Inertiaman
Active Member
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2023
- Messages
- 270
- Likes
- 625
Your observation -- going to 6 or 7 bands is "easier" than going to 8 or 10 bands, so therefore could have been accomplished sooner -- is largely correct from a simplistic perspective. But from a practical, total efficiency-of-workplan perspective it could be considered a resource-consuming intermediate objective. I would expect Wiim tries to minimize perturbations to the realtime data pipeline, since its mission critical. Substantial testing and verification would take place before rolling out any changes in that area. Doing that on an interim 6 band release would arguably further delay the 8 or 10 band scenario.
The original rollout of the current 4 band PEQ probably didn't push the envelope on system CPU/memory resources; I'd guess they were more focused on stability, fidelity, few/no bugs, etc, so the implementation may have been more brute-force than highly optimized. Now they are working on performance optimization, which is non-trivial work on an ARM SoC running DSP-ish instruction set extensions, HW accelerations, etc.
I can't fault Wiim for narrowing this to a one-and-done effort to get the most PEQ their HW resources can possibly support. I can, however, fault them for grossly misjudging the timeline to achieve the objective. Things are one year or more delayed from the original "announcement" of improved PEQ. Not a good look. But hey, all of use will gladly take a 2 year late 10 band PEQ over no expansion of PEQ at all. So we wait, some more patiently than others.
