Hi! I'm new on dsp and i have some doubt. If i want to implemment some
simple audio processor on a texas dsp(input 12 or maybe up to 16 bits,
with a few effects and features like equalizer, chorus, delay, etc.),
which dsp would be appropiate? For example, the 6000 floating point
line is too much? It would be nice with the 2000 or 3000 type?
I would like to have some estimation of the amount of memory required
for the effects, i would prefer to avoid external memory(unless if is
not possible to avoid for this application!). Thanks for your guide.
texas dsp chip appropiate for simple audio processing
Started by ●August 26, 2007
Reply by ●August 27, 20072007-08-27
Ed Yaz-
> Hi! I'm new on dsp and i have some doubt. If i want to implemment some
> simple audio processor on a texas dsp(input 12 or maybe up to 16 bits,
> with a few effects and features like equalizer, chorus, delay, etc.),
> which dsp would be appropiate? For example, the 6000 floating point
> line is too much? It would be nice with the 2000 or 3000 type?
>
> I would like to have some estimation of the amount of memory required
> for the effects, i would prefer to avoid external memory(unless if is
> not possible to avoid for this application!). Thanks for your guide.
TI pushes the C55x series and C672x series for audio applications. C55x is fixed-point and the devices tend to be:
-smaller
-low power consumption
-fairly cost; devices at the lower end of
the offerings can be extremely low cost
-some versions have some impressive built-in
peripherals, including USB and medium-quality
A/D converter
C672x devices are:
-floating-point
-reduced version of top-end floating-point
devices (C6713)
-fairly low power consumption
-fairly low cost
Both have enough internal mem for basic audio applications and if not enough it's easy to connect standard fast SRAM.
Also both have a wide range of peripheral support -- there's just about not anything you can't hook up to them.
-Jeff
> Hi! I'm new on dsp and i have some doubt. If i want to implemment some
> simple audio processor on a texas dsp(input 12 or maybe up to 16 bits,
> with a few effects and features like equalizer, chorus, delay, etc.),
> which dsp would be appropiate? For example, the 6000 floating point
> line is too much? It would be nice with the 2000 or 3000 type?
>
> I would like to have some estimation of the amount of memory required
> for the effects, i would prefer to avoid external memory(unless if is
> not possible to avoid for this application!). Thanks for your guide.
TI pushes the C55x series and C672x series for audio applications. C55x is fixed-point and the devices tend to be:
-smaller
-low power consumption
-fairly cost; devices at the lower end of
the offerings can be extremely low cost
-some versions have some impressive built-in
peripherals, including USB and medium-quality
A/D converter
C672x devices are:
-floating-point
-reduced version of top-end floating-point
devices (C6713)
-fairly low power consumption
-fairly low cost
Both have enough internal mem for basic audio applications and if not enough it's easy to connect standard fast SRAM.
Also both have a wide range of peripheral support -- there's just about not anything you can't hook up to them.
-Jeff
Reply by ●August 27, 20072007-08-27
Ed-
> Thanks Jeff !
>
> Your tips were very useful. So, if i can ask a little more about this, i still
> have some doubts:
>
> - Is really easy use external memory on 672x series? Because that was the reason i
> was considerating the 2000 or 3000 series (more memory integrated).
Yes. Connecting either SRAM and SDRAM to C672x EMIF is glueless. SRAM is the most
likely for an audio application, unless you need a really big buffer, like on the
order of several sec or more.
> - Do you know some estimation of how much would cost, lets say, about ten dsp
> chips (55x and 672x)? Because the prices are always about 1k units, and i would
> spend up to 50 dollars/unit.
Not sure, maybe multiply by 1.25 or 1.5 to get single qty chip cost. It's going to
vary depending on which distributors you ask.
> - The 2000 and 3000 series wouldn't give good performance on audio applications?
> Usually they have the adc and dac integrated (about 12 bits), and maybe it wouldn't
> be a bad choice, at least their performance weren't acceptable for audio
> processing, or the prices were too high (or both!).
Well 2 comments. First, how many people are using 2000 and 3000 devices for audio?
Very few as far as I know. So what TI application notes are you going find? How
many audio codec (chip) manufacturers have reference designs for 2000 and 3000? What
real-time DSP code examples for audio algorithms are available? What tech groups are
using 2000 and 3000 for audio applications; i.e. how are you going to get peer help?
Second, the integrated ADC and DAC circuits may not have the level of signal quality
/ integrity needed for an audio application. I would suggest that you consider a
minimum of 16-bit linear phase with SNR 90 dB or higher. Also you may need
differential input, specific input impedance, etc.
-Jeff
>
> Thanks again for your tips. I want to select the correct dsp for my
> application(spending good the money!).
PS. Please post to the group, not to me.
> Thanks Jeff !
>
> Your tips were very useful. So, if i can ask a little more about this, i still
> have some doubts:
>
> - Is really easy use external memory on 672x series? Because that was the reason i
> was considerating the 2000 or 3000 series (more memory integrated).
Yes. Connecting either SRAM and SDRAM to C672x EMIF is glueless. SRAM is the most
likely for an audio application, unless you need a really big buffer, like on the
order of several sec or more.
> - Do you know some estimation of how much would cost, lets say, about ten dsp
> chips (55x and 672x)? Because the prices are always about 1k units, and i would
> spend up to 50 dollars/unit.
Not sure, maybe multiply by 1.25 or 1.5 to get single qty chip cost. It's going to
vary depending on which distributors you ask.
> - The 2000 and 3000 series wouldn't give good performance on audio applications?
> Usually they have the adc and dac integrated (about 12 bits), and maybe it wouldn't
> be a bad choice, at least their performance weren't acceptable for audio
> processing, or the prices were too high (or both!).
Well 2 comments. First, how many people are using 2000 and 3000 devices for audio?
Very few as far as I know. So what TI application notes are you going find? How
many audio codec (chip) manufacturers have reference designs for 2000 and 3000? What
real-time DSP code examples for audio algorithms are available? What tech groups are
using 2000 and 3000 for audio applications; i.e. how are you going to get peer help?
Second, the integrated ADC and DAC circuits may not have the level of signal quality
/ integrity needed for an audio application. I would suggest that you consider a
minimum of 16-bit linear phase with SNR 90 dB or higher. Also you may need
differential input, specific input impedance, etc.
-Jeff
>
> Thanks again for your tips. I want to select the correct dsp for my
> application(spending good the money!).
PS. Please post to the group, not to me.
Reply by ●August 27, 20072007-08-27
Thanks!
But i still have some doubts:
- The dsp chips from the 2000 and 3000 series wouldn't be appropiated
for audio? Some guys in my class insist on those dsp series, saying
that is enough for simple audio, even is more easy to add new audio
features to 67x series.
- Is really easy use external memory on 67x series? I checked the user
guide for that on texas web page, and it seems easy, but i would like
to see a comment about that.
Thanks again!
Ed
--- In a..., "Jeff Brower" wrote:
>
> Ed Yaz-
>
> > Hi! I'm new on dsp and i have some doubt. If i want to implemment some
> > simple audio processor on a texas dsp(input 12 or maybe up to 16 bits,
> > with a few effects and features like equalizer, chorus, delay, etc.),
> > which dsp would be appropiate? For example, the 6000 floating point
> > line is too much? It would be nice with the 2000 or 3000 type?
> >
> > I would like to have some estimation of the amount of memory required
> > for the effects, i would prefer to avoid external memory(unless if is
> > not possible to avoid for this application!). Thanks for your guide.
>
> TI pushes the C55x series and C672x series for audio applications.
C55x is fixed-point and the devices tend to be:
>
> -smaller
>
> -low power consumption
>
> -fairly cost; devices at the lower end of
> the offerings can be extremely low cost
>
> -some versions have some impressive built-in
> peripherals, including USB and medium-quality
> A/D converter
>
> C672x devices are:
>
> -floating-point
>
> -reduced version of top-end floating-point
> devices (C6713)
>
> -fairly low power consumption
>
> -fairly low cost
>
> Both have enough internal mem for basic audio applications and if
not enough it's easy to connect standard fast SRAM.
> Also both have a wide range of peripheral support -- there's just
about not anything you can't hook up to them.
>
> -Jeff
>
But i still have some doubts:
- The dsp chips from the 2000 and 3000 series wouldn't be appropiated
for audio? Some guys in my class insist on those dsp series, saying
that is enough for simple audio, even is more easy to add new audio
features to 67x series.
- Is really easy use external memory on 67x series? I checked the user
guide for that on texas web page, and it seems easy, but i would like
to see a comment about that.
Thanks again!
Ed
--- In a..., "Jeff Brower" wrote:
>
> Ed Yaz-
>
> > Hi! I'm new on dsp and i have some doubt. If i want to implemment some
> > simple audio processor on a texas dsp(input 12 or maybe up to 16 bits,
> > with a few effects and features like equalizer, chorus, delay, etc.),
> > which dsp would be appropiate? For example, the 6000 floating point
> > line is too much? It would be nice with the 2000 or 3000 type?
> >
> > I would like to have some estimation of the amount of memory required
> > for the effects, i would prefer to avoid external memory(unless if is
> > not possible to avoid for this application!). Thanks for your guide.
>
> TI pushes the C55x series and C672x series for audio applications.
C55x is fixed-point and the devices tend to be:
>
> -smaller
>
> -low power consumption
>
> -fairly cost; devices at the lower end of
> the offerings can be extremely low cost
>
> -some versions have some impressive built-in
> peripherals, including USB and medium-quality
> A/D converter
>
> C672x devices are:
>
> -floating-point
>
> -reduced version of top-end floating-point
> devices (C6713)
>
> -fairly low power consumption
>
> -fairly low cost
>
> Both have enough internal mem for basic audio applications and if
not enough it's easy to connect standard fast SRAM.
> Also both have a wide range of peripheral support -- there's just
about not anything you can't hook up to them.
>
> -Jeff
>
Reply by ●August 28, 20072007-08-28
Thanks a lot! Your tips help me a lot. I think will convince my
partners with some 672x chip!
Ed
--- In a..., Jeff Brower wrote:
>
> Ed-
>
> > Thanks Jeff !
> >
> > Your tips were very useful. So, if i can ask a little more about
this, i still
> > have some doubts:
> >
> > - Is really easy use external memory on 672x series? Because that
was the reason i
> > was considerating the 2000 or 3000 series (more memory integrated).
>
> Yes. Connecting either SRAM and SDRAM to C672x EMIF is glueless.
SRAM is the most
> likely for an audio application, unless you need a really big
buffer, like on the
> order of several sec or more.
>
> > - Do you know some estimation of how much would cost, lets say,
about ten dsp
> > chips (55x and 672x)? Because the prices are always about 1k
units, and i would
> > spend up to 50 dollars/unit.
>
> Not sure, maybe multiply by 1.25 or 1.5 to get single qty chip cost.
It's going to
> vary depending on which distributors you ask.
>
> > - The 2000 and 3000 series wouldn't give good performance on
audio applications?
> > Usually they have the adc and dac integrated (about 12 bits), and
maybe it wouldn't
> > be a bad choice, at least their performance weren't acceptable for
audio
> > processing, or the prices were too high (or both!).
>
> Well 2 comments. First, how many people are using 2000 and 3000
devices for audio?
> Very few as far as I know. So what TI application notes are you
going find? How
> many audio codec (chip) manufacturers have reference designs for
2000 and 3000? What
> real-time DSP code examples for audio algorithms are available?
What tech groups are
> using 2000 and 3000 for audio applications; i.e. how are you going
to get peer help?
>
> Second, the integrated ADC and DAC circuits may not have the level
of signal quality
> / integrity needed for an audio application. I would suggest that
you consider a
> minimum of 16-bit linear phase with SNR 90 dB or higher. Also you
may need
> differential input, specific input impedance, etc.
>
> -Jeff
>
> >
> > Thanks again for your tips. I want to select the correct dsp for my
> > application(spending good the money!).
>
> PS. Please post to the group, not to me.
>
partners with some 672x chip!
Ed
--- In a..., Jeff Brower wrote:
>
> Ed-
>
> > Thanks Jeff !
> >
> > Your tips were very useful. So, if i can ask a little more about
this, i still
> > have some doubts:
> >
> > - Is really easy use external memory on 672x series? Because that
was the reason i
> > was considerating the 2000 or 3000 series (more memory integrated).
>
> Yes. Connecting either SRAM and SDRAM to C672x EMIF is glueless.
SRAM is the most
> likely for an audio application, unless you need a really big
buffer, like on the
> order of several sec or more.
>
> > - Do you know some estimation of how much would cost, lets say,
about ten dsp
> > chips (55x and 672x)? Because the prices are always about 1k
units, and i would
> > spend up to 50 dollars/unit.
>
> Not sure, maybe multiply by 1.25 or 1.5 to get single qty chip cost.
It's going to
> vary depending on which distributors you ask.
>
> > - The 2000 and 3000 series wouldn't give good performance on
audio applications?
> > Usually they have the adc and dac integrated (about 12 bits), and
maybe it wouldn't
> > be a bad choice, at least their performance weren't acceptable for
audio
> > processing, or the prices were too high (or both!).
>
> Well 2 comments. First, how many people are using 2000 and 3000
devices for audio?
> Very few as far as I know. So what TI application notes are you
going find? How
> many audio codec (chip) manufacturers have reference designs for
2000 and 3000? What
> real-time DSP code examples for audio algorithms are available?
What tech groups are
> using 2000 and 3000 for audio applications; i.e. how are you going
to get peer help?
>
> Second, the integrated ADC and DAC circuits may not have the level
of signal quality
> / integrity needed for an audio application. I would suggest that
you consider a
> minimum of 16-bit linear phase with SNR 90 dB or higher. Also you
may need
> differential input, specific input impedance, etc.
>
> -Jeff
>
> >
> > Thanks again for your tips. I want to select the correct dsp for my
> > application(spending good the money!).
>
> PS. Please post to the group, not to me.
>
Reply by ●August 28, 20072007-08-28
Ed Yazz-
> Thanks!
>
> But i still have some doubts:
>
> - The dsp chips from the 2000 and 3000 series wouldn't be appropiated
> for audio? Some guys in my class insist on those dsp series, saying
> that is enough for simple audio, even is more easy to add new audio
> features to 67x series.
Well, I made some points... they come from 20+ years of experience. Feel free to
compare those points with with your class guys. My guess is your class guys don't
have experience doing multiple projects that had to come in on time, under budget.
It's one thing to pick a chip based on capabilities alone and another to pick a chip
within context of overall project and tech support concerns.
> - Is really easy use external memory on 67x series? I checked the user
> guide for that on texas web page, and it seems easy, but i would like
> to see a comment about that.
I recommended C672x for audio, not general C67x. Check out section 2.5.1,
Interfacing to Asynchronous Memory, in this document:
http://focus.ti.com/lit/ug/spru711c/spru711c.pdf
Also suggest to post on C6x Yahoo Group and ask that question.
-Jeff
> --- In a..., "Jeff Brower" wrote:
> >
> > Ed Yaz-
> >
> > > Hi! I'm new on dsp and i have some doubt. If i want to implemment some
> > > simple audio processor on a texas dsp(input 12 or maybe up to 16 bits,
> > > with a few effects and features like equalizer, chorus, delay, etc.),
> > > which dsp would be appropiate? For example, the 6000 floating point
> > > line is too much? It would be nice with the 2000 or 3000 type?
> > >
> > > I would like to have some estimation of the amount of memory required
> > > for the effects, i would prefer to avoid external memory(unless if is
> > > not possible to avoid for this application!). Thanks for your guide.
> >
> > TI pushes the C55x series and C672x series for audio applications.
> C55x is fixed-point and the devices tend to be:
> >
> > -smaller
> >
> > -low power consumption
> >
> > -fairly cost; devices at the lower end of
> > the offerings can be extremely low cost
> >
> > -some versions have some impressive built-in
> > peripherals, including USB and medium-quality
> > A/D converter
> >
> > C672x devices are:
> >
> > -floating-point
> >
> > -reduced version of top-end floating-point
> > devices (C6713)
> >
> > -fairly low power consumption
> >
> > -fairly low cost
> >
> > Both have enough internal mem for basic audio applications and if
> not enough it's easy to connect standard fast SRAM.
> > Also both have a wide range of peripheral support -- there's just
> about not anything you can't hook up to them.
> >
> > -Jeff
> Thanks!
>
> But i still have some doubts:
>
> - The dsp chips from the 2000 and 3000 series wouldn't be appropiated
> for audio? Some guys in my class insist on those dsp series, saying
> that is enough for simple audio, even is more easy to add new audio
> features to 67x series.
Well, I made some points... they come from 20+ years of experience. Feel free to
compare those points with with your class guys. My guess is your class guys don't
have experience doing multiple projects that had to come in on time, under budget.
It's one thing to pick a chip based on capabilities alone and another to pick a chip
within context of overall project and tech support concerns.
> - Is really easy use external memory on 67x series? I checked the user
> guide for that on texas web page, and it seems easy, but i would like
> to see a comment about that.
I recommended C672x for audio, not general C67x. Check out section 2.5.1,
Interfacing to Asynchronous Memory, in this document:
http://focus.ti.com/lit/ug/spru711c/spru711c.pdf
Also suggest to post on C6x Yahoo Group and ask that question.
-Jeff
> --- In a..., "Jeff Brower" wrote:
> >
> > Ed Yaz-
> >
> > > Hi! I'm new on dsp and i have some doubt. If i want to implemment some
> > > simple audio processor on a texas dsp(input 12 or maybe up to 16 bits,
> > > with a few effects and features like equalizer, chorus, delay, etc.),
> > > which dsp would be appropiate? For example, the 6000 floating point
> > > line is too much? It would be nice with the 2000 or 3000 type?
> > >
> > > I would like to have some estimation of the amount of memory required
> > > for the effects, i would prefer to avoid external memory(unless if is
> > > not possible to avoid for this application!). Thanks for your guide.
> >
> > TI pushes the C55x series and C672x series for audio applications.
> C55x is fixed-point and the devices tend to be:
> >
> > -smaller
> >
> > -low power consumption
> >
> > -fairly cost; devices at the lower end of
> > the offerings can be extremely low cost
> >
> > -some versions have some impressive built-in
> > peripherals, including USB and medium-quality
> > A/D converter
> >
> > C672x devices are:
> >
> > -floating-point
> >
> > -reduced version of top-end floating-point
> > devices (C6713)
> >
> > -fairly low power consumption
> >
> > -fairly low cost
> >
> > Both have enough internal mem for basic audio applications and if
> not enough it's easy to connect standard fast SRAM.
> > Also both have a wide range of peripheral support -- there's just
> about not anything you can't hook up to them.
> >
> > -Jeff
Reply by ●August 30, 20072007-08-30
Do you know the DSP56371 of Freescale?
It's a very suitable processor for your need.
It's 24 bits fixed point DSP, has 80Kwords of internal SRAM and it's very fast (180MIPS).
You are going to need memory to obtain long delays (Fs samples per second).
best regards
Hi! I'm new on dsp and i have some doubt. If i want to implemment some
>simple audio processor on a texas dsp(input 12 or maybe up to 16 bits,
>with a few effects and features like equalizer, chorus, delay, etc.),
>which dsp would be appropiate? For example, the 6000 floating point
>line is too much? It would be nice with the 2000 or 3000 type?
>
>I would like to have some estimation of the amount of memory required
>for the effects, i would prefer to avoid external memory(unless if is
>not possible to avoid for this application!). Thanks for your guide.
It's a very suitable processor for your need.
It's 24 bits fixed point DSP, has 80Kwords of internal SRAM and it's very fast (180MIPS).
You are going to need memory to obtain long delays (Fs samples per second).
best regards
Hi! I'm new on dsp and i have some doubt. If i want to implemment some
>simple audio processor on a texas dsp(input 12 or maybe up to 16 bits,
>with a few effects and features like equalizer, chorus, delay, etc.),
>which dsp would be appropiate? For example, the 6000 floating point
>line is too much? It would be nice with the 2000 or 3000 type?
>
>I would like to have some estimation of the amount of memory required
>for the effects, i would prefer to avoid external memory(unless if is
>not possible to avoid for this application!). Thanks for your guide.
Reply by ●August 31, 20072007-08-31
