Feature Suggestions

[afland]

Although it seems like development has stopped / paused at least for now, here are some features, many of them found in clownfish, that I think would be useful to make lyrebird even more complete:

1. Sound player - so you could choose a local sound file to play through the virtual mic, and, preferably, lyrebird should be able to remember which files were added and store them in an accessible list.

2. System sound player - one use case for having system sound play through virtual mic that I recently ran into was watching a movie together with some friends. Things like discord and zoom only do 30 fps free screen sharing, but I could use obs to play a movie through a virtual camera; however, audio would be missing. I realize I could use pulse to change the sound input to system sound instead of my mic, but then I couldn't talk with anyone while watching. So I think it would be great if there could be a toggle to add system sound to mic output while the physical mic still works.

3. A music player like the one in clownfish

Again, I would love to see these features implemented at some point, but lyrebird is already a great project, and I'll definitely use it over any other voice changers. :)

[ghost]

We totally wanna add all three. I promise at some point these will come! We even have a Pulseaudio script for number 2, just need to add it to the code!

[ghost]

New one:

4. Select the effects input device from Lyrebird as per Using external mic as input device for lyrebird virtual input #49.

[ghost]

5. Loopback

[ghost]

6. Gain control, frequency options and reverb

[ghost]

7. Key binds as per [Question] How can I make a shortcut to activate a voice? #56

[joaoDragado]

From the issues list, i am one of many that either has installation issues or cant install/gave up on lyrebird due to some python incompatibility ; this is generally quite common. most linux machines have several versions installed ; i myself use the 3.7.10 via an anaconda env install, which the deb installer does not recognize. i assume most would rather not mess with any of the working python symlinks on their machine for a non-critical package.

My question/suggestion is : how dificult is it to bundle the package into a self-contained .Appimage file? I know there are some package specifically for that purpose (py to appImage) but havent used them so no idea on the work involved

Not a feature per se, although one could say that getting to install and try it is the most important feature of any package.
Thanks for all your efforts

[ghost]

@joaoDragado I haven't looked into app images in detail but an idea worth exploring. I'll look into this more sometime, I appreciate the suggestion :)