On 20/03/16 00:48, Luca Barbato wrote: > On 19/03/16 21:57, Vittorio Giovara wrote: >> On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 12:50 PM, Andreas Cadhalpun >> <andreas.cadhal...@googlemail.com> wrote: >>> On 21.04.2015 02:20, Claudio Freire wrote: >>>> On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 9:13 PM, Michael Niedermayer <michae...@gmx.at> >>>> wrote: >>>>> On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 09:07:14PM -0300, Claudio Freire wrote: >>>>>> On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 8:59 PM, Claudio Freire <klaussfre...@gmail.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 8:32 PM, Andreas Cadhalpun >>>>>>> <andreas.cadhal...@googlemail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> The long version: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> ath should approximate the shape of the absolute hearing threshold, >>>>>>>>>>> so >>>>>>>>>>> yes, it's best if it really uses the minimum, since that will >>>>>>>>>>> prevent >>>>>>>>>>> clipping of the ath curve and result in a more accurate threshold >>>>>>>>>>> computation. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> So you agree with my patch fixing minath? >>>>>>>>>> Or would you prefer a version with: >>>>>>>>>> minath = ath(3410 - 0.733 * ATH_ADD, ATH_ADD) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Well, that's not really closer to the minimum (a few tests with >>>>>>>>> gnuplot say). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Are you sure your plots were done correctly? >>>>>>>> Because I'm quite sure this is the correct first order approximation >>>>>>>> of the minimum. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> For ATH_ADD = 4 this gives 3407.068, which is quite close to Michael's >>>>>>>> value >>>>>>>> (3407.080774800152). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I checked the formula several times, but still, I could have made a >>>>>>> mistake. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> This is what I did if you want to check it out (maybe you spot the >>>>>> mistake) >>>>>> >>>>>> gnuplot> ath(f,a) = _ath(f/1000.0, a) >>>>>> gnuplot> _ath(f,a) = 3.64 * f**(-0.8) - 6.8 * exp(-0.6 * (f-3.4) * >>>>>> (f-3.4)) + 6.0 * exp(-0.15 * (f-8.7) * (f-8.7)) + (0.6 + 0.04 * a) * >>>>>> 0.001 * f * f * f >>>>> ^^^^^^^^^^ >>>>> missing * f >>>> >>>> Much better now :) >>>> >>>> So yes. I'd say it's a good change. >>> >>> OK, patch attached. >>> >>> Best regards, >>> Andreas >> >> Is this patch still needed? >> > > Should be ok to merge it.
Actually it seems in. _______________________________________________ libav-devel mailing list libav-devel@libav.org https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel
