On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 1:18 PM, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
> None of this would be produced by linear interpolation.
not my code :) talk to steve harris if you wish, otherwise check in
with hans baier and ask him about the work he has done on
interpolation models in 3.X, since he may have a deeper understanding
of what the 2.X code is doing.
eh? lots of people are using ardour as a playback engine driven by
timecode, with no intention of recording the output. when you're
editing and scrubbing/shuttling, i would have imagined that in the
vast majority of cases you would *not* be recording what you are
doing. what am i missing?
>> If a signal is recorded
we must be thinking of a different use case.
the code i wrote to do varispeed-sync-tracking was designed to handle
a "wobbly" timecode source such as an ADAT tape machine. its timecode
speed is not constant but suffers from very small motor-induced
variation. from the experiments i did, that variation is essentially
random, and if you played the same material twice, it would be subject
to two different sets of timecode variations. i cannot see how
encoding the varispeed into the on-disk material is useful in this
are you talking about something different?