[sdiy] Audio Weaver for ST Discovery boards -Free!

[Scott Gravenhorst]

Hmm.  Well, since I am going to soon receive the F7 Discovery board
soon, I will probably wind up determining if that is simply sufficient
for my goals - those are mainly to support a polysynth with high
quality sound with special effects (reverb, chorus, etc) and minimum of
16 voices of polyphony with what most would consider a robust feature
set.  The TMS320 boards at Digikey I saw were all in the $400 range,
but maybe I have no foo in my google :p ...
>
>
>On May 11, 2017, at 9:11 AM, Scott Gravenhorst wrote:
>> I agree about the selection of CODEC and attention to audio 
>details, but at least any CODEC will > allow "practice" coding 
>I2S so that when you make your own board you have those chops, 
>even if it's > a different CODEC. > > "Richie Burnett" wrote: >> 
>The inclusion of built-in CODECs on dev boards is a bit of a 
>mixed bag. >> It's useful for getting things up and running 
>quickly if there is some type >> of CODEC built in. However, many 
>of the DSP boards I've used either have >> crappy low-resolution 
>CODECs and/or pay little attention to proper >> analogue/digital 
>segregation and ground-plane practices, so you get >> relatively 
>poor audio quality and quite a lot of digital noise present at >> 
>the analogue outputs. At least if you have to make your own CODEC 
>"shield" >> you can make sure that you choose a decent CODEC and 
>lay out the board >> properly to realise its potential 
>performance. >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Scott 
>Gravenhorst >> Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2017 2:46 PM >> >> Ah, 
>thanks for that. One thing that pisses me off a bit is that it's 
>still >> too uncommon for dev >> boards (like this one) to have 
>an on board audio codec. Thankfully, the >> Discovery board does. 
>I >> would think in these days where every product out there has 
>a screen and >> sound that it would be >> imperative to put at 
>least an audio codec on the board. The advantage for >> me is 
>that when >> developing driver code for a codec, it's comforting 
>to know that the codec >> being placed there by >> the mfr would 
>seem to indicate that it _should_ work and that if there's a >> 
>problem - it's your code. >> >> I may purchase the SAM E70 board 
>after looking at the datasheet, but I can >> see I'll have to >> 
>jerry-rig a codec to some pins on the board - which will be SMD 
>and having >> myopia plus presbyopia, >> that's a problem. 
>Perhaps there's a plug in board... (not with my luck) >> I've not 
>yet had luck >> coding I2S, but I can sharpen my chops on the 
>Discovery board. At least the >> E70 board isn't >> expensive at 
>about $30usa. I'll need to determine what the difference is >> 
>between S70 and E70. The >> S70 chip is the one used for the 
>Tsunami Super WAV Trigger board. >> >> On 2017-05-11 12:30, Scott 
>Gravenhorst wrote: >>> Well, to be honest, I started looking at 
>Microchip's (Atmel) >>> ATSAMS70N20 which includes >>> almost 
>identical internal features. It has a bit more internal RAM, >>> 
>but the datasheet >>> says it runs up to 300 MHz. The ARM on the 
>32F746GDISCOVERY board >>> runs up to 216 MHz. >>> However, I've 
>not been able to find a dev board for the ATSAMS70N20. >>> >>> So 
>I have to say that this Discovery board is my second choice and 
>>>> will be a super-major >>> step up from a dsPIC. As for 
>performance, I'll just have to see how >>> much synth I can >>> 
>cram into it. One interesting thing about both of the ARM ICs is 
>that >>> they have a 2 >>> channel 12 bit DAC that runs up to 1 
>MHz sample rate which might be >>> fun with naive >>> waveforms 
>since the Nyquist limit is 500 kHz. I've worked with a 12 >>> bit 
>DAC at that >>> sample rate using an FPGA and I noticed no alias 
>problems with naive >>> waveforms. >>> However, such a high 
>sample rate will limit voice and feature count. >>> >>> Anyway, 
>I'll post about it once I've got a good feel for what it can >>> 
>do. All I have >>> right now is a bunch of PDF files. >>> >>> 
>Michael Zacherl wrote: >>>> >>>> On 11.May 2017, at 3:44 , Scott 
>Gravenhorst wrote: >>>>> I got some birthday money and bought 
>this: 32F746GDISCOVERY >>>>> = >>>> >>>>> It looks pretty nice. I 
>will try Audio Weaver when the board comes >>>>> here. >>>> >>>> 
>at this price ($49 really?) it looks like a steal! >>>> How 
>you=92d rank the cpu performance-wise? >>>> Additional I/O via 
>SPI? (still thinking dc-coupled audio rate A/D D/A) 
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Synth-diy mailing list
>Synth-diy at synth-diy.org
>http://synth-diy.org/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>

-- ScottG
________________________________________________________________________
-- Scott Gravenhorst
-- http://scott.joviansynth.com/
-- When the going gets tough, the tough use the command line.
-- Matt 21:22