-
Problem: Expected behaviour: Additional Information: In the case this feature is stablished like this on purpose, I suggest renaming the "Dry" variable inside the ma_delay_node because it can lead to confusions about the usual behaviour of those components in audio engeneering. For example, "delayVolume" descrives better what "dry" value does inside ma_delay_node. Apart, I would suggest adding the feature of "Dry" as well, in case someone just wants the "Wet" signal alone (which is my case). If anything of the commented above is wrong in terms of miniaudio.h code, feel free to correct me. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Replies: 2 comments 1 reply
-
Thanks. You're absolutely right about this. I just messed that up. Looking at it, I think the wet/dry properties were untested the whole time. Certainly the intent was exactly as you described - to have "knobs" to control how much of the dry and wet signal is heard, with each being independent of each other. I've updated the logic to look like this, which looks correct to me (and sounds correct to my ear as well). It's in the dev branch. /* Feedback */
buffer[iBuffer] = input[iInput] + (buffer[iBuffer] * decay);
/* Apply wet and dry factors and output. */
output[iOutput] = (buffer[iBuffer] * wet) + (input[iInput] * dry); Are you able to give the dev branch a try? I haven't checked other effects just yet, but will need to have a look at those as well at some point. (Also FYI, in miniaudio all effect stuff is cross platform. The only platform-specific code is the low-level device IO stuff.) Thanks for reporting this one. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Okey, I tested the dev branch:
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Thanks. You're absolutely right about this. I just messed that up. Looking at it, I think the wet/dry properties were untested the whole time. Certainly the intent was exactly as you described - to have "knobs" to control how much of the dry and wet signal is heard, with each being independent of each other.
I've updated the logic to look like this, which looks correct to me (and sounds correct to my ear as well). It's in the dev branch.
Are you able to give the dev branch a try? I haven't checked other …