27 Jul
2011
27 Jul
'11
2:49 p.m.
Am Mittwoch, den 27.07.2011, 11:58 +0000 schrieb Fons Adriaensen:
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 01:19:07PM +0200, hermann
wrote:
May you would like to review the source again, I'm still learning and be
far from perfect, and usually I'm open for suggestions and hints how to
improve what I try to do.
I break the tuner out for a user request, for nothing more.
And, well we use a downsample rate of 16
const int DOWNSAMPLE = 16;
m_sampleRate = sampleRate / DOWNSAMPLE;
resamp.setup(sampleRate, m_sampleRate, 1, 16);
for the overhead I didn't mean the mem usage or download size, like I
said, gxtuner use ~1% CPU witch isn't as bad I mean, zita-at1 needs the
double amount here.
kind regards
hermann
well, zita-at1 is a nice app, but as a simple
tuner it's a bit overhead.
Beh, 60k for the binary ?
Not at least, thanks to your famous library
zita-resampler, gxtuner
needs ~1% CPU to indicate the tune and freq.
How are you using it ? The last time I looked there was thig
giant FFT used to interpolate the peak - *that* can certainly
be done much more efficiently using resampling. And even that
would be overkill - fitting a curve to the peak would do the
trick as well (and is what zita-at1 does).