Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2008 17:04:08 +0100 From: Stefan Ehmann <shoesoft@gmx.net> To: freebsd-multimedia@freebsd.org Cc: "Julian H. Stacey" <jhs@berklix.org> Subject: Re: forcing more sound buffering Message-ID: <200801181704.08998.shoesoft@gmx.net> In-Reply-To: <200801181423.m0IENFAL087176@fire.js.berklix.net> References: <Pine.BSF.3.96.1080117135549.237B-100000@gaia.nimnet.asn.au> <200801181423.m0IENFAL087176@fire.js.berklix.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Friday 18 January 2008 15:23:15 Julian H. Stacey wrote: > > I expect so. > > > > =A0> =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0& how it relates to max delay exp= ected from disc feeding > > =A0> =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0audio data. =A0ie (I'm guessing, = it's late & I haven't > > =A0> =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0read source yet) if file reports = eg > > =A0> =A0 audio_01.mp3: MPEG ADTS, layer III, v1, 128 kBits, 44.1 kHz, > > JntStereo > =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0Does 64K give me just a ha= lf second of buffer ? > > =A0> =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0(not enough here !) > > > > Assuming 128kbps that's 16Kbytes/sec, so 64K should give you ~4 seconds. > > Ah yes, thanks had forgotten thats 128K Bit not Bytes/sec. Doesn't this refer to the decoded data, which is ~176KB/s?
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200801181704.08998.shoesoft>