[Csnd] mincer question.
Date | 2012-03-17 16:06 |
From | Roger Kelly |
Subject | [Csnd] mincer question. |
I am using the example from the manual below. My questions are about the FFT size, and idecim. I would have thought that a larger FFT size would only affect sound quality and resolution of the original sample, as well as decimation size, but it seems to have other audio effects. I am looking for advice for what would be an ideal setting with FFT and decimation for best quality that is simply doing time shifting independent of frequency.
<CsoundSynthesizer> <CsOptions> ; Select audio/midi flags here according to platform -odac ;;;realtime audio out ;-iadc ;;;uncomment -iadc if realtime audio input is needed too ; For Non-realtime ouput leave only the line below: ; -o mincer.wav -W ;;; for file output any platform </CsOptions> <CsInstruments> sr = 48000 ksmps = 32 nchnls = 2 0dbfs = 1 instr 1 idur = p3 ilock = 1 ipitch = 1 itimescale = 1 iamp = 0.8 atime line 0,idur,idur*itimescale asigl, asigr mincer atime, iamp, ipitch, 1, ilock,2048,6 outs asigl, asigr endin </CsInstruments> <CsScore> f 1 0 0 1 "D:/proj/soundgen/sounds/samples/drums/lime120.wav" 0 0 0 i 1 0 7 1 ;locked e </CsScore> </CsoundSynthesizer> |
Date | 2012-03-17 17:03 |
From | Justin Smith |
Subject | Re: [Csnd] mincer question. |
There is an unavoidable tradeoff between timing and frequency information. With more overlaps / larger FFT size, you preserve more frequency information and lose more timing information when time stretching (frequencies preserved, time smearing), with a smaller FFT size / fewer overlaps you preserve more timing and dynamics, and lose more frequency information when time stretching (dynamics and timing preserved, frequency breebles). This isn't just a limitation of FFT, it is a byproduct of the fact that frequency is the derivitive of amplitude over time, so any time stretching algorithm must deal with this dilemma.
|