3 ms·

Is it hard to make the soundfont as wave tables instead? Samples are so large!

• Birch-san 8y ago
  At the very least, it would be good to release an sf3 version; sf3 uses ogg compression (as opposed to mp3). This can be 10x smaller for comparable quality. Though I found that (fluidsynth, at least) is very slow at loading sf3. Takes a few seconds.
  • voltagex_ 8y ago
    I wonder how hard it would be to write a non-compliant SoundFont that uses Opus - Ogg Vorbis is very old at this point and not as good as newer codecs. Edit: that was a fun rabbit hole SF2.04, owned by Creative. http://freepats.zenvoid.org/sf2/sfspec24.pdf http://freepats.zenvoid.org/sf2/sfspec24.pdf SF3 is "just" Ogg compressed SF2, but there's no spec and it seems like it's only implemented in http://www.fluidsynth.org/ http://www.fluidsynth.org/ Edit edit: in the SF2.04 spec - "hydra - A. A nine-headed mythical beast. B. The nine “pdta” sub-chunks which make up the SoundFont articulation data."
• beetwenty 8y ago
  The SF2 spec implicitly expects the sample data to be one very large sample buffer, which are subsequently resampled and looped on each new note. So it's possible to reuse the same set of single-cycle waveforms in various combinations and have a very small file(and I've seen a few floating around that are like this) - but a lot of playback routines do not implement this use-case correctly.