Re: Double precision
Ove Karlsen <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.audio.mp3.lame |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On 6/21/2013 3:36 PM, Ove Karlsen wrote: > On 6/21/2013 3:22 PM, Thomas Orgis wrote: >> Am Thu, 20 Jun 2013 18:31:58 +0200 >> schrieb Ove Karlsen <[email protected]>: >> >>> Does anyone know if increasing internal resolution in lame encoder >>> would >>> be trivial? I thought in 2013, it might be nice to increase that to >>> double. >> Well, in 2013 you'd rather port the single precision code to run on >> GPUs;-) > If you can massively parallelize it, then GPU might benefit. >> >> But really, is there any hint that double precision would help anything >> with MP3 quality? Even for studio productions, I only see 32 bit >> float PCM >> as top-notch format. > It was.. in 2000. >> Would using double precision for intermediate >> calculations really make any difference on a resulting bitstream? I'm >> not even talking about audible differences. > It sounds a bit more natural to me. If one only was doing bitcopies > ofcourse nothing would change, but usually one does some processing in > there, that benefits from precision. >> >> >> Alrighty then, >> >> Thomas > Peace Be With You! Also I looked barely at the code. It says "sample_t" is internal resolution, however I guess other parts of processing needs double aswell? Peace Be With You. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows: Build for Windows Store. http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev