Audio DSP Micro ?

"RealInfo" <therightinfo@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:g0hjkl$gh5$1@news4.netvision.net.il: 

> 
> Many thanks to all those who took time to answer my question and to send
> away the fog ...
> Looks to me that since multi effect with multi chaining options is my
> goal , the best approach wolud be
> implementing each effect kind - fuzz, tremollo , reverb , eq , noise
> gate etc... with traditional
> good old analog discrete ics and transistors and diodes .
> Some control unit that is FPGA or some simple uc like 8051 that will do
> the user interfacing and the
> chaining etc would be best option .
> If multi chaining is not needed then implementing the desired effect
> would be best done with
> the good old way ..
> 
> Relying on a single DSP core for that will be waste of time and effort .
> What do you think ?
> 
> EC

I was an analog engineer long before I did my first DSP application. One of 
the first things I even built that actually worked was a fuzz box for my 
guitar when I was a teenager.

I bring this up because I think I have perspective on both sides of the 
situation.

From a strictly signal processing point of view, I would do the whole 
project with a dedicated DSP that controls everything. Obviously, DSP 
experience is helpful here. The specific DSP can be just about anything as 
has already been pointed out. This would be the most flexible and alllow 
you to easily experiment with new ideas. I don't see any real benefit of an 
FPGA in this application. Certainly a small microcontroller (AVR or PIC) 
and some analog switches could be used in an analog implementation.

The larger question is what is your motivation? It's cheaper to just buy a 
commercial stomp box so I assume you want to learn something, enjoy 
building stuff, etc. I think you need to answer this question. 

Al Clark
Danville Signal Processing, Inc. 


 

On Wed, 14 May 2008 12:53:19 -0700 (PDT), emeb <ebrombaugh@gmail.com>
wrote:

>O
>
>Freescale also has a fairly inexpensive ($150) development system for
>the DSP56371 processor. It includes a free Eclipse/GCC/GDB development
>IDE and a USB connection to your PC for code download & debug. 8
>channels audio in, 8 channels audio out (two of which can be optical
>SPDIF) and a few dip switches and LEDs. More info here:
>
>http://www.freescale.com/webapp/sps/site/prod_summary.jsp?code=SYMP_SOUNDBITE&nodeId=0127952D4A2D79
>
>The DSP56371 has a nifty filter accelerator built-in that can offload
>some of the DSP from the main processor. Good for FIRs mostly, but
>also has some IIR features.
>
>Eric


Freescale (ex Motorola) has great parts, but your still stuck,
unfortunately, having to use Code Terrorist and very little and slow
support.

That was my last experience anyway.


boB

On May 16, 12:02 am, boB <boB@> wrote:
>
> Freescale (ex Motorola) has great parts, but your still stuck,
> unfortunately, having to use Code Terrorist and very little and slow
> support.
>
> That was my last experience anyway.

Err... I know you're being ironic, but what's "Code Terrorist"? The
development software they're shipping now is called "Symphony Studio"
and it's available here:

http://www.freescale.com/webapp/sps/site/prod_summary.jsp?code=SYMPH_STUDIO&nodeId=0127952D4A2D79

It's a completely free download (about 58MB) and is based on open
source tools (Eclipse/GCC/GDB/OpenOCD). I don't know what the issues
with "Code Terrorist" were, but the current stuff seems to work OK.

Eric

On Fri, 16 May 2008 11:49:48 -0700 (PDT), emeb <ebrombaugh@gmail.com>
wrote:

>On May 16, 12:02 am, boB <boB@> wrote:
>>
>> Freescale (ex Motorola) has great parts, but your still stuck,
>> unfortunately, having to use Code Terrorist and very little and slow
>> support.
>>
>> That was my last experience anyway.
>
>Err... I know you're being ironic, but what's "Code Terrorist"? The

   That would surely be CodeWarrior:

http://www.freescale.com/codewarrior (which expands to some longer URL
when you go there...)

   It was originally a separate software development-tool company.
Motorola bought it in 1999, and is of course part of Freescale since
it was spun off from Motorola.
   I'm using Codewarrier stuff for a Freescale microcontroller, it
appears to work well for what little I've been doing with it. It's a
"free" license code-limited to about 2k, then it's supposed to be a
$2,500 license to generate larger code.

   Here's a history:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CodeWarrior

>development software they're shipping now is called "Symphony Studio"
>and it's available here:
>
>http://www.freescale.com/webapp/sps/site/prod_summary.jsp?code=SYMPH_STUDIO&nodeId=0127952D4A2D79
>
>It's a completely free download (about 58MB) and is based on open
>source tools (Eclipse/GCC/GDB/OpenOCD). I don't know what the issues
>with "Code Terrorist" were, but the current stuff seems to work OK.
>
>Eric

On May 17, 4:46 pm, Ben Bradley <ben_nospam_brad...@frontiernet.net>
wrote:
> On Fri, 16 May 2008 11:49:48 -0700 (PDT), emeb <ebromba...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >On May 16, 12:02 am, boB <boB@> wrote:
>
> >> Freescale (ex Motorola) has great parts, but your still stuck,
> >> unfortunately, having to use Code Terrorist and very little and slow
> >> support.
>
> >Err... I know you're being ironic, but what's "Code Terrorist"? The
>
>    That would surely be CodeWarrior:

Ah - OK. I used to use CW on Mac back in the 68K days. I knew that
they got sucked into Motorola and were supporting a lot of the current
Freescale parts. Never noticed it targeting 56K, although I confess I
haven't paid much attention to that niche for the last, oh, decade or
so.

Anyway, CW is not what they're using for the 56K lately.

Eric