iiwusynth-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

[iiwusynth-devel] Fluiwusynth


From: M. Nentwig
Subject: [iiwusynth-devel] Fluiwusynth
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 09:13:34 +0300

Hei,

Sorry for the subject line, I just couldn't restrain myself :-)

I just committed my changes to CVS. The problems Josh discovered are not
yet fixed, coming soon...
Modulating loop points has been addressed. Also the loop volume
detection for the turnoff condition is run only once per sample, that
should save some time.
I have also disabled real-time priority for the MIDI thread, because it
helped to get rid of dropouts.

> > It would be cool to look into MMX and SSE for this kind of ...

I have heard, that MMX is not float-compatible (the CPU has to be turned
into MMX mode, which takes some time, and then the FPU is unavailable in
MMX mode). But take that with caution, I haven't touched an assembler
since my 8051 days.

Before the voice loop is recoded in assembler, we should streamline the
algorithm as much as possible. I'll add soon:
- a condition to turn off interpolation at root pitch and normal phase
- a condition to turn off the filter, if fc is high enough.
- a condition to turn off reverb send and chorus send each, if the send
level is 0

If nobody objects, I'll move the run_dsp macro into an own file
iiwu_dsp.c and #include it instead of the macro. Is that OK? That makes
editing and commenting much easier.

> FluidSynth it'll be then!

Hoping for a 'solid' synth, whatever the name. I didn't find any other
projects / products using the same name.

> > Now if only the filter was less scratchy when ...

The problem could still be, that the filter is updated only once per
buffer. This theory is easy to verify - set a buffer size of 4 or so,
recompile the synth and compare the results. But CPU usage will go
through the roof, because recomputing the filter is so expensive.

> the synth is currently GPL'ed but wouldn't it be interesting to ...

As far as I am concerned, LGPL is OK. The less restrictive, the better.

Cheers

Markus





reply via email to

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