ComputerVoltageSources

Greetings group!

I'm glad to see this kicked off. I was watching with
interest the discussion in synth-diy a few weeks back
and wanted to pursue this area further.

One thing that caught my eye in the earlier discussion
was the idea of using a fast CPU as not only a CV
source, but also for VCOs, VCFs, VCAs, and general
signal processing. The BasicATOM Pro isn't quit fast
enough to do a lot of this, but several other
processors were mentioned that would support this.

I followed up on the Analog Devices ADuC702x family
which looks very promising for this. It's a 40MHz ARM7
with 12-bit ADC (muxed) and 4 dedicated 12-bit DACs
on-chip. Some members of the family are inexpensive
(~$6) and available in packages that are relatively
DIY-friendly.

I'm presently doing top level design on a 4chl
input/4chl output module based on the ADuC7020. This
member of the family has somewhat limited digital I/O,
but with an SPI-based port extender such as the Maxim
MAX6957 it would be possible to support buttons, LEDs
and an LCD display.

ADI sells a $30 development system for this part which
includes the ADuC7020 on a 40-pin DIP carrier, along
with a download cable and two different C-based IDEs.
I've ordered one of these and plan to slap something
together.

Back-of-the-envelope estimates indicate that it should
be possible to get ~60kHz sample rates on 4
simultaneous channels, including a bit of oversampling
& filtering on the ADC inputs to eliminate noise and
improve SNR.

The big downside is that the development environment
is not BASIC but C. I'm comfortable in C, but I agree
with Grant's earlier observation that BASIC is a great
enabler, allowing a broad range of users to quickly
come up to speed and contribute. There is the
possibility of porting a freely-available BASIC
interpreter such as Brandy-BASIC to the ARM7 though,
and this is on my road map.

I'd be interested in any comments & criticism from the
group.

Eric


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

Goodness!
this got interesting fast!!!!!
Monday ain't over yet and there're already 62 members!

--- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, Eric Brombaugh
<ebrombaugh@...> wrote:

> One thing that caught my eye in the earlier discussion
> was the idea of using a fast CPU as not only a CV
> source, but also for VCOs, VCFs, VCAs, and general
> signal processing.

This is a very signicant issue
and i encourage all the members to weigh in on it because the group
will be most useful if consesus on a 'topic' (or topicS) is achieved.
Such consesus is a real courtesy to the moderators. It really makes
their job easier because we police ourselves and it helps reduce OT
squabbles. Good fences make good neighbors.

This issue is also gonna be a slippery trout to get in the creel
because the category of gadget (CVS) around which this group is
centered is a "liminal entity" (i got that from the "Analog Days"
book.... what a deliciously weird term! -liminal entity-).
To save you all a link to dictionary.com, a liminal entity is a
something that lives on a threshold between two realms....
like a flying fish, an amphibious car, and that frequency range from
0.5 to 20 hz where a pulse train turns from clicks to a tone.

a CVS is simply a programmable function geverator. Aaron Lanterman has
pointed out that NI makes commercial 'data acquistion' gadgets with a
couple of outputs for which there are numerous PC& MAC support
packages and development environments. Eric Brombaugh posits that if
we're going to be wiggling voltages around with code , why not wiggle
them real fast and make audio with 'em too? DIY digital audio!
it's simply a matter of scale....

[This is a bit funny, because when i teach clases in electronic music,
i stand on my poor pupils desks and exhort them to throw away their
preconceptions about what a module does. A VCF is a (damped)
oscillator, and LFO is just a cap-value from a VCO ...etc.
i pout and tantrum until the poor browbeaten sprouts color outside the
lines...]

but in this case

my vote is that we draw some lines and try to stay in 'em.
Good fences make good neighbors.

i'll proffer my postion this way:

The attributes of the topic that i (and i speak only for MYSELF)
intend to expose and exploit in this group are:

-DIY
or DIY-ish , kits, mods but not limited exclusively to one device

-programmable
at some point in its production

-CV o r i e n t e d
i'm not above driving an LFO into low audio but... i'm not sure that
i'm prepared to discuss tweaking the tuning and scaling to 1/40th of a
cent

That's where my chalk lines are.... how 'bout y'all???

If the moderators choose they could segregate this group structure
into sub-topics (fast-wiggling/slow wiggling) or just hose down the
corral and turn the varmints loose!

But let's cut 'em a break folks....
post a comment or two on what YOUR particular flavor of the fetish is
so they can get a few pins in this map.

and on that note....
Thank you Eric for weighing in right off the bat and getting this
issue on the table from the get-go

carpe themam!
-doc

uh... yeah, what he said...

first, welcome to all, make yourselves at home. glad to be yr 'umble
servant here, and thrilled to have an opportunity to support the
community in some way.

um... liminal... i read a great levi strauss essay on that...
something about lentils and lintels and beans and doorways... i'm a
big fan of beans. i probably still have the book up in the attic...

speaking of which, yes: multiplicity & focus. first order of bidness
here was to address some concerns about code written for the PSIM...
GPL licenses, open source, blah blah blah. the files section is set
up for you to post your own code to... feel free to share your
creation, and please respect the individual author's wishes (whatever
they may be) if you use or modify their code. discussion of
programs "in process" is on-topic, for sure.

next on the agenda, a home for the development and programming of a
diy "next generation" module along the lines of the PSIM... immediate
goal is an open-source hardware design (schematic, layout, gerbers,
panels). there's already been some discussion on SDIY, and a
tentative consensus (i think) to stay in the CV rather than Audio
range and aim for some backward-compatibility with existing PSIM
code. that will continue to unfold in the next few weeks, i'm
thinkin'...

and then. more is better. audio modules, single-purpose modules,
modules with basil/peanut pesto... yum. the possibilities are indeed
endless. from my perspective, i think there's value in a series of
projects which actually get completed... as compared to endless
iterations of plans, each one grander than the last, none of which
get off the drawing board. and for once i'm speaking from experience
on this. but striking that balance between dreaming & doing is up to
you.

again, welcome

bbob drake
(moderator in title only....i know very very little about
moderation)




--- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, "drmabuce"
<drmabuce@...> wrote:

>
> Goodness!
> this got interesting fast!!!!!
> Monday ain't over yet and there're already 62 members!
>
> --- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, Eric Brombaugh
> <ebrombaugh@> wrote:
>
> > One thing that caught my eye in the earlier discussion
> > was the idea of using a fast CPU as not only a CV
> > source, but also for VCOs, VCFs, VCAs, and general
> > signal processing.
>
> This is a very signicant issue
> and i encourage all the members to weigh in on it because the group
> will be most useful if consesus on a 'topic' (or topicS) is

achieved.

> Such consesus is a real courtesy to the moderators. It really makes
> their job easier because we police ourselves and it helps reduce OT
> squabbles. Good fences make good neighbors.
>
> This issue is also gonna be a slippery trout to get in the creel
> because the category of gadget (CVS) around which this group is
> centered is a "liminal entity" (i got that from the "Analog Days"
> book.... what a deliciously weird term! -liminal entity-).
> To save you all a link to dictionary.com, a liminal entity is a
> something that lives on a threshold between two realms....
> like a flying fish, an amphibious car, and that frequency range from
> 0.5 to 20 hz where a pulse train turns from clicks to a tone.
>
> a CVS is simply a programmable function geverator. Aaron Lanterman

has

> pointed out that NI makes commercial 'data acquistion' gadgets with

a

> couple of outputs for which there are numerous PC& MAC support
> packages and development environments. Eric Brombaugh posits that if
> we're going to be wiggling voltages around with code , why not

wiggle

> them real fast and make audio with 'em too? DIY digital audio!
> it's simply a matter of scale....
>
> [This is a bit funny, because when i teach clases in electronic

music,

> i stand on my poor pupils desks and exhort them to throw away their
> preconceptions about what a module does. A VCF is a (damped)
> oscillator, and LFO is just a cap-value from a VCO ...etc.
> i pout and tantrum until the poor browbeaten sprouts color outside

the

> lines...]
>
> but in this case
>
> my vote is that we draw some lines and try to stay in 'em.
> Good fences make good neighbors.
>
> i'll proffer my postion this way:
>
> The attributes of the topic that i (and i speak only for MYSELF)
> intend to expose and exploit in this group are:
>
> -DIY
> or DIY-ish , kits, mods but not limited exclusively to one device
>
> -programmable
> at some point in its production
>
> -CV o r i e n t e d
> i'm not above driving an LFO into low audio but... i'm not sure that
> i'm prepared to discuss tweaking the tuning and scaling to 1/40th

of a

> cent
>
> That's where my chalk lines are.... how 'bout y'all???
>
> If the moderators choose they could segregate this group structure
> into sub-topics (fast-wiggling/slow wiggling) or just hose down the
> corral and turn the varmints loose!
>
> But let's cut 'em a break folks....
> post a comment or two on what YOUR particular flavor of the fetish

is

> so they can get a few pins in this map.
>
> and on that note....
> Thank you Eric for weighing in right off the bat and getting this
> issue on the table from the get-go
>
> carpe themam!
> -doc
>

When the microprocessor was introduced to the synthesizer, it was pretty much used for
polyphony only. The use of microprocessors for complex control voltage generation is
largely unexplored territory.

Also, there is a wide base of inexpensive third party support for systems that can handle
CV speeds. The Basic Micro development software is quite full featured for being free.

The computer generation of control voltages is mostly an amusing pastime and has very
limited commercial value, that makes it more likely for people to freely share their
software and hardware on a hobby level.

It would be a public service to keep this accessible to grade school, high school and
college students. If it is fast and easy, it is fun, and people will do it. If it is difficult and
expensive, they will not.

Writing DSP apps on a DSP dev system is likely to produce very little result. Too expensive
and too much work.

Also the FPGA is rapidly replacing the DSP as the preferred platform for signal generation
and processing. The enormous resources and 1 nanosecond clock times make it very
powerful for this.

We tried to get a FPGA based audio group going, but the curb height was too high and it
flopped. I think the same thing would happen with a DSP platform.

--- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, "drmabuce" <drmabuce@...> wrote:
>
> Goodness!
> this got interesting fast!!!!!
> Monday ain't over yet and there're already 62 members!
>
> --- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, Eric Brombaugh
> <ebrombaugh@> wrote:
>
> > One thing that caught my eye in the earlier discussion
> > was the idea of using a fast CPU as not only a CV
> > source, but also for VCOs, VCFs, VCAs, and general
> > signal processing.
>
> This is a very signicant issue
> and i encourage all the members to weigh in on it because the group
> will be most useful if consesus on a 'topic' (or topicS) is achieved.
> Such consesus is a real courtesy to the moderators. It really makes
> their job easier because we police ourselves and it helps reduce OT
> squabbles. Good fences make good neighbors.
>
> This issue is also gonna be a slippery trout to get in the creel
> because the category of gadget (CVS) around which this group is
> centered is a "liminal entity" (i got that from the "Analog Days"
> book.... what a deliciously weird term! -liminal entity-).
> To save you all a link to dictionary.com, a liminal entity is a
> something that lives on a threshold between two realms....
> like a flying fish, an amphibious car, and that frequency range from
> 0.5 to 20 hz where a pulse train turns from clicks to a tone.
>
> a CVS is simply a programmable function geverator. Aaron Lanterman has
> pointed out that NI makes commercial 'data acquistion' gadgets with a
> couple of outputs for which there are numerous PC& MAC support
> packages and development environments. Eric Brombaugh posits that if
> we're going to be wiggling voltages around with code , why not wiggle
> them real fast and make audio with 'em too? DIY digital audio!
> it's simply a matter of scale....
>
> [This is a bit funny, because when i teach clases in electronic music,
> i stand on my poor pupils desks and exhort them to throw away their
> preconceptions about what a module does. A VCF is a (damped)
> oscillator, and LFO is just a cap-value from a VCO ...etc.
> i pout and tantrum until the poor browbeaten sprouts color outside the
> lines...]
>
> but in this case
>
> my vote is that we draw some lines and try to stay in 'em.
> Good fences make good neighbors.
>
> i'll proffer my postion this way:
>
> The attributes of the topic that i (and i speak only for MYSELF)
> intend to expose and exploit in this group are:
>
> -DIY
> or DIY-ish , kits, mods but not limited exclusively to one device
>
> -programmable
> at some point in its production
>
> -CV o r i e n t e d
> i'm not above driving an LFO into low audio but... i'm not sure that
> i'm prepared to discuss tweaking the tuning and scaling to 1/40th of a
> cent
>
> That's where my chalk lines are.... how 'bout y'all???
>
> If the moderators choose they could segregate this group structure
> into sub-topics (fast-wiggling/slow wiggling) or just hose down the
> corral and turn the varmints loose!
>
> But let's cut 'em a break folks....
> post a comment or two on what YOUR particular flavor of the fetish is
> so they can get a few pins in this map.
>
> and on that note....
> Thank you Eric for weighing in right off the bat and getting this
> issue on the table from the get-go
>
> carpe themam!
> -doc
>

>>> drmabuce@... 03/06/06 2:20 PM >>>
> something that lives on a threshold between two realms....
> like a flying fish, an amphibious car

An honest government?
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8260059923762628848&q=loose+change

OK, back on topic: I would propose that the resulting units/modules/thingers discussed would *not* require connection to a PC/MAC/TRS80/etc during their use. Using a PC to program the module is one thing, but having a PC doing processing while the module is in use is a whole different thing. And I think that the programming software should be capable of running on a very low-end machine.

The only PC in my studio now is for programming the PSIM... I'd like to keep it that way :)

Andrew

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-DIY
or DIY-ish , kits, mods but not limited exclusively to one device

-programmable
at some point in its production

-CV o r i e n t e d
i'm not above driving an LFO into low audio but... i'm not sure that
i'm prepared to discuss tweaking the tuning and scaling to 1/40th of a
cent

That's where my chalk lines are.... how 'bout y'all???

Thanks for the feedback!

Given that the folks whom I consider to be the leaders
in this area have weighed in against anything that's
non-BASIC and non-CV, I'll keep further discussion of
this particular project out of this group. I'm not
surprised or disappointed - that's why I asked.

Nevertheless, I'll be lurking around here for ideas!

Eric

--- Grant Richter <grichter@...> wrote:

> It would be a public service to keep this accessible
> to grade school, high school and
> college students. If it is fast and easy, it is fun,
> and people will do it. If it is difficult and
> expensive, they will not.
>
> Writing DSP apps on a DSP dev system is likely to
> produce very little result. Too expensive
> and too much work.


> "drmabuce" <drmabuce@...> wrote:
> The attributes of the topic that i (and i speak
> only for MYSELF)
> intend to expose and exploit in this group are:
>
> -DIY
> or DIY-ish , kits, mods but not limited
> exclusively to one device
>
> -programmable
> at some point in its production
>
> -CV o r i e n t e d
> i'm not above driving an LFO into low audio but...
> i'm not sure that
> i'm prepared to discuss tweaking the tuning and
> scaling to 1/40th of a
> cent
>
> That's where my chalk lines are.... how 'bout
> y'all???

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

Hi Group! (my first post, needless to say)

Doc mentioned he wanted us to weigh in on the issue of platform and
whether or not this would be a CV only device. So here's my vote:

I stand behind Grant and Gary (and Doc) in their statements in favor
of using the BasicAtomPRO. The reasons they present are fairly
compelling - It's fast, flexible, capable, there is a pre-existing
body of work to build off, and the ease of programming such a device
keeps it user-friendly for modular users/builders who don't want to
get into pic/avr programming, or dsp coding (much worse).

Also, did anyone ever get the BasicMicro software for programming
their PSIM running on Virtual PC on an OS X?

-Henry

On Mar 6, 2006, at 4:00 PM, Henry Till wrote:

> Also, did anyone ever get the BasicMicro software for programming
> their PSIM running on Virtual PC on an OS X?

The software booted fine and saw the USB->serial adapter, but without
my PSIM it is impossible to make any further progress. This was on a
Titanium 1ghz Powerbook.

Regards,

Michael Ford
--
http://www.metalbox.com

I mainly want something to do CV processing. It's fairly simple and cheap.

High level PSIM compatibily is highly desirable. It's also highly achievable
thanks to the ground work laid by Grant and others.

There's no reason not to use the BasicATOMPRO, from my perspective. It costs
more than the cheapest PICs but is not so expensive as to preclude its use
in dedicated modules.

Hope this helps. And now, off to band practice!

BTW, some of you guys have the most colorful metaphors. :-)
--
john

A generally accepted tenet in the programming world is that if you
need speed and closeness to the processor, then there is no avoiding
C. BASIC is a terrific language, particularly for beginners. DO all
projects have to be on a single platform? Maybe not so much...

Mike

--- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, Eric Brombaugh
<ebrombaugh@...> wrote:

>
> The big downside is that the development environment
> is not BASIC but C. I'm comfortable in C, but I agree
> with Grant's earlier observation that BASIC is a great
> enabler, allowing a broad range of users to quickly
> come up to speed and contribute. There is the
> possibility of porting a freely-available BASIC
> interpreter such as Brandy-BASIC to the ARM7 though,
> and this is on my road map.
>
> I'd be interested in any comments & criticism from the
> group.
>
> Eric
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>

I wrote that before reading all the posts. I agree that BasicAtom Pro
and PSIM compatibility is the way to go.

But I'm also interested in DIY audio range stuff...so maybe Eric could
periodically keep us posted on any progress in this area.

Mike

--- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Marsh"
<michaelmarsh@...> wrote:

>
>
> A generally accepted tenet in the programming world is that if you
> need speed and closeness to the processor, then there is no avoiding
> C. BASIC is a terrific language, particularly for beginners. DO all
> projects have to be on a single platform? Maybe not so much...
>
> Mike
>
> --- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, Eric Brombaugh
> <ebrombaugh@> wrote:
> >
> > The big downside is that the development environment
> > is not BASIC but C. I'm comfortable in C, but I agree
> > with Grant's earlier observation that BASIC is a great
> > enabler, allowing a broad range of users to quickly
> > come up to speed and contribute. There is the
> > possibility of porting a freely-available BASIC
> > interpreter such as Brandy-BASIC to the ARM7 though,
> > and this is on my road map.
> >
> > I'd be interested in any comments & criticism from the
> > group.
> >
> > Eric
> >
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> > http://mail.yahoo.com
> >
>

MBASIC is actually more like a macro-assembler.

It is not interpreted. It points to blocks of optimized machine code that are strung
together by the Basic language like "blueprint".

Not a true compiler, but much faster than any interpreted Basic language.

For straight DSP stuff, there are many more appropriate groups.

The original platform was an 8031, it was a Wiard 300 series module named the "Music
Computer". I prototyped it but never wrote any software for it. It was only 8 bit I/O.

Before that I used a PAIA 8700 computer controlled voltage source. That was written in
assembly and typed in with a hex keyboard (like ya did in 1979).

I don't think anyone cares about the processor or language you use for your personal
computer voltage source.

When I was in college, you programmed in assembly or Fortran, then Basic, then it was
Pascal, then C, then C++, then Java. It just depends on when you went to school.

I started writing BASIC at age 11, in 1967, when it was the new miracle language....

hahahahahaha (crazed cackling of veteran driven insane by the computer wars)


--- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Marsh" <michaelmarsh@...>
wrote:

>
>
> A generally accepted tenet in the programming world is that if you
> need speed and closeness to the processor, then there is no avoiding
> C. BASIC is a terrific language, particularly for beginners. DO all
> projects have to be on a single platform? Maybe not so much...
>
> Mike
>
> --- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, Eric Brombaugh
> <ebrombaugh@> wrote:
> >
> > The big downside is that the development environment
> > is not BASIC but C. I'm comfortable in C, but I agree
> > with Grant's earlier observation that BASIC is a great
> > enabler, allowing a broad range of users to quickly
> > come up to speed and contribute. There is the
> > possibility of porting a freely-available BASIC
> > interpreter such as Brandy-BASIC to the ARM7 though,
> > and this is on my road map.
> >
> > I'd be interested in any comments & criticism from the
> > group.
> >
> > Eric
> >
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> > http://mail.yahoo.com
> >
>

I don't see any reason to do audio range stuff that analog modules can
already do effortlessly, and am generally more in tune with the notion
of CV stuff (easier to code too), however -

I can think of a couple ideas kicked around on the MOTM list (one an
announced product) that are examples of audio modules not easily done
in analog:

- 8 vcos with common tuning and tracking, with voltage controllable
spread w/ randomization amounts, in other words the Cloud Generator.

- a basic 4 or 8 voice polyphonic osc->vca module, with control over a
few basic params and built in loudness envelopes.

BTW, I hope I didn't make the PSIM list explode when I published my
image of my stooged up module. All heck broke loose shortly after..

Moe

--- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Marsh"
<michaelmarsh@...> wrote:

>
> I wrote that before reading all the posts. I agree that BasicAtom Pro
> and PSIM compatibility is the way to go.
>
> But I'm also interested in DIY audio range stuff...so maybe Eric could
> periodically keep us posted on any progress in this area.
>
> Mike
>
> --- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Marsh"
> <michaelmarsh@> wrote:
> >
> >
> > A generally accepted tenet in the programming world is that if you
> > need speed and closeness to the processor, then there is no avoiding
> > C. BASIC is a terrific language, particularly for beginners. DO all
> > projects have to be on a single platform? Maybe not so much...
> >
> > Mike
> >
> > --- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, Eric Brombaugh
> > <ebrombaugh@> wrote:
> > >
> > > The big downside is that the development environment
> > > is not BASIC but C. I'm comfortable in C, but I agree
> > > with Grant's earlier observation that BASIC is a great
> > > enabler, allowing a broad range of users to quickly
> > > come up to speed and contribute. There is the
> > > possibility of porting a freely-available BASIC
> > > interpreter such as Brandy-BASIC to the ARM7 though,
> > > and this is on my road map.
> > >
> > > I'd be interested in any comments & criticism from the
> > > group.
> > >
> > > Eric
> > >
> > >
> > > __________________________________________________
> > > Do You Yahoo!?
> > > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> > > http://mail.yahoo.com
> > >
> >
>

I think MBasic is the key idea. The software is transportable (with tweaking) to two
different microcontrollers. One fast (16 MHz H8), one slower (PIC).

You can buy a free standing version of MBasic that is not tied to their chips.

They sell just the H8 chip for $20.00. The schematics for the processor boards are in the
PDFs. Unless you like to solder 48 pin QFP packages, I would just get the 28 pin through
hole carrier board.

--- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, "Grant Richter" <grichter@...> wrote:
>
> MBASIC is actually more like a macro-assembler.
>
> It is not interpreted. It points to blocks of optimized machine code that are strung
> together by the Basic language like "blueprint".
>
> Not a true compiler, but much faster than any interpreted Basic language.
>
> For straight DSP stuff, there are many more appropriate groups.
>
> The original platform was an 8031, it was a Wiard 300 series module named the "Music
> Computer". I prototyped it but never wrote any software for it. It was only 8 bit I/O.
>
> Before that I used a PAIA 8700 computer controlled voltage source. That was written in
> assembly and typed in with a hex keyboard (like ya did in 1979).
>
> I don't think anyone cares about the processor or language you use for your personal
> computer voltage source.
>
> When I was in college, you programmed in assembly or Fortran, then Basic, then it was
> Pascal, then C, then C++, then Java. It just depends on when you went to school.
>
> I started writing BASIC at age 11, in 1967, when it was the new miracle language....
>
> hahahahahaha (crazed cackling of veteran driven insane by the computer wars)
>
>
> --- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Marsh" <michaelmarsh@>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > A generally accepted tenet in the programming world is that if you
> > need speed and closeness to the processor, then there is no avoiding
> > C. BASIC is a terrific language, particularly for beginners. DO all
> > projects have to be on a single platform? Maybe not so much...
> >
> > Mike
> >
> > --- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, Eric Brombaugh
> > <ebrombaugh@> wrote:
> > >
> > > The big downside is that the development environment
> > > is not BASIC but C. I'm comfortable in C, but I agree
> > > with Grant's earlier observation that BASIC is a great
> > > enabler, allowing a broad range of users to quickly
> > > come up to speed and contribute. There is the
> > > possibility of porting a freely-available BASIC
> > > interpreter such as Brandy-BASIC to the ARM7 though,
> > > and this is on my road map.
> > >
> > > I'd be interested in any comments & criticism from the
> > > group.
> > >
> > > Eric
> > >
> > >
> > > __________________________________________________
> > > Do You Yahoo!?
> > > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> > > http://mail.yahoo.com
> > >
> >
>

--- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Marsh"
<michaelmarsh@...> wrote:

> But I'm also interested in DIY audio range stuff...so maybe Eric could
> periodically keep us posted on any progress in this area.

Certainly! If/when I get something working I'll put up a webpage with
docs & pics and send a link to this group.

Eric

Cool, thanks Eric.

Mike

--- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, "ebrombaugh"
<ebrombaugh@...> wrote:

>
> --- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Marsh"
> <michaelmarsh@> wrote:
> > But I'm also interested in DIY audio range stuff...so maybe Eric could
> > periodically keep us posted on any progress in this area.
>
> Certainly! If/when I get something working I'll put up a webpage with
> docs & pics and send a link to this group.
>
> Eric
>