Return-Path: Message-ID: Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2008 18:58:26 -0700 From: "Brad Midgley" To: "BlueZ development" In-Reply-To: <50282bd30802211429h419f6342qb6ab4ac62cd20a69@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <50282bd30802211429h419f6342qb6ab4ac62cd20a69@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [Bluez-devel] SBC optimizations Reply-To: BlueZ development List-Id: BlueZ development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: bluez-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net Errors-To: bluez-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net Cidorvan How significant is the volume drop in 4 subbands? Should we just leave the decoder at 64 bit mults so we don't needlessly suffer quality issues on faster platforms? Brad On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 3:29 PM, Cidorvan Leite wrote: > Hi! > > I replaced the 64bits multiplies by 32bits and fixed the volume, now > the encode and decode are >10% faster. > Unfortunately, I couldn't keep the same volume for decode with 4 subbands... > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft > Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. > http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ > _______________________________________________ > Bluez-devel mailing list > Bluez-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bluez-devel > > -- Brad ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Bluez-devel mailing list Bluez-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bluez-devel