similar to: [PATCH] Hoist a repeated conditional in the channel mapping code.

This commit accepts the new default channel masks for 6.1 and 7.1 surround input WAV files, and writes the corresponding masks when decoding to WAV without a channel mask from the metadata block. --- src/flac/decode.c | 5 +++++ src/flac/encode.c | 4 +++- 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/flac/decode.c b/src/flac/decode.c index 98fc430..2d1bdd6 100644 ---

On 13-03-01 2:17 PM, Erik de Castro Lopo wrote: > Ralph, looks like there's a missing closing brace there. Do you want to fix > it and resubmit or should I fix it? Sorry about that. Is this one better? -r -------------- next part -------------- commit 93d92eb5e98cacd8cab185a0bfdaafb795b14b22 Author: Ralph Giles <giles at mozilla.com> Date: Thu Jan 17 16:21:45 2013 -0800

Martin Leese wrote: > Your proposed wording was: > 0000-0111 : (number of independent channels)-1. The channel order > follows SMPTE/ITU-R recommendations. The assignments are as follows: > > The channel order might not follow SMPTE/ITU-R > recommendations, so this proposed wording > seems misleading to me. But this text describes only those 4 bits in frame header. IMHO

Currently FLAC doesn't read the contents of WAVEFORMATEXTENSIBLE_CHANNEL_MASK tag in a decoded FLAC file and doesn't write correct channel mask to a WAV file. (d->channel_mask == 0 inside DecoderSession_process() function in decode.c) The attached patch fixes this problem but I'm not sure that it doesn't have any side effects... Also, maybe it's better to call

The commit http://git.xiph.org/?p=flac.git;a=commitdiff;h=99257e177eac96fa41a107b423080232f59ebe45 also requires some changes in write_iff_headers() function: currently flac don't write WAVEFORMATEXTENSIBLE header if decoder_session->channel_mask is equal to 0, 1 or 3. After the commit 99257e17 flac should do this for channel_mask equal to 0, 4 or 3. The patch fixes this.

I made some changes to the previous patch. I don't know why I originally didn't put the output buffering to piped output too but that is now moved to cover both file and pipe output. Additionally this patch informs the Windows filesystem in advance about the decoded size to eliminate NTFS fragmentation. On 25.9.2014 23:01, Janne Hyv?rinen wrote: > Decoding flac files is also prone

lvqcl wrote: > The commit http://git.xiph.org/?p=flac.git;a=commitdiff;h=99257e177eac96fa41a107b423080232f59ebe45 > also requires some changes in write_iff_headers() function: > > currently flac don't write WAVEFORMATEXTENSIBLE header if > decoder_session->channel_mask is equal to 0, 1 or 3. > After the commit 99257e17 flac should do this for channel_mask > equal to

lvqcl wrote: > Martin Leese wrote: >> Note that the channel order may not be defined. > > IMHO it doesn't matter in this place of documentation (which describes > default channel assignments for FLAC). Your proposed wording was: 0000-0111 : (number of independent channels)-1. The channel order follows SMPTE/ITU-R recommendations. The assignments are as follows: The

Removed buffer size increase. Only tells the filesize to Windows now. On 26.9.2014 14:08, Erik de Castro Lopo wrote: > Martijn van Beurden wrote: > >> Can you please wrap the setvbuf in _WIN32 IFDEFs too? Currently >> memory usage of FLAC decoding is about 1MB, so this patch is >> increasing memory usage tenfold, also for platforms that do not >> need this. It is a

I apologize for the terribly long message, but here goes. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- First, regarding existing tools that I now about. libavcodec and users (e.g. HandBrake): - if there are 6 channels or less, the layout is set by the decoder as per the FLAC specification - if there are more than 6 channels, the layout is

lvqcl wrote: > Martin Leese wrote: >> Why place restrictions on which speaker a >> user can use? ... >> Finally to answer your question, for a >> single-channel file, FLAC should accept any >> one of the three masks 0x00000001 (FL), >> 0x00000002 (FR), 0x00000004 (FC), plus any >> one of the 15 other single-bit masks, plus zero. Please note that the

Sorry for the delay; I have been waiting for SourceForge to come back on-line. lvqcl wrote: > 1) It seems that some programs (eac3to) write the value of > WAVEFORMATEXTENSIBLE_CHANNEL_MASK tag with uppercase 'x' (e.g. 0X3) > (see <http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=1728852#post1728852>) > > Also, from MediaInfo changelog

lvqcl wrote: ... > From FLAC 1.2.1 documentation: > > 0000-0111 : (number of independent channels)-1. Where defined, the channel > order follows SMPTE/ITU-R recommendations. The assignments are as follows: > 1 channel: mono > 2 channels: left, right > 3 channels: left, right, center > 4 channels: left, right, back left, back right > 5 channels: left, right, center,

Now that we've selected a channel mapping for 7 and 8 channel flac, the command-line encoder tools needs updating to accept wav files with compatible channel maps. -r -------------- next part --------------

Martijn van Beurden wrote: > Op 16-07-15 om 17:58 schreef lvqcl: >> But this text describes only those 4 bits in frame header. >> IMHO this sectoin should not describe WAVEFORMATEXTENSIBLE_CHANNEL_MASK, >> it should be described somewhere in vorbis comments section. > > I would propose: 0000-0111 : (number of independent channels)-1. > The channel order is defined

On 7/16/15, Martin Leese <martin.leese at stanfordalumni.org> wrote: > Martijn van Beurden wrote: >> I would propose: 0000-0111 : (number of independent channels)-1. >> The channel order is defined through the >> WAVEFORMATEXTENSIBLE_CHANNEL_MASK vorbis comment, if defined. If >> no WAVEFORMATEXTENSIBLE_CHANNEL_MASK is present, the channel >> order follows

Maybe I don't understand you correctly, but 0000 is mono, not undefined. It says: 0000-0111 : (number of independent channels)-1 I agree that the use of WAVEFORMATEXTENSIBLE_CHANNEL_MASK should be documented. I can probably take a look at it this week or so, if no one hasn't already? 2015-07-05 13:54 GMT+02:00 lvqcl <lvqcl.mail at gmail.com>: > An issue was raised at < >

An issue was raised at <http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=1728923#post1728923> - FLAC uses WAVEFORMATEXTENSIBLE_CHANNEL_MASK tag to describe non-standard layout, but it isn't mentioned anywhere in FLAC format. Channel assignment is described at <https://xiph.org/flac/format.html#frame_header>: "Where defined, the channel order follows SMPTE/ITU-R recommendations."

I know I've read about it under the FAQ and other various forums a dozen times, FLAC is able to encode up to 8 channels. But has anyone actually tried to do this? I ran across this nifty 7.1 wav sample courtesy of Microsoft. http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/howto/articles/Multichannel.aspx#link6 For some reason the channel mask was incorrectly set to 0x3f, so I manually changed

Tim's proposal seems reasonable but it conflicts with the FLAC documentation that says the channel ordering follows SMPTE/ITU-R recommendations. I think we may be butting up against an area where the standards aren't clear. ITU-R BS.2159-4 (http://www.itu.int/dms_pub/itu-r/opb/rep/R-REP-BS.2159-4-2012-PDF-E.pdf) doesn't define a 7.1 layout but simply diagrams several possibilities on