Re: Opinions sought: AudioUnit Rendering
Re: Opinions sought: AudioUnit Rendering
- Subject: Re: Opinions sought: AudioUnit Rendering
- From: Bill Stewart <email@hidden>
- Date: Wed, 06 Mar 2002 23:47:09 -0800
This could be a settable property if this was a real concern
It would tend on the conservative side - it would be better to process a
copule of extra buffers just for safety than cut-off a nicely fading tail...
PLEASE TAKE NOTE:).... This question also plays into the audio unit
properties that were previously discussed - latency, rampTime and tail...
These are going to be very important to some applications to have a
reasonable estimate of how much preparation time an audio unit needs, what
latency to a signal chain that it introduces and what kind of tail it will
generate. These will (should) tend to be conservative estimates, and I could
imagine a very reasonable tie-in to the activity of not doing any rendering
to the reported tail of the unit.
There is an interesting reason to do this... If audio units implement this
property then they will probably become very popular audio units:) Many
usual situations do not have continuous data being pumped through - for ex.
A set of tracks where those tracks may only run audio for a short period of
the playback time... The fact that an audio unit only does work when it has
to should mean that more processing can therefore be done and your users
will thank you. They can run more effects...
And yes - they'll not use your DSP if it cuts its reverb tail off after a
second regardless:) There is no safe play - there's many plugins now that
crash and glitch and.... Users will only use the ones that work as they
expect them to.
Bill
on 6/3/02 10:52 PM, Herbie Robinson wrote:
>
> I don't think we're that interested in the partial buffer case. The real win
>
> here is that in the case of a reverb for instance, its going to do a lot of
>
> processing of data before its tail is really below a minimum threshold. So
>
> the partial buffer provides little I think in comparison to that.
>
>
>
> But if the reverb can know that it has no valid input since time x, and its
>
> done its tail it can then just pass a silent buffer through or NULL, or
>
> whatever we decide.
>
>
I should probably jump in and mention that "time X" is going to be
>
dependent on what the user is doing and if you get it wrong, the user
>
is not going to be at all pleased. Some audio people out there will
>
be quite fussy about letting those reverb tails run out. The safe
>
play here is to wait for the stop button...
mailto:email@hidden
tel: +1 408 974 4056
__________________________________________________________________________
"Thousands of years ago, cats were worshipped as gods. We have never
forgotten this."
__________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________
coreaudio-api mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives:
http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/coreaudio-api
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.