Mercurial > hg > sv-dependency-builds
comparison src/libsamplerate-0.1.9/doc/faq.html @ 126:4a7071416412
Current libsamplerate source
author | Chris Cannam <cannam@all-day-breakfast.com> |
---|---|
date | Tue, 18 Oct 2016 13:24:45 +0100 |
parents | |
children |
comparison
equal
deleted
inserted
replaced
125:cd6cdf86811e | 126:4a7071416412 |
---|---|
1 <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"> | |
2 <HTML> | |
3 | |
4 <HEAD> | |
5 <TITLE> | |
6 Secret Rabbit Code (aka libsamplerate) | |
7 </TITLE> | |
8 <META NAME="Author" CONTENT="Erik de Castro Lopo (erikd AT mega-nerd DOT com)"> | |
9 <META NAME="Version" CONTENT="libsamplerate-0.1.8"> | |
10 <META NAME="Description" CONTENT="The Secret Rabbit Code Home Page"> | |
11 <META NAME="Keywords" CONTENT="libsamplerate sound resample audio dsp Linux"> | |
12 <LINK REL=StyleSheet HREF="SRC.css" TYPE="text/css" MEDIA="all"> | |
13 </HEAD> | |
14 | |
15 <BODY TEXT="#FFFFFF" BGCOLOR="#000000" LINK="#FB1465" VLINK="#FB1465" ALINK="#FB1465"> | |
16 <!-- pepper --> | |
17 <CENTER> | |
18 <IMG SRC="SRC.png" HEIGHT=100 WIDTH=760 ALT="SRC.png"> | |
19 </CENTER> | |
20 <!-- pepper --> | |
21 <BR> | |
22 <!-- pepper --> | |
23 <TABLE ALIGN="center" WIDTH="98%"> | |
24 <TR> | |
25 <TD VALIGN="top"> | |
26 <BR> | |
27 <DIV CLASS="nav"> | |
28 <BR> | |
29 <A HREF="index.html">Home</A><BR> | |
30 <A HREF="license.html">License</A><BR> | |
31 <A HREF="history.html">History</A><BR> | |
32 <A HREF="download.html">Download</A><BR> | |
33 <A HREF="quality.html">Quality</A><BR> | |
34 <A HREF="api.html">API</A><BR> | |
35 <A HREF="bugs.html">Bug Reporting</A><BR> | |
36 <A HREF="win32.html">On Win32</A><BR> | |
37 <A HREF="faq.html">FAQ</A><BR> | |
38 <A HREF="lists.html">Mailing Lists</A><BR> | |
39 <A HREF="ChangeLog">ChangeLog</A><BR> | |
40 <BR> | |
41 <DIV CLASS="block"> | |
42 Author :<BR>Erik de Castro Lopo | |
43 <!-- pepper --> | |
44 <BR><BR> | |
45 <!-- pepper --> | |
46 | |
47 </DIV> | |
48 <IMG SRC= | |
49 "/cgi-bin/Count.cgi?ft=6|frgb=55;55;55|tr=0|md=6|dd=B|st=1|sh=1|df=src_api.dat" | |
50 HEIGHT=30 WIDTH=100 ALT="counter.gif"> | |
51 </DIV> | |
52 | |
53 </TD> | |
54 <!-- pepper --> | |
55 <!-- ######################################################################## --> | |
56 <!-- pepper --> | |
57 <TD VALIGN="top"> | |
58 <DIV CLASS="block"> | |
59 | |
60 <H1><B>Frequently Asked Questions</B></H1> | |
61 <P> | |
62 <A HREF="#Q001">Q1 : Is it normal for the output of libsamplerate to be louder | |
63 than its input?</A><BR><BR> | |
64 <A HREF="#Q002">Q2 : On Unix/Linux/MacOSX, what is the best way of detecting | |
65 the presence and location of libsamplerate and its header file using | |
66 autoconf?</A><BR><BR> | |
67 <A HREF="#Q003">Q3 : If I upsample and downsample to the original rate, for | |
68 example 44.1->96->44.1, do I get an identical signal as the one before the | |
69 up/down resampling?</A><BR><BR> | |
70 <A HREF="#Q004">Q4 : If I ran src_simple (libsamplerate) on small chunks (160 | |
71 frames) would that sound bad?</A><BR><BR> | |
72 <A HREF="#Q005">Q5 : I'm using libsamplerate but the high quality settings | |
73 sound worse than the SRC_LINEAR converter. Why?</A><BR><BR> | |
74 <A HREF="#Q006">Q6 : I'm use the SRC_SINC_* converters and up-sampling by a ratio of | |
75 2. I reset the converter and put in 1000 samples and I expect to get 2000 | |
76 samples out, but I'm getting less than that. Why?</A><BR><BR> | |
77 <A HREF="#Q007">Q7 : I have input and output sample rates that are integer | |
78 values, but the API wants me to divide one by the other and put the result | |
79 in a floating point number. Won't this case problems for long running | |
80 conversions?</A><BR><BR> | |
81 </P> | |
82 <HR> | |
83 <!-- ========================================================================= --> | |
84 <A NAME="Q001"></A> | |
85 <H2><BR><B>Q1 : Is it normal for the output of libsamplerate to be louder | |
86 than its input?</B></H2> | |
87 <P> | |
88 The output of libsamplerate will be roughly the same volume as the input. | |
89 However, even if the input is strictly in the range (-1.0, 1.0), it is still | |
90 possible for the output to contain peak values outside this range. | |
91 </P> | |
92 <P> | |
93 Consider four consecutive samples of [0.5 0.999 0.999 0.5]. | |
94 If we are up sampling by a factor of two we need to insert samples between | |
95 each of the existing samples. | |
96 Its pretty obvious then, that the sample between the two 0.999 values should | |
97 and will be bigger than 0.999. | |
98 </P> | |
99 <P> | |
100 This means that anyone using libsamplerate should normalize its output before | |
101 doing things like saving the audio to a 16 bit WAV file. | |
102 </P> | |
103 | |
104 <!-- pepper --> | |
105 <!-- ========================================================================= --> | |
106 | |
107 <a NAME="Q002"></a> | |
108 <h2><br><b>Q2 : On Unix/Linux/MacOSX, what is the best way of detecting | |
109 the presence and location of libsamplerate and its header file using | |
110 autoconf?</b></h2> | |
111 | |
112 <p> | |
113 libsamplerate uses the pkg-config (man pkg-config) method of registering itself | |
114 with the host system. | |
115 The best way of detecting its presence is using something like this in configure.ac | |
116 (or configure.in): | |
117 </p> | |
118 | |
119 <pre> | |
120 PKG_CHECK_MODULES(SAMPLERATE, samplerate >= 0.1.3, | |
121 ac_cv_samplerate=1, ac_cv_samplerate=0) | |
122 | |
123 AC_DEFINE_UNQUOTED([HAVE_SAMPLERATE],${ac_cv_samplerate}, | |
124 [Set to 1 if you have libsamplerate.]) | |
125 | |
126 AC_SUBST(SAMPLERATE_CFLAGS) | |
127 AC_SUBST(SAMPLERATE_LIBS) | |
128 </pre> | |
129 <p> | |
130 This will automatically set the <b>SAMPLERATE_CFLAGS</b> and <b>SAMPLERATE_LIBS</b> | |
131 variables which can be used in Makefile.am or Makefile.in like this: | |
132 </p> | |
133 <pre> | |
134 SAMPLERATE_CFLAGS = @SAMPLERATE_CFLAGS@ | |
135 SAMPLERATE_LIBS = @SAMPLERATE_LIBS@ | |
136 </pre> | |
137 | |
138 <p> | |
139 If you install libsamplerate from source, you will probably need to set the | |
140 <b>PKG_CONFIG_PATH</b> environment variable's suggested at the end of the | |
141 libsamplerate configure process. For instance on my system I get this: | |
142 </p> | |
143 <pre> | |
144 -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Configuration Complete =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- | |
145 | |
146 Configuration summary : | |
147 | |
148 Version : ..................... 0.1.3 | |
149 Enable debugging : ............ no | |
150 | |
151 Tools : | |
152 | |
153 Compiler is GCC : ............. yes | |
154 GCC major version : ........... 3 | |
155 | |
156 Extra tools required for testing and examples : | |
157 | |
158 Have FFTW : ................... yes | |
159 Have libsndfile : ............. yes | |
160 Have libefence : .............. no | |
161 | |
162 Installation directories : | |
163 | |
164 Library directory : ........... /usr/local/lib | |
165 Program directory : ........... /usr/local/bin | |
166 Pkgconfig directory : ......... /usr/local/lib/pkgconfig | |
167 </pre> | |
168 | |
169 | |
170 <!-- pepper --> | |
171 <!-- ========================================================================= --> | |
172 <A NAME="Q003"></A> | |
173 <H2><BR><B>Q3 : If I upsample and downsample to the original rate, for | |
174 example 44.1->96->44.1, do I get an identical signal as the one before the | |
175 up/down resampling?</B></H2> | |
176 <P> | |
177 The short answer is that for the general case, no, you don't. | |
178 The long answer is that for some signals, with some converters, you will | |
179 get very, very close. | |
180 </P> | |
181 <P> | |
182 In order to resample correctly (ie using the <B>SRC_SINC_*</B> converters), | |
183 filtering needs to be applied, regardless of whether its upsampling or | |
184 downsampling. | |
185 This filter needs to attenuate all frequencies above 0.5 times the minimum of | |
186 the source and destination sample rate (call this fshmin). | |
187 Since the filter needed to achieve full attenuation at this point, it has to | |
188 start rolling off a some frequency below this point. | |
189 It is this rolloff of the very highest frequencies which causes some of the | |
190 loss. | |
191 </P> | |
192 <P> | |
193 The other factor is that the filter itself can introduce transient artifacts | |
194 which causes the output to be different to the input. | |
195 </P> | |
196 | |
197 <!-- pepper --> | |
198 <!-- ========================================================================= --> | |
199 <A NAME="Q004"></A> | |
200 <H2><BR><B>Q4 : If I ran src_simple on small chunks (say 160 frames) would that | |
201 sound bad?</B></H2> | |
202 <P> | |
203 Well if you are after odd sound effects, it might sound OK. | |
204 If you are after high quality sample rate conversion you will be disappointed. | |
205 </P> | |
206 <P> | |
207 The src_simple() was designed to provide a simple to use interface for people | |
208 who wanted to do sample rate conversion on say, a whole file all at once. | |
209 </P> | |
210 | |
211 <!-- pepper --> | |
212 <!-- ========================================================================= --> | |
213 <A NAME="Q005"></A> | |
214 <H2><BR><B>Q5 : I'm using libsamplerate but the high quality settings | |
215 sound worse than the SRC_LINEAR converter. Why?</B></H2> | |
216 <P> | |
217 There are two possible problems. | |
218 Firstly, if you are using the src_simple() function on successive blocks | |
219 of a stream of samples, you will get bad results. The src_simple() function | |
220 is designed for use on a whole sound file, all at once, not on contiguous | |
221 segments of the same sound file. | |
222 To fix the problem, you need to move to the src_process() API or the callback | |
223 based API. | |
224 </P> | |
225 <P> | |
226 If you are already using the src_process() API or the callback based API and | |
227 the high quality settings sound worse than SRC_LINEAR, then you have other | |
228 problems. | |
229 Read on for more debugging hints. | |
230 </P> | |
231 <P> | |
232 All of the higher quality converters need to keep state while doing conversions | |
233 on segments of a large chunk of audio. | |
234 This state information is kept inside the private data pointed to by the | |
235 SRC_STATE pointer returned by the src_new() function. | |
236 This means, that when you want to start doing sample rate conversion on a | |
237 stream of data, you should call src_new() to get a new SRC_STATE pointer | |
238 (or alternatively, call src_reset() on an existing SRC_STATE pointer). | |
239 You should then pass this SRC_STATE pointer to the src_process() function | |
240 with each new block of audio data. | |
241 When you have completed the conversion, you can then call src_delete() on | |
242 the SRC_STATE pointer. | |
243 </P> | |
244 <P> | |
245 If you are doing all of the above correctly, you need to examine your usage | |
246 of the values passed to src_process() in the | |
247 <A HREF="api_misc.html#SRC_DATA">SRC_DATA</A> | |
248 struct. | |
249 Specifically: | |
250 </P> | |
251 <UL> | |
252 <LI> Check that input_frames and output_frames fields are being set in | |
253 terms of frames (number of sample values times channels) instead | |
254 of just the number of samples. | |
255 <LI> Check that you are using the return values input_frames_used and | |
256 output_frames_gen to update your source and destination pointers | |
257 correctly. | |
258 <LI> Check that you are updating the data_in and data_out pointers | |
259 correctly for each successive call. | |
260 </UL> | |
261 <P> | |
262 While doing the above, it is probably useful to compare what you are doing to | |
263 what is done in the example programs in the examples/ directory of the source | |
264 code tarball. | |
265 </P> | |
266 <P> | |
267 If you have done all of the above and are still having problems then its | |
268 probably time to email the author with the smallest chunk of code that | |
269 adequately demonstrates your problem. | |
270 This chunk should not need to be any more than 100 lines of code. | |
271 </P> | |
272 | |
273 <!-- pepper --> | |
274 <!-- ========================================================================= --> | |
275 <A NAME="Q006"></A> | |
276 <H2><BR><B>Q6 : I'm use the SRC_SINC_* converters and up-sampling by a ratio of | |
277 2. I reset the converter and put in 1000 samples and I expect to get 2000 | |
278 samples out, but I'm getting less than that. Why?</B></H2> | |
279 <P> | |
280 The short answer is that there is a transport delay inside the converter itself. | |
281 Long answer follows. | |
282 </P> | |
283 <P> | |
284 By way of example, the first time you call src_process() you might only get 1900 | |
285 samples out. | |
286 However, after that first call all subsequent calls will probably get you about | |
287 2000 samples out for every 1000 samples you put in. | |
288 </P> | |
289 <P> | |
290 The main problems people have with this transport delay is that they need to read | |
291 out an exact number of samples and the transport delay scews this up. | |
292 The best way to overcome this problem is to always supply more samples on the | |
293 input than is actually needed to create the required number of output samples. | |
294 With reference to the example above, if you always supply 1500 samples at the | |
295 input, you will always get 2000 samples at the output. | |
296 You will always need to keep track of the number of input frames used on each | |
297 call to src_process() and deal with these values appropriately. | |
298 </P> | |
299 | |
300 <!-- pepper --> | |
301 <!-- ========================================================================= --> | |
302 <A NAME="Q007"></A> | |
303 <H2><BR><B>Q7 : I have input and output sample rates that are integer | |
304 values, but the API wants me to divide one by the other and put the result | |
305 in a floating point number. Won't this case problems for long running | |
306 conversions?</B></H2> | |
307 <P> | |
308 The short answer is no, the precision of the ratio is many orders of magnitude | |
309 more than is really needed. | |
310 </P> | |
311 <P> | |
312 For the long answer, lets do come calculations. | |
313 Firstly, the <tt>src_ratio</tt> field is double precision floating point number | |
314 which has | |
315 <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_precision"> | |
316 53 bits of precision</a>. | |
317 </P> | |
318 <P> | |
319 That means that the maximum error in your ratio converted to a double is one | |
320 bit in 2^53 which means the the double float value would be wrong by one sample | |
321 after 9007199254740992 samples have passed or wrong by more than half a sample | |
322 wrong after half that many (4503599627370496 samples) have passed. | |
323 </P> | |
324 <P> | |
325 Now if for example our output sample rate is 96kHz then | |
326 </P> | |
327 <pre> | |
328 4503599627370496 samples at 96kHz is 46912496118 seconds | |
329 46912496118 seconds is 781874935 minutes | |
330 781874935 minutes is 13031248 hours | |
331 13031248 hours is 542968 days | |
332 542968 days is 1486 years | |
333 </pre> | |
334 <P> | |
335 So, after 1486 years, the input will be wrong by more than half of one sampling | |
336 period. | |
337 </P> | |
338 <p> | |
339 All this assumes that the crystal oscillators uses to sample the audio stream | |
340 is perfect. | |
341 This is not the case. | |
342 According to | |
343 <a href="http://www.ieee-uffc.org/freqcontrol/quartz/vig/vigcomp.htm"> | |
344 this web site</a>, | |
345 the accuracy of standard crystal oscillators (XO, TCXO, OCXO) is at best | |
346 1 in 100 million. | |
347 The <tt>src_ratio</tt> is therefore 45035996 times more accurate than the | |
348 crystal clock source used to sample the original audio signal and any potential | |
349 problem with the <tt>src_ratio</tt> being a floating point number will be | |
350 completely swamped by sampling inaccuracies. | |
351 </p> | |
352 | |
353 <!-- <A HREF="mailto:aldel@mega-nerd.com">For the spam bots</A> --> | |
354 | |
355 </DIV> | |
356 </TD></TR> | |
357 </TABLE> | |
358 | |
359 </BODY> | |
360 </HTML> | |
361 |