- From: Chris Rogers <crogers@google.com>
- Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2012 12:20:03 -0700
- To: Srikumar Karaikudi Subramanian <srikumarks@gmail.com>
- Cc: Joe Berkovitz <joe@noteflight.com>, Jussi Kalliokoski <jussi.kalliokoski@gmail.com>, "public-audio@w3.org Group" <public-audio@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CA+EzO0kBaGMNjwNQZ6eXnDJyVKKmi3rWtaDhWTs7qYn-6ZQEEQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, Oct 5, 2012 at 9:03 PM, Srikumar Karaikudi Subramanian < srikumarks@gmail.com> wrote: > On 6 Oct, 2012, at 4:27 AM, Joe Berkovitz <joe@noteflight.com> wrote: > > Actually, I didn't ever think a GainNode would generate its own signal. > Rather, it did not occur to me to drive a set of AudioParams with an > envelope via the audio rate modulation feature, using a gain controlled > unity signal. It is this last idea that seems a bit tricky and unclear for > API novices. If there were something like a UnitySourceNode, I would feel > better. > > Chris R - I see that the AudioBufferSourceNode's 'gain' attribute was > removed from the spec in Apr '11 ( > https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/audio/file/908b6b7b8702/webaudio/specification.html), > but it is present in all webkit implementations even today, including > Chrome Canary. In > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-audio/2012AprJun/0072.html, > you wrote -- "We may need to re-visit the removal of these gain > attributes from the API, since I've found several pages out in the wild > using them. They're not harmful attributes, just ones I felt could be > cleaned up (removed) since AudioGainNode can be used instead. We may need > to choose a deprectation path, or simply keep them." > > With the 'gain' parameter, the AudioBufferSourceNode would offer a single > node solution to envelope generation. You can set a one sample buffer with > sample value = 1, turn on looping and work with its gain parameter. This is > simple enough that a special UnitySourceNode and an EnvelopeNode would be > superfluous. (I only just realized I've been using the ABSN this way > instead of the "GainNode with unity signal" approach I mentioned earlier .. > but was surprised to find that the ABSN.gain parameter was removed from the > spec.) > > AudioBuffer.gain and AudioListener.gain are likely to be superfluous, but > if AudioBufferSourceNode.gain is removed, a gain node seems likely to be > necessary most of the time anyway. Given that the ability to connect a node > to an AudioParam didn't exist when the ABSN.gain parameter was removed, it > is worth reconsidering it in the context of envelopes as well. > > Hi Kumar, I think it's best to keep the AudioBufferSourceNode API simpler. It's only two or three more lines of JS to create the AudioGainNode and connect it.
Received on Monday, 8 October 2012 19:20:30 UTC