ffdshow tryout libsamplerate update

[XhmikosR]

Current libsamplerate version 0.1.2 is from 2002. The developer has fixed some bugs and improved quality and performance a lot, as the changelog mentions.

# Version 0.0.12 (Nov 28 2002) First public release.
# Version 0.0.13 (Dec 03 2002) Fixes for MacOSX and Solaris.
# Version 0.0.14 (Jan 13 2003) Now compiles on Win32. Major code speedup. Minor bug fixes.
# Version 0.0.15 (May 02 2003) Minor bug fixes.
# Version 0.1.0 (Mar 14 2004) Add callback API, functions for short to float and float to short conversion. Minor bug fixes.
# Version 0.1.1 (Jul 17 2004) Callback API bug fix. Bugfix for aggressive gcc-3.4 optimisations.
# Version 0.1.2 (Sep 12 2004) Callback API reset bug fix.
# Version 0.1.3 (Mar 23 2008) Huge quality improvements to two best SINC based converters.
# Version 0.1.4 (Jul 02 2008) Fix segfault when using extremely low conversion ratios.
# Version 0.1.5 (Jan 11 2009) Optimisation resulting in dramatic throughput improvements ( See here (http://www.mega-nerd.com/erikd/Blog/CodeHacking/SecretRabbitCode/rel_0_1_5.html).).
# Version 0.1.6 (Jan 27 2009) Minor bug fix in test suite (account for rounding error on x86_64).
# Version 0.1.7 (Feb 14 2009) Fix a segfault bug. Fix compilation under MSVC.
The only (obvious) downside from updating libsamplerate to the latest version 0.1.7, is the increase in size. 800KB plus in the installer.
You can find binaries here (link removed). Please vote and share your opinion so that we know what most people prefer.

EDIT: Committed in rev3421.

[nevcairiel]

File size is actually an argument? Why? How?

Update, of course!

[buzzqw]

800MB could mean something.. 800kb is nothing :)

update!

BHH

[Midzuki]

Update, of course.

Otherwise, create and distribute a command-line "rabbit.exe". :D

[STaRGaZeR]

Go for it, quality first :)

[DigitalDeviant]

800kb is a small price to pay, but only if it's stable.

[clsid]

The bugfixes are not really an argument since they are probably related to the major changes done in 0.1.3.

As for the quality, did anyone actually do any listening tests? A blind test would be nice. Too WAV files created using the new and old libsamplerate, without a label that says which one is which.

[XhmikosR]

Personally, I think that even if the quality is at least the same, the performance improvements are worth alone. So, anyone who wants to create some samples for testing, should go ahead, and let the audiophiles have fun. :)
It's easier for me to notice differences in quality visually, so I cannot help you with that.

[STaRGaZeR]

Bring up the WAVs ;)

[Superb]

800kb is a joke. Update.

[clsid]

As an installed file it indeed doesn't matter what size it is. But a 25% increase in installer size does matter (for some). Certainly for a minor feature like this. It means a few terabyte of extra traffic per month for those who distribute ffdshow.

If it really turns out to be so much better, than we will have to live with it. But I still haven't seen any tests, just people who blindly stare at a changelog.

[Superb]

Are you kidding me? Nobody forces no one to host the ffdshow installer. The official project page is at SF.net, and trust me- they don't care about 800kb.
Do you expect tests and comparisons for a 800kb change? Isn't the developer's word (changelog) enough?

[fastplayer]

A couple of points:
Where are the bug reports/complaints/feature requests for the current resampler? I haven't seen any lately. Looks to me like everything's fine. Or not?
Who is willing to test it thoroughly? Any takers?
Who is willing to fix bugs that might rear its ugly head? We're not exactly "flooded" with devs right now...

Until someone who actually uses the resampler can test and verify that the changes have no side effects whatsoever (apart from bloating the installer), I'm against updating it.

[clsid]

SF is only a small distributor. Most users get it elsewhere.

The developer is likely an audiophile. That gives him a different view on quality differences compared to normal users. That is why I would like to see some tests. Not just because of the 800kb, but to know if there is really any noticeable quality difference or not.

Who here actually uses libsamplerate and for what reason?

[STaRGaZeR]

SF is only a small distributor. Most users get it elsewhere.

Where?

We are in 2010. 800KB more in the installer is a joke. I can't guarantee there will be no bugs, but I've tested the new libsamplerate and I didn't find any.

Who here actually uses libsamplerate and for what reason?

Me, for resampling anything lower than 44100Hz or higher than 48000Hz, my WASAPI device doesn't support those sampling rates.

[tetsuo55]

I use the resampler for the same wasapi reasons

[Astrophizz]

Terabytes of extra traffic per month from 800kb? Does ffdshow get downloaded millions of times per month from individual distributors?

[clsid]

Does ffdshow get downloaded millions of times per month from individual distributors?I estimate about 3 million times in total. Of which 200k from SF.net.

[leeperry]

0.15 is a drastic improvement indeed, the 0.17 ffdshow binary has been available for a while: http://forum.doom9.org/showpost.php?p=1252766&postcount=25

[Mr VacBob]

Does libsamplerate work better than libavcodec/resample2.c in ffmpeg?