[gmpi] Re: Topic 6: Time representation
- From: Paul Davis <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: gmpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 12 May 2003 08:28:56 -0400
>(don't know how, maybe by a special RT thread or whatever) and then all
>Computer will be able to manage a 64 or 32 or 16 samples and why not one
>single sample latency audio stream. And then the timestamp handling will be
>simply useless.
i don't agree with your claims about our inability to get accurate
timestamps for various input data. i don't think that this list is the
right place for a discussion of why not.
however, even if these concerns were correct, as david said, as soon
as the user has a "sequencer" application, they become completely
irrelevant: the user can specify various things with sample accuracy
without any problem at all, and without any reliance on any kind of
system timer. when a user uses a graphical editor to set an automation
gain control point at sample N, they expect the control point to be
obeyed at that sample. this is especially true for gain control
curves, where the position of the termination at -inf dB is absolutely
required to be sample accurate if the user was trying to fade out and
avoid a short "blip" of any subsequent audio.
as far as i can tell, you are the only person on the list who has any
issue with sample accurate timestamping. i suggest, i request, i plead
that we get back to discussing THE REPRESENTATION OF TIME in GMPI.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Generalized Music Plugin Interface (GMPI) public discussion list
Participation in this list is contingent upon your abiding by the
following rules: Please stay on topic. You are responsible for your own
words. Please respect your fellow subscribers. Please do not
redistribute anyone else's words without their permission.
Archive: //www.freelists.org/archives/gmpi
Email gmpi-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx w/ subject "unsubscribe" to unsubscribe
Other related posts:
