On Thu, 2018-12-13 at 15:09 +0100, Peter P. wrote:
> * Roman Haefeli <reduzent@gmail.com> [2018-12-13 13:52]:
> > On Thu, 2018-12-13 at 13:21 +0100, Peter P. wrote:
> > > * Roman Haefeli <reduzent@gmail.com> [2018-12-13 11:58]:
> > > > Hey all
> > > >
> > > > I once read about a simple and robust way to perform latency
> > > > measurements with an audio signal.
> > > >
> > > > Explained in a few words, the test signal consists of a
> > > > sweeping
> > > > sine
> > > > tone. The return signal ring-modulates the source signal and
> > > > the
> > > > resulting signal consists of two frequencies, the sum (
> > > > f_src+f_ret
> > > > )
> > > > and difference ( f_src - f_ret), while the lower frequency is
> > > > proportional to the latency and can be detected quite easily
> > > > with with
> > > > e.g. [sigmund~].
> > > >
> > > > I have troubles finding the name of this algorithm and don't
> > > > remember
> > > > the original source. I would like to read more about it and
> > > > correctly
> > > > attribute the original author / inventor.
> > >
> > > See jack_delay on
https://kokkinizita.linuxaudio.org/linuxaudio/
> >
> > That's a different algorithm and probably much more precise. The
> > one
> > I'm looking for is simpler (and I'd probably know how to implement
> > it
> > in Pd).
>
> What about 7.stuff/tools/latency.pd?
Cool, the collection of algorithms is growing :-)
This is again a different approach. The test signal is a pulse and the
patch measures time between sending and receiving the click. The cool
thing is it's done in a way that doesn't need any "magic" objects like
[sigmund].
However, it's still not the one I was describing earlier.
Roman
_______________________________________________
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list