone that's got one?
>
> ----------------------------------
> E-Mail: RickTaylor(a)Speakeasy.Net
> Date: 06-Jul-2004
> Time: 16:55:54
>
> This message was sent by XFMail
> ----------------------------------
>
"Ben":
>
> I can't tell you what is causing this but you probably won't get a
> noticeable improvement by switching from 48 to 96 kHz. Your speaker
> system (and your ears) are probably incapable of resolving >20kHz
> signals in a live PA-type situation. Audio professionals ( mixers,
> mastering engineers, etc - not manufacturers ) are still undecided
> whether higher sampling rates is a good thing.
My impression is that the more maths an audio professional knows, the more
sure the audio professional is that higher sampling rates is a
bad thing. (unless you are recording sounds that is later going to be
downsampled a lot of course)
Perhaps its impossible for us non-skilled-mathematicians to
understand properly why 96 kHz is a bad thing...
--
On Wednesday 07 July 2004 17:47, linux-audio-user-request(a)music.columbia.edu
wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 07, 2004 at 03:09:57PM +0300, David Baron wrote:
> > I am running on a PIII clocked to 575mhz with 512m RAM. Running Debian
> > Sid, 2.6.7 kernel. I put in the realtime-lms to enable real time.
> >
> > Am I missing anything or am I simply asking too much of this system.
>
> I think you just dont have enough CPU power.
Yeah, seems that way. Might work OK if Jamin read its files directly since I
can apply similar plugins in Xmms without problems, even with other processes
eating CPU cycles.
Under that "other" operating systems, stuff like T-raks, Harbal, et. al., will
run no sweat on this computer as will mix limiters along with all the other
plugins in Sonar.
Hi again,
Just to briefly explain these two nice techniques as a couple of you have
asked about them. They are both based on the same math, a kind of modified
fast fourier transform which enables the software to stretch or shrink time
without affecting pitch or sound timbre (the characteristic that enables us
to recognize an instrument).
Note tuning, only applicable to samples of monophonic instruments: the
software has a freq detector that will find the nearest note to what is
being played. It will find a starting time, end time and deviation for that.
Then it will apply this FFT to generate a sample equal in duration but in
tune. This is done by stretching or shrinking as appropriate first (this
does not change pitch), then re-sampling to length which changes the pitch
as required.
Quantizer: only used for samples of percussion AFAIK, but should be
applicable to other instruments with high attack like bass and others: first
step is for the software to identify the location of the notes (that's the
equivalent for MIDI events but this time in audio), by using a kind of peak
detector this time instead of the freq detector for the other technique.
Second step is to identify where the notes should exactly be time-wise. For
this, it's neccessary that the software knows about the timing of the song /
sample! (basically BPM and desired quantize resolution). Knowing this, it's
pretty straightforward to "shrink and stretch" before and after the note so
it falls exactly on time.
These two give best results when the notes are not too off. This is due to
this special FFT not being a perfect method to extract exactly everything
that's there, especially high frequencies. Different implementations of
these use different algorithms, all are based on a FFT, but some use
different techniques to mask certain side effects that appear on the
modified sample. Some implementations are very impressive I have to say, and
they can stretch or shrink to say two times or half with brilliant results.
All pretty impressive technology which has been around for a while now..
Cheers,
Alex
_________________________________________________________________
Horóscopo, tarot, numerología... Escucha lo que te dicen los astros.
http://astrocentro.msn.es/
Thought people here might be interested in this story:
http://kerneltrap.org/node/view/3366
It's about a patch that allows you to switch between CPU scheduling policies
through the /proc interface. eg:
echo sc > /proc/sys/kernel/cpusched/mode
should switch to Con Kolivas' staircase scheduler. Haven't tried it myself but
thought people might be interested.
Joe
Hi to the list,
I've installed a Debian Sarge with kernel 2.6.6, jack 0.94 and
realtime-lsm 0.1.1 to have the realtime capabilities for the normal user.
The default is to set gid=<audio_group_gid>, but I'm not able to start
jack from a user in the audio:
$ jackstart
jackstart: cannot get realtime capabilities, current capabilities are:
=ep cap_setpcap-ep
probably running under a kernel with capabilities disabled,
a suitable kernel would have printed something like "=eip"
Neither the any=1 parm does the job. If I reload the module with the
allcaps=1, then I can start jack from a normal user.
Am I missing something? Is not insecure to run jack via allcaps=1?
Anyway, with the 2.6 series I've got a lot of xruns. I've read that
maybe the problem is, instead, with the new version of libc. Someone
knows more on it, and is there some workaround?
Thanks,
- Antonio
Hi all!!!
I have this hardware:
Roland E30 keyboard
Creative PCI 128
Jackd
Monitors left and right
1) I want to play on the keyboad and record the midi events to rosegarden.
2) I want to play rosegarden through PCI 128 that make the Roland speaker play my midi.
Is it possible? I have jackd up and running.
Thanks so much!!
ste
Stefano Cardo
Debian DeMuDi GNU/Linux User
I'm trying out oggenc under linux/unstable, but I'm confused! Using
"oggenc -b 128" ends with a file with bitrate around 60-70 acording the
the report printed by oggenc...
--
peace, love & harmony
Atte
http://www.atte.dk