[sent only to Tanu by mistake, resending to the list]
07.09.2014 15:48, Tanu Kaskinen wrote:
On Sun, 2014-08-24 at 13:35 +0600, Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:
04.08.2014 19:29, I wrote:
Anyway, I think that the task of objectively testing the resampler
speed and quality also needs to be done, in order to provide such
justifications. Please see
http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/pulseaudio-discuss/2014-February/019968.html
for the formulation.
Now I have the tools for the basic form of quality evaluation (using a
linear sine sweep). The tools can compare quality of various resamplers,
including those found in proprietary operating systems. However, the end
result is still not good enough to answer the question "is this
resampler good enough". The (useless) answer is almost always the same:
"no, here is a sine wave frequency that it either attenuates audibly or
distorts audibly", even though nobody listens to e.g 18 kHz sine waves.
I will test the two new resamplers among the others today.
Do we have some kind of a conclusion about whether the soxr and
libavresample resamplers should be merged? If I understood correctly,
the libavresample resampler appears to be somehow broken, so I guess
that should not be merged until the brokenness is fixed.
Correct.
Did the soxr
resampler end up being the best one in any of the following categories?
1) Best quality
The problem with this question is that there are perfect resamplers in
terms of perceived quality. It has no meaning to compare e.g.
speex-float-5 and speex-float-10 in terms of quality. Both are just
perfect when given a task of resampling from 44.1 to 48 kHz.
At MQ or HQ quality, soxr is perfect, too.
2) Fastest
Definitely not, at least at quality levels above QQ. And at QQ, I have
not tested, and at that level it is just a cubic interpolator. I think
we don't need a complex library just for cubic interpolation.
3) Fastest without any audible distortions
Definitely not, by a factor of 10 (over speex).
4) Best compromise between speed and quality
Definitely not.
X) Some of the above when applying licensing constraints
Definitely not. The winner on all points is speex. At the quality level
of 5, it never creates audible distortions. And at any quality higher
than 2, it eats less CPU than any comparable (in terms of quality)
competitors.
At this point, I also suggest removing libsamplerate-based resampler.
--
Alexander E. Patrakov
_______________________________________________
pulseaudio-discuss mailing list
pulseaudio-discuss@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/pulseaudio-discuss
