On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 8:54 PM, Pavel Koshevoy wrote:
> On 06/04/2018 08:35 PM, Ronak Patel wrote:
>>
>> Thanks. Is it okay if I push a patch for this? How high of a limit does
>> the algorithm support today?
>>
>
> I don't think there is an upper limit... Post a patch here for review. See
> htt
On 06/04/2018 08:35 PM, Ronak Patel wrote:
Thanks. Is it okay if I push a patch for this? How high of a limit does the
algorithm support today?
I don't think there is an upper limit... Post a patch here for review. See
http://www.ffmpeg.org/developer.html#Submitting-patches-1
Pavel.
___
We did consider rubberband, but the audio quality is too poor. The audio has
echo artifacts in it that makes it sound robotic.
Sent from my iPhone
> On Jun 4, 2018, at 8:32 PM, Lou Logan wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Jun 4, 2018, at 10:09 AM, Ronak wrote:
>>
>> We are looking to use the atempo filter f
Thanks. Is it okay if I push a patch for this? How high of a limit does the
algorithm support today?
Sent from my iPhone
> On Jun 4, 2018, at 8:00 PM, Pavel Koshevoy wrote:
>
>> On 06/04/2018 12:09 PM, Ronak wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> How are you all?
>>
>> We are looking to use the atempo filte
On Mon, Jun 4, 2018, at 10:09 AM, Ronak wrote:
>
> We are looking to use the atempo filter for our audio files. However,
> the limit between 0.5 - 2x is too restrictive for us. We would like to
> expand the limit to 0.5x - 3x.
Consider using the rubberband filter instead if atempo is too simple
On 06/04/2018 12:09 PM, Ronak wrote:
Hello,
How are you all?
We are looking to use the atempo filter for our audio files. However, the limit
between 0.5 - 2x is too restrictive for us. We would like to expand the limit
to 0.5x - 3x.
I tried changing the range in atempo.c and the rest of the
