Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

LFE channel should always be counted for AC-4 object-based content on MPEG-4 layer #1943

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Dec 3, 2024

Conversation

ybai001
Copy link
Contributor

@ybai001 ybai001 commented Dec 3, 2024

A limitation has been identified in Annex E of the AC-4 specification (ETSI TS 103 190-2 V1.2.1, February 2018).

The specification defines the parameter n_umx_objects_minus1 in Annex E (E.11.11) to indicate the number of FULLBAND objects. However, it does not provide a mechanism to determine the presence of an LFE (Low-Frequency Effects) channel.

At the elementary stream level, the presence of an LFE channel can be determined from the "b_lfe" property defined in section 6.3.2.8.1. Unfortunately, this property is not exposed at the MPEG-4 layer. Following internal discussions, it has been decided that the LFE channel should always be included in the total channel count. This decision aligns with current implementation practices, which consistently include the LFE channel when creating an A-JOC (Advanced Joint Object Coding) substream.

@ybai001 ybai001 changed the title LFE channel should always be counted for AC-4 A-JOC content on MPEG-4 layer LFE channel should always be counted for AC-4 object-based content on MPEG-4 layer Dec 3, 2024
@rohitjoins rohitjoins self-assigned this Dec 3, 2024
@copybara-service copybara-service bot merged commit e499377 into androidx:main Dec 3, 2024
1 check passed
@ybai001 ybai001 deleted the dlb/ac4-ajoc/dev branch December 5, 2024 02:21
shahdDaghash pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 18, 2024
PiperOrigin-RevId: 702281314
(cherry picked from commit e499377)
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants