Re: which is better / more effective
Måns Rullgård <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.audio.sox |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Glenn English <[email protected]> writes: > I'm getting ready to ask sox to do several things: EQ, compression, > normalization, speed change, etc. I see on the web, suggestions of > several different ways to do this: make one call to sox with several > switches, make several calls to sox with one switch, or pipe those > several calls together. > > Which of these works best? Does it matter? Does sox just figure all > this out and fork several times if it needs to? (multi-core CPU and > lots of RAM on Debian Linux, and the file is ~1G FLAC, if any of that > makes any difference) Sox has very limited support for multi-processing built-in, and it doesn't work very well. For a long effects chain, you'll get better throughput by piping multiple processes. If you have a single command like this: sox in.flac out.flac effect1 effect2 effect3 it can be split up like this: sox in.flac -p effect1 | sox -p -p effect2 | sox -p out.flac effect3 The end result should be exactly the same. It probably doesn't make sense to put light-weight effects in a separate command as the extra inter-process copying could easily negate any gains. -- Måns Rullgård ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot