[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [fluid-dev] Supported Wave/Flac format other than SF2

From: Mattes
Subject: Re: [fluid-dev] Supported Wave/Flac format other than SF2
Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2015 13:22:14 +0100
User-agent: SOGoMail 2.2.9a

Am Donnerstag, 05. Februar 2015 10:15 CET, "BCA @ Free-Artists" 
<address@hidden> schrieb:

> In certain points, I don't understand the initial posting. One thing is
> clear to me - he doesn't want to construct a soundfonts ("Going by SF2
> is going to be hard for developer to implement new soundfont"). It
> appears he wants just to import sample files on button press, and start
> playing them. That means for FS, the sample player shall construct the
> soundfonts.

> I can understand the request for flac format, since it is lossless
> (compared with wave),

??? while wave is technically a container format it´s usually used for
uncompressed samples so it´s lossless as well.

> and saves about the half of hard disk space. It
> might even be, once in future, FLAC will replace wave (if the CD
> industry allows for this ;-).

Wave has nothing whatsoever to do with the CD format.

> FluidSynth is soundfonts player only, so in regards of FS, a request can
> be only, to enable soundfonts contruction from native flac sample files
> (IIRC Swami has planned so for future).

Iff we are talking about the possible import format than that´s handled by the
library used to read sound files (libsoundfile should handle all of this).

> FluidSynth as such could be made
> fit for reading such soundfonts, indeed. But in that case, it would be
> at least frome equivalent interest (in my eyes), to support soundfonts
> files based on Ogg Vorbis or a similar HQ compression format. This would
> be a real improvement, since the soundfonts could be reduced
> impressively in file size, while keeping HQ sound.

But one would need to either keep the sounds uncompressed in main memory
(so no gain compared with the current setup) or uncompress them during playback
(with all the CPU-costs involvedin this).

> David, does FS support playing soundfonts in a bit-ness higher than 
> 16-bit? Another question in regards of FS, would be support for up to
> 96-bit soundfonts.

For heaven´s sake - what for? That´s a dynamic range no human will ever be able
to hear/use?
Or did you just mix up bit-depth and (96khz) sampling rate?

Cheers, Ralf Mattes

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]