IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

15 Pages V  « < 3 4 5 6 7 > »   
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Resampler plugin, uses SoX 14.2.0 resampling routines
h34rtb1t
post May 24 2010, 17:10
Post #101





Group: Members
Posts: 3
Joined: 18-May 10
Member No.: 80735



QUOTE (lvqcl @ May 20 2010, 22:15) *
QUOTE (h34rtb1t @ May 20 2010, 13:19) *
Would you please add one more configuration setting, which do upsample 4x for [0, 48]kHz and 2x for (48, 96]kHz source.

Thanks.


You can do this with SoX_resampler_mod.

Just add 2 resamplers to DSP chain. First makes 4x upsampling and passes 64000,88200,96000 unmodified. Second makes 2x upsampling and passes 128000,176400,192000 unmodified.


Oh, I see. Great tip!

But, could you please provide the binary of modded version of 0.5.4.1+SSE2?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
a3aan
post May 29 2010, 11:24
Post #102





Group: Members
Posts: 80
Joined: 23-December 06
Member No.: 38930



QUOTE (lvqcl @ May 28 2010, 20:27) *
SoX resampler (+mod) 0.5.4.2:
..

Thanks!
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
hidn
post Jun 8 2010, 14:23
Post #103





Group: Members
Posts: 55
Joined: 17-April 08
Member No.: 52847



It is possible to do x64 bit version of plugin? smile.gif
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
kode54
post Jun 8 2010, 15:02
Post #104





Group: Admin
Posts: 4580
Joined: 15-December 02
Member No.: 4082



QUOTE (hidn @ Jun 8 2010, 06:23) *
It is possible to do x64 bit version of plugin? smile.gif

Yes, as soon as there's an x64 version of foobar2000.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
lvqcl
post Jun 8 2010, 15:03
Post #105





Group: Developer
Posts: 3340
Joined: 2-December 07
Member No.: 49183



QUOTE (hidn @ Jun 8 2010, 17:23) *
It is possible to do x64 bit version of plugin? smile.gif


Yes. All you need is 64-bit version of foobar2000.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
hidn
post Jun 8 2010, 19:09
Post #106





Group: Members
Posts: 55
Joined: 17-April 08
Member No.: 52847



well. request useless. 'll just wait for the mass transition to x64 smile.gif

This post has been edited by hidn: Jun 8 2010, 19:09
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
j_b
post Jun 9 2010, 16:07
Post #107





Group: Members
Posts: 33
Joined: 19-September 07
From: Santo, TX
Member No.: 47182



QUOTE (lvqcl @ Dec 27 2009, 12:07) *
Try this simple plugin. It adds 2 entries to DSP: "2x upsample w/o lpf" and "2x downsample w/o lpf".


Please consider adding “2x upsample with linear interpolation” to foo_dsp_resamp.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
lvqcl
post Jun 9 2010, 16:36
Post #108





Group: Developer
Posts: 3340
Joined: 2-December 07
Member No.: 49183



QUOTE
Please consider adding “2x upsample with linear interpolation” to foo_dsp_resamp.

Why do you want it? blink.gif

This post has been edited by lvqcl: Jun 9 2010, 16:36
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
ArtS21
post Jun 18 2010, 16:15
Post #109





Group: Members
Posts: 1
Joined: 18-June 10
Member No.: 81613



QUOTE (lvqcl @ May 20 2010, 22:15) *
You can do this with SoX_resampler_mod.

Just add 2 resamplers to DSP chain. First makes 4x upsampling and passes 64000,88200,96000 unmodified. Second makes 2x upsampling and passes 128000,176400,192000 unmodified.

I'm confused unsure.gif Mod allows upsampling only up to 48000. How come you write about 64000,88200,96000, etc?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
lvqcl
post Jun 18 2010, 19:06
Post #110





Group: Developer
Posts: 3340
Joined: 2-December 07
Member No.: 49183



QUOTE
Mod allows upsampling only up to 48000.


You can choose target samplerate. Works here flawlessly.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
rastan
post Jul 17 2010, 19:51
Post #111





Group: Members
Posts: 2
Joined: 4-July 10
Member No.: 82017



I recently modded my X-fi Prelude with removing 24mhz crystal and connecting an external clock generator with same value due to jitter. After this mod, I managed with failure of playback 44.1k files. Since that I don't know how fix this via another hardware mod, i went to resample during playback all my archive (most 44.1khz flac) to a value which X-Fi chip natively supports it (aka 48/96khz). Then I find Sox resampler here.

I wonder that is there any comparision between X-Fi's native resampler vs. Sox even I know that Sox resampler one of the best out there.

Thanks to lvpcl and Sox team for this great fb2k component anyway..

This post has been edited by rastan: Jul 17 2010, 19:53
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
khaos974
post Jul 31 2010, 12:33
Post #112





Group: Members
Posts: 7
Joined: 18-October 09
From: Beijing
Member No.: 74098



In the 0.5.4.2, what is the difference between the mod and the mod2 versions?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
lvqcl
post Jul 31 2010, 12:44
Post #113





Group: Developer
Posts: 3340
Joined: 2-December 07
Member No.: 49183



mod: It doesn't resample the frequencies that you enter in the text field.

mod2: It resamples only the frequencies that you enter in the field.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Sandrine
post Aug 29 2010, 00:45
Post #114





Group: Members
Posts: 319
Joined: 2-July 10
Member No.: 81991



Thanks for the new version! Please consider releasing processor optimized versions for mod and mod2.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
kode54
post Aug 29 2010, 01:01
Post #115





Group: Admin
Posts: 4580
Joined: 15-December 02
Member No.: 4082



That really depends on the resampler library itself. I don't think many compilers will just automatically parallelize/vectorize the entire process and magically make things faster.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Alex B
post Sep 10 2010, 12:26
Post #116





Group: Members
Posts: 1303
Joined: 14-September 05
From: Helsinki, Finland
Member No.: 24472



I just downloaded the v. 0.5.4.3.

I have a K10 (a Phenom II). Should I use K8 or Dual Core or should I try to run my own tests?

The packaging is now different. The mod package is separate and it does not contain optimized versions. Are the mod versions "MSVS generic" ? The v. 0.5.4.2 included SSE2 mods.


--------------------
http://listening-tests.freetzi.com
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
lvqcl
post Sep 10 2010, 15:55
Post #117





Group: Developer
Posts: 3340
Joined: 2-December 07
Member No.: 49183



QUOTE (Alex B @ Sep 10 2010, 15:26) *
I just downloaded the v. 0.5.4.3.

I have a K10 (a Phenom II). Should I use K8 or Dual Core or should I try to run my own tests?

"Core2" is for Intel Core2 Duo/Quad processors. So I suppose that you should use K8.

Anyway, the performance increase is very little (about 10% or even less), that's why
QUOTE (Alex B @ Sep 10 2010, 15:26) *
The packaging is now different. The mod package is separate and it does not contain optimized versions.


QUOTE (Alex B @ Sep 10 2010, 15:26) *
Are the mod versions "MSVS generic" ?

Yes.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Alex B
post Sep 10 2010, 16:14
Post #118





Group: Members
Posts: 1303
Joined: 14-September 05
From: Helsinki, Finland
Member No.: 24472



Thanks.

I did a quick test. I converted 25 short wav tracks (~350 MB) from 44.1. to 48k. I ran the test set five times in a row with each different compile. The sample rate conversion settings were default. Foobar used all four CPU cores.

Here are the results:
CODE
Generic
Total encoding time: 0:22.578, 93.30x realtime
Total encoding time: 0:23.625, 89.17x realtime
Total encoding time: 0:22.140, 95.15x realtime
Total encoding time: 0:22.718, 92.73x realtime
Total encoding time: 0:22.844, 92.22x realtime

Atom
Total encoding time: 0:22.765, 92.54x realtime
Total encoding time: 0:23.594, 89.28x realtime
Total encoding time: 0:22.875, 92.09x realtime
Total encoding time: 0:23.656, 89.05x realtime
Total encoding time: 0:22.922, 91.90x realtime

Core 2
Total encoding time: 0:22.375, 94.15x realtime
Total encoding time: 0:22.813, 92.34x realtime
Total encoding time: 0:22.937, 91.84x realtime
Total encoding time: 0:22.719, 92.72x realtime
Total encoding time: 0:23.203, 90.79x realtime

K8
Total encoding time: 0:23.578, 89.34x realtime
Total encoding time: 0:24.218, 86.98x realtime
Total encoding time: 0:22.734, 92.66x realtime
Total encoding time: 0:22.657, 92.98x realtime
Total encoding time: 0:23.781, 88.58x realtime

Mod
Total encoding time: 0:24.125, 87.32x realtime
Total encoding time: 0:23.891, 88.17x realtime
Total encoding time: 0:24.141, 87.26x realtime
Total encoding time: 0:23.140, 91.04x realtime
Total encoding time: 0:22.734, 92.66x realtime

I can't make any conclusions. The results are too varied.

This post has been edited by Alex B: Sep 10 2010, 16:24


--------------------
http://listening-tests.freetzi.com
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
lvqcl
post Sep 10 2010, 17:15
Post #119





Group: Developer
Posts: 3340
Joined: 2-December 07
Member No.: 49183



You can use foo_benchmark for tests. Just use 32-bit float WAV file as an input.

For 16-bit input files, foo_hdcd and foo_input_dts.dll will also be called. This will slightly decrease actual speed.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
kode54
post Sep 10 2010, 19:14
Post #120





Group: Admin
Posts: 4580
Joined: 15-December 02
Member No.: 4082



QUOTE (lvqcl @ Sep 10 2010, 09:15) *
For 16-bit input files, foo_hdcd and foo_input_dts.dll will also be called. This will slightly decrease actual speed.

Only for the first 5 seconds or so worth of data, unless there's anything to decode. I suppose this still has a noticeable effect on benchmarks.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
lvqcl
post Sep 10 2010, 19:31
Post #121





Group: Developer
Posts: 3340
Joined: 2-December 07
Member No.: 49183



wav "decoding" speed w/o foo_hdcd and foo_input_dts:
32-bit: 6000x realtime
16-bit: 10000x realtime

with both foo_hdcd and foo_input_dts:
32-bit: 6000x realtime
16-bit: 2800x realtime


Well, it seems that this difference (10000 vs. 2800) is negligible when resampling speed is only ~90x realtime.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Steve Forte Rio
post Sep 14 2010, 21:13
Post #122





Group: Members
Posts: 443
Joined: 4-October 08
From: Ukraine
Member No.: 59301



About new sse3 test version...

Core i3 530 @ 2.94 GHz

foobar2000 1.1 Decoding Speed Test (source: 16 bit 44.1 kHz PCM, 5 passes, buffer entire file into memory, high priority, DSP: SoX 48000 Hz Very High, 95% bandpass, linear phase)

Generic 0.5.4.3 version:

QUOTE
Total length: 34:51.733
Info Read time: 0:00.000
Opening time: 0:00.102
Decoding time: 0:34.626
60.409x realtime


0.5.4.3 Core 2 version:

QUOTE
Total length: 34:51.733
Info Read time: 0:00.000
Opening time: 0:00.052
Decoding time: 0:30.648
68.251x realtime


SSE3 test version:

QUOTE
Total length: 34:51.733
Info Read time: 0:00.000
Opening time: 0:00.118
Decoding time: 0:23.868
87.638x realtime


smile.gif

This post has been edited by Steve Forte Rio: Sep 14 2010, 21:15
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
lvqcl
post Sep 14 2010, 21:36
Post #123





Group: Developer
Posts: 3340
Joined: 2-December 07
Member No.: 49183



Thanks for testing.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
jaro1
post Oct 5 2010, 11:10
Post #124





Group: Members
Posts: 76
Joined: 22-November 08
Member No.: 62952



The version 0.5.4.3 was for all types of processor (atom, core2, K8) SSE2 version, so there are also other processor specific optimizations there, right?
Will there also be procesor specific version with SSE3 instructions enabled? Version 0.5.5, which is SSE3, is common for all procesor types. (but maybe i am completely false). Difference between v. 0.5.4.3 (K8) - definitelly faster as generic - and 0.5.5 is negligible on Athlon 64.
Thanks to lvqcl for further improvements of his component.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
lvqcl
post Oct 8 2010, 17:49
Post #125





Group: Developer
Posts: 3340
Joined: 2-December 07
Member No.: 49183



http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....st&p=722827
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

15 Pages V  « < 3 4 5 6 7 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 31st July 2014 - 17:21