- From: Jussi Kalliokoski <jussi.kalliokoski@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2012 22:30:48 +0300
- To: Chris Rogers <crogers@google.com>
- Cc: Srikumar Karaikudi Subramanian <srikumarks@gmail.com>, Joe Berkovitz <joe@noteflight.com>, "public-audio@w3.org Group" <public-audio@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAJhzemXRr4ePiLxQ61L71OS7NRRgxuTag_yevGdds+yy0Km=3g@mail.gmail.com>
I agree. I also agree with it being way too complicated for a lot of use cases to completely move the scheduling out of AudioParam. But I really like Joe's idea, maybe we should have something called DCSourceNode which has a voltage param? :P That would definitely address my use case. Cheers, Jussi On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 10:20 PM, Chris Rogers <crogers@google.com> wrote: > > > 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 19:31:10 UTC