[Clam-devel] [PATCH] (working in progress) Harmonizer

[Xavier Amatriain]

Residuals are ignored because the small addition in quality does not 
justify the
huge performance penalty.

On this same line adding a dynamic number of voices might be dangerous. As I
explained in my previous email adding many peaks is translated into many 
performance
issues.


Pau Arumi wrote:
> En/na Hernán Ordiales ha escrit:
>
>> i'll post here another mail about that and looking for suggestions to 
>> improve it
>> take in account that by default residuals are ignored (maybe i'll
>> toggle default value, what do you think?)
>
> since there are so many controls i'd like to check with your
> results, could you post some audio file? (take your time)
>
>>
>> ok, for that reason i've started with a fixed InControlArray of 4
>> voices (i think is enough in mosts cases) because we need a prototype
>> of it
>
> of course. i'm also a fan of start-simple-add-flexibility-later-maybe.
>
>> what to do?
>>
>> - One fixed harmonizer processing with fixed amount of controls and 
>> protoype
>> - One harmonizer processing with dinamic amount of voices, but without
>> a prototype???
>> - Both (2 different processings)
>
> a single processing with #voices configuration. the prototyping
> binding is done (else big surprise) after configuration.
>
>>> what do you mean exactly. what and when in-controls should be
>>> remembered?
>>
>> For example if i want to remember 'gains' or frequencies and have a
>> saved network of that
>>
>> In this case, have a network configured with specific voices and gains
>> ready to play...
>> In spectralnetwork, nice values of robotization, gains, filter, freq, 
>> etc...
>
> yes. it's a reasonable feature.
> but i'm not sure how network-saved in-controls should interact
> with in-control init at configuration time.
> my first thought is that network-saved should preval (applied
> after config)
>
> hernan, file it as a feature request, please.
> anyone wanting to work on this?
>
>
>> ATM is always the mean value between min and max (for example in
>> robotization i think is bettter a '0' value by default)
>
> yes we need this new interface/feature: incontrol.SetDefault(0)
> which implies that in cases where a default is given,
> GetDefault() won't return the mean but the specified value.
> it seems an easy hack, i'm open to receive a patch :-)
>
> pau
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Clam-devel mailing list
> Clam-devel at llistes.projectes.lafarga.org
> https://llistes.projectes.lafarga.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/clam-devel