Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="tourettes" data-source="post: 651397" data-attributes="member: 10858">&quot;Need&quot; is a wrong word, it mustn't be done since other wise audio renderer will reject the audio stream as it is encoded.Yes, the resampler is planned to be done (almost the next new feature I would say). This is definitely required since not all people are using ffdshow as audio decoder and almost all other audio codecs lack such support for resampling (and lot of audio HW is incapable of playing various sample rates or bit depths). Similar resampling is normaly done by the MS default DirectSound audio renderer.MP audio renderer cannot be tied to some specific audio codec.I have no clue (updated the post to contain that <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" />) - but in any case it is off topic for this thread.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="tourettes, post: 651397, member: 10858"] "Need" is a wrong word, it mustn't be done since other wise audio renderer will reject the audio stream as it is encoded. Yes, the resampler is planned to be done (almost the next new feature I would say). This is definitely required since not all people are using ffdshow as audio decoder and almost all other audio codecs lack such support for resampling (and lot of audio HW is incapable of playing various sample rates or bit depths). Similar resampling is normaly done by the MS default DirectSound audio renderer. MP audio renderer cannot be tied to some specific audio codec. I have no clue (updated the post to contain that :)) - but in any case it is off topic for this thread. [/QUOTE]

Verification