- From: Karl Tomlinson <karlt+public-audio@karlt.net>
- Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2014 12:12:19 +1300
- To: Chris Wilson <cwilso@google.com>
- Cc: "public-audio\@w3.org" <public-audio@w3.org>
Chris Wilson writes: > Thanks, that's good background. It seems from this, though, that > either 1) users should do this themselves, or 2) we should provide a > control parameter on the emphasis, possibly multiple controls (after > all, the "default" on the LA2A is no emphasis). My inclination is to > remove the emphasis, but that will require changing all current > implementations. Alternately, we need to carefully specify what > emphasis is being applied, so it can be undone (by > pre-pre-de-emphasizing, and post-post-emphasizing, which seems a > bit...odd.) > > This is causing problems in multiband compression (which we use in > Chrome OS for speaker tuning), as well as other side effects. > > Any comments on removing this emphasis? The zero/pole de-emphasis and attempted inverse that WebKit uses and Gecko copied would have some interesting effects on phase, so I can see the advantages in allowing for different filters. I'd prefer that any added filter control was a separate node from DynamicsCompressorNode because it would give more flexibility. Pre-emphasis may be useful for purposes other than compression. If the first order filter shapes are important for those that want the pre-emphasis, then it may be necessary to add API (to BiquadFilterNode perhaps) to emulate them. I expect zero/pole filters to be faster than convolution.
Received on Thursday, 9 January 2014 23:12:59 UTC