search for: retuned

Martijn van Beurden wrote: >> And I also suggested to consider a different setting for -7 preset: >> -7 == -l 12 -b 4096 -m -r 6 -A tukey(0.5);partial_tukey(2) >> see <http://www.hydrogenaud.io/forums/index.php?s=&showtopic=106545&view=findpost&p=871797> >> >> But it will decrease decoding speed for this preset. > > Yes, that is another thing

As I haven't heard any complaints concerning the proposal for retuning compression levels which I posted a few months ago, here's the patch that enables them, with the change proposed by lvqcl. This patch changes the settings associated with compression levels 6, 7 and 8. With this patch, -e is no longer used, but instead apodization functions are added. This should improve

Martijn van Beurden wrote: > With the patch I mailed earlier today, I found out a few > adjustments could be made to the compression level settings.This > retuning speeds up the encoding and improves compression, while > not changing anything decoding-wise. > > Currently, compression settings are as follows > > -5, -l 8 -b 4096 -m -r 5 -A tukey(0.5) > -6, -l 8 -b

Martijn van Beurden wrote: > This patch changes the settings associated with compression > levels 6, 7 and 8. With this patch, -e is no longer used, but > instead apodization functions are added. This should improve > compression with at least 95% of all material. Independent tests > show that this is probably the case. But your patch changes only two last presets (-7 and -8) so

Hi all, The compression levels in FLAC have been kept the same for a long time, only preset 6, 7 and 8 got a slight change years ago. However, as some parts of FLAC got much faster, I felt it was time to retune the presets, to better use the now much faster parts. There is a proposal at github here: https://github.com/xiph/flac/pull/576 I think there might be strong opinions on this matter.

Hi all, With the patch I mailed earlier today, I found out a few adjustments could be made to the compression level settings.This retuning speeds up the encoding and improves compression, while not changing anything decoding-wise. Currently, compression settings are as follows -5, -l 8 -b 4096 -m -r 5 -A tukey(0.5) -6, -l 8 -b 4096 -m -r 6-A tukey(0.5) -7, -l 8 -b 4096 -m -e -r 6-A

Erik de Castro Lopo wrote: >> Currently, compression settings are as follows >> >> -6, -l 8 -b 4096 -m -r 6-A tukey(0.5) >> -7, -l 8 -b 4096 -m -e -r 6-A tukey(0.5) >> -8, -l 12 -b 4096 -m -e -r 6-A tukey(0.5) >> >> I suggest the following, in case my previous patch is accepted >> >> -6, -l 8 -b 4096 -m -r 6 -A tukey(0.5);partial_tukey(2)

On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 06:39:43PM +1000, mle+la at mega-nerd.com wrote: > Martijn van Beurden wrote: > > > I dropped -e because > > it's compression improvement isn't worth the slowdown, but it is > > easy for the user to add this anyway. > > I think we should keep -e but may print a warning. The reason to keep it > is so that we do not break some

> And I also suggested to consider a different setting for -7 preset: > -7 == -l 12 -b 4096 -m -r 6 -A tukey(0.5);partial_tukey(2) > see <http://www.hydrogenaud.io/forums/index.php?s=&showtopic=106545&view=findpost&p=871797> > > But it will decrease decoding speed for this preset. Yes, that is another thing to consider. My proposal keeps the decoding speed for

Op 20-10-14 om 16:36 schreef Martijn van Beurden: > Op 20-10-14 om 16:31 schreef lvqcl: >> But your patch changes only two last presets (-7 and -8) so >> -6 stays unchanged. ( IIRC it should have >> "tukey(5e-1);partial_tukey(2)" as its apodization string >> instead of current "tukey(5e-1)" ). > > .... okay, I really don't know how it is

Full_Name: G?ran Brostr?m Version: 2.3.1 OS: Linux, ubuntu Submission from: (NULL) (85.11.40.53) > dweibull(0, 0.5, 1) [1] NaN Warning message: NaNs produced in: dweibull(x, shape, scale, log) should give Inf (and no Warning). Compare with > dgamma(0, 0.5, 1) [1] Inf This happens when 'shape' < 1.

Hi, I have this in my form <%= check_box_tag(@accept, value = "1", checked = false) %> Which puts a nice checkbox on my form but when I try to retrieve the value that is returned, which I expect to find in @accept, there is nothing. How do I check the returned value? Thanks, Paul Thompson

Hi, > If I understand this correctly, these new apodization functions only > affect compression and that files compressed with these new functions > will still decode correctly with older versions of the FLAC decoder. > > Is that right? Yes, that is correct. These functions are used to window the audiodata, but only for the predictor stage. What these new function enable,

Hi all, After creating a new LLVM-based project, I faced an odd problem. ExecutionEngine::create always retuned null. After some investigation I found out that it was due to the target architecture not getting registered. I'm using Visual C++ 2005 and in the X86TargetMachine.cpp file an extern variable X86TargetMachineModule is created to 'ensure' that the module is linked in. It works for the ex...

I've Looked over the list of Auth methods that dovecot can use But i didn't see a option for a custom auth option. Would it be possible to add in a way for dovecot to call a script to check a users login info. have it able to retun the the homedir,gid/uid, and weather or not the password matched. -- Chris L. Franklin --

Hello, Sorry if this question was already asked (I though it was... but did not found the exact answer in the archives). I use R 2.2.0 and just updated to Firefox 1.5 (note that I already got the same result with Firefox 1.x.x) under Win XP sp2 US (full details of my config hereunder). When I try to use the HTML help search page, I can make a search: the message 'Applet SearchEngine

Martijn van Beurden wrote: > Hi, > > > If I understand this correctly, these new apodization functions only > > affect compression and that files compressed with these new functions > > will still decode correctly with older versions of the FLAC decoder. > > > > Is that right? > > Yes, that is correct. These functions are used to window the >

Op 03-12-14 om 15:49 schreef Olivier Tristan: > [...] > If you want to check this on a single piano note, I would be > happy to know if this improves the monophonic use case as well. This sample is indeed a case where the retuning of FLAC 1.3.1 shows a severe regression. It seems the patch does work quite well in this case, but it does not fully fix the regression. FLAC 1.3.0 -5:

Op 03-12-14 om 18:14 schreef Brian Willoughby: > I would like to point out that 'quiet' material is common when making original recordings. This is probably a misunderstanding: I said that the material that suffers is usually quiet, not that all quiet material suffers. > I do a great deal of live recording, and the levels are always quiet in order to guard against clipping. These

Dear R helpers, I have generated a portfolio of Equity, Dollar Rate and say zero coupon bond. I have calculated the daily returns based on the prices available for last two years. Now, I have three seperate csv files (Equity.csv, Dollar.csv and Bond.csv) containing the respective returns. I need to calculate the correlation matrix between the retuns of these assets. Please guide me how this