- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2012 08:38:35 +0000
- To: public-audio@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=17335 --- Comment #6 from Marcus Geelnard (Opera) <mage@opera.com> --- (In reply to comment #5) > Since it is an audio rate controller you should always see it as a signal > and apply signal theory. True, but in this case I think that the real use case is to use quite low-frequency signals (like various forms of ramps that run for at least 20 ms or so). For those scenarios, band-limiting should not be necessary. As long as the spec mandates a certain method of interpolation (e.g. nearest, linear or cubic spline), the user knows what to expect and will not try to make other things with it (like modulating a signal with a high-frequency waveform). Also, I think it's important that all implementations behave equally here, because different interpolation & filtering methods can lead to quite different results. E.g. a 5 second fade-out would sound quite different if it used nearest interpolation instead of cubic spline interpolation. In that respect, a simpler and more performance friendly solution (like nearest or linear interpolation) is better, because it's easier to mandate for all implementations. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
Received on Thursday, 6 December 2012 08:38:39 UTC