SV: RE: RE: re: [sdiy] Freescale Soundbuite

[karl dalen]

--- Barry Klein <Barry.L.Klein at wdc.com> skrev:
> If I knew how to program the damn stuff I frankly wouldn't care if I had 
> to pay for the software tools - if I could afford them.

Well **they** (imo not I) tells *ME* C language are very simple?!
I have only done assembler previously but now i try to learn C,
so far i have actually done some code that works and C seams doable
so if i can do it you can more then well do it! :-)

Personally i still hate C, actually i hate any dev tools suite from any vendor
(just name one and i will automatically start to hate them, hehe)they are all
a drag, particularly GNU tools under linux which you have to configure your
self to get them working! :-)
And if you cant configure them right your considered a dork! 
Well OK then, i confess gladly, im a dork.

>I just don't want
>to go layout a surface mount multilayer board and pay some board house to 
>make me a few.  If I could program these I would rather buy boards when I
>needed and make my modules to my heart's content.  Both the Freescale and
>Tonecore use the same chip. Why not make your hardware platform work with
>both?

Did you read what various people had to say in the stomp box forum link?
The fine print are that if its going to be publically accepted no one
wants to depend on HW that's linked to a company as it is their IP.
However FS and Line6 uses different DSP but from the same family so stuff
written on L6 are most likely going to work on the FS but not the other way
around. 

But i do agree to your major point, none wants to deal with multilayer PCB's.
Its a drag both to design and to pay for!

The *major* problem are that *you* have to use multiple instances to get a
product you can use, one vendor for making the PCB, another for populating
the PCB with components, several vendors to buy the components from (well to
be fair, many populator vendors can buy the components for you, still volume
counts before they even lift a finger to assist you).

> >>  I think coming out with another 4 waveform VCO module is boring, but it
> still keeps happening... 

That's a strong point you have there.
What i meant was that the line between a full blown Walldorf Blofeld for 299eu
and a modular 32Wave, Trough zero, DSP based for 399eu are mighty thin.
Why would i pay for the 399 module? Where are the incentive, stimulus?

> My impression of modulars is that it is an
> approach to designing your own custom sound design or "noise" generation
> system unique to your needs. I could care less if every module had one chip
> on a board with a bunch of pots, jacks, and switches.  LCD display even
> better.  But has to have LEDs, right?  :-)

OK, Led's then! :-)
Anyhow its an interesting issue you brought up, i personally wouldent be
suppriced if we would see in a years time a vendor that do all modular stuff
entirely with a DSP.Paul S have said he's going to walk that way, i wouldent
be surpriced if Tom and Bruce already have decided so, Plan B allready does
MCU in their stuff. Doepfer seams a bit lazy!? .-) AS already has DSP modules.

> >>  There are enough interested people with this capability in the world to
> create a competitively-priced board.  The DSP chip is way less than what
> you'd pay for a Curtis or SSM filter or VCO chip...

Thats not a fair comparing!
It's like compare a rowing boat and a oil tanker.

>Also, I just got a
>postcard from a firm that will make your board at normal board cost, get
>your parts from Digikey at cost, and make them for a supposedly reasonable
>fee. The whole thing about getting boards made is - how soon do you need
>them?

Ha! Suppoosedly! 
Well you still need fair amount of volume if you are going to sell them at
profit, even to make some for your self. They are going to charge you
ridiculous setup costs for units made and even 10-20 units made and that
even at long delivery times. I believe it when you can show actual figures.
 
My experience so far with this outsourcing kind of bussiness are that
it sounds fine untill you actually start to disscuss the end cost of
the whole outsourced manufacturing. For instance we could refer to such
a simple thing as front panels and what Grant once said about this
manufacturing of front panels. 

However there are great business opportunity for a sway person,to combine
PCB manufacturing with populating boards, sourcing components, front plate
manufacturing and screenprint (whatever) into one operation as a product
offered at low cost for lets say min 100 modules a order.

To make this happening under current tax system forget US,EU its going to 
be in ASIA, former est block countries or elsewhere, etc.

> I agree, for many of us the thrill was making a
> unique circuit on a breadboard and then layout a pcb etc.  But we have to
> face it that the newer technology provides the capability to make something
> much more powerful for the same cash outlay (and the "fun" will now be using
> it).

You know actually i do agree to your points but this is not a very new tech,
DSP's on single silicon has has been around since early 80ies its the tools
that has become into everyones hands lately.Jusst look at the price for TI's
tools, thats a major point why TIs DSPs arent used much in music app's, also
TI's agenda has always been to target Telecom market with their DSP's so
therefore there is no point to make low cost tools for other markets.
(even that we do know for sure that TI had a picture of a synth in their
marketing poster for their TMS320C25 once upon a time!) 

Shame on them! ;-) 

>> Really 2 layer?
Yes. What they say in their ad!

>Wow, I think that could cause a few problems, but whatever.
You meant EMC and RFI issues?

>Anyway, I still thinking panel mount for a modular approach - not
> a desktop standalone.  That's fine and you are right that such a board would
> be good for that.  I am in the process of getting a Spartan 3E FPGA just for
> that purpose (I don't have the programming skills). That one can be had for 
> $100-150.  $100 if you go to one of their seminars.

Scott and others have been tapping away on FPGAS lately, FPGA accessibility has
also been a issue of the availability of the tools. Anyway a complete modular
FPGA based synth have been done:
http://matrixsynth.blogspot.com/2007/06/airburne-modular-synthesizer-avs-04b.html
 
> Hmm, its going to be a software synth behind a aluminium face plate.
> 
> >> I'm perfectly fine with that!  Just make it cheap and small so I can fit 
> them all in a reasonable space.  Having multiple huge keyboard synths is not
> practical for me, having a bunch of softsynths that won't work on Vista or
> whatever follows it won't work for me, but a bunch of softsynths in panels
> sounds the best option.  But really, if it is a "modular" the functions will
> be more fundamental than a full blown softsynth in a small panel. 

So what you are actually looking for are the *modular* way of working
and not what's behind the panel or the panel size or what *label* the
panel get as a product? ..........................A hair dryer! :-)

(irony mode on)
Well, i dont mind that, i just prefear a tiny module with everything in it,
and not based on PC, functionality of KYMA and MAX/PD and G2 but in the style
of Bloofeld in a tiny box with some knobs for 299 euro which i *don't* have
to program my self to get it! :-) Oh! and battery driven with a solar cell,
like in those Chinese calculators that one can buy 50cent!(irony mode off)

This kind of synth has been possible to make for at least the past 8-10
years however anyone who does it will kill the market or a bunch of markets
so they wont.

Just look at Walldorf, they single handed has killed not only the aftermarket
of the Bloofeld it self but every single synth they have made previously.
The second hand value of a Q or XT are about to crash land.
Status vacuum cleaner again i suppose! :-)

Soon you could buy 10 pack of second hand bloofelds for 19,99Eu/sd,
and mount them in a modular box, knobs LCD and all, very boring.

It would be interessting to know how much they had to pay for getting 
that unit at profit, im sure its made in China, even Moog get their
stuff made in China.

>>I see that problem with Modular synths as they are.  You have sound
> generation and control stuff with huge signals but then filters, delays, and
> other effects that must work with much lower level signals.The more this
> can be done digitally the more capabilities you can have in signal routing.
> Not just digital stuff sounds crappy overdriven.

Hmm, i dont see signal levels as a major problem, they can all be equalized
into the same range more or less, But off course, as you say dynamics are
vast in digital domain.

End of my rant, thank you. ;-)

Reg
KD


      __________________________________________________________
Låna pengar utan säkerhet. Jämför vilkor online hos Yahoo!
http://shopping.yahoo.se/c-100390123-lan-utan-sakerhet.html?partnerId=96915014