🚀 go-pugleaf

Al Clark <dsp@danvillesignal.com> wrote in message news:<Xns91DB81B2F6D2aclarkdanvillesignal@209.249.90.101>...
> john_wr100@yahoo.com (Johnny) wrote in news:3c9db1ea.6888487
> @news.optusnet.com.au:
> 
> > On Sun, 24 Mar 2002 10:18:32 GMT, john_wr100@yahoo.com (Johnny) wrote:
> > 
> > I am planning on doing some experimentation with digital fitlers. I
> > want to make an active crossover for my audio system. I was looking at
> > one of the following kits:
> > 
> > Motorola DSP5636X Evaluation module.
> > or
> > Analog devices ADSP-21065L Ez-Kit lite
> > 
> > I probably need about 80 Million multiply/accumate per second and at
> > least 24bit fixed point. Faster is better though.
> > 
> > I dont mind programming in Assembly or C language.  I figure that
> > assembly is probably fine because my code should be pretty simple just
> > to implement FIR filters and  I/O functions.  I was kind of scared by
> > roughly 1000 pages of documentation for the motorola development
> > system and DSP programmers guide. 

wow.  not having an EVM since the 56002, i didn't know they sent any
documentation (other than the "Family Manual", and a text-only manual
for the assembler) with the kit.  despite some of the warts in the
563xx generation (the children are more sophisticated, but not quite
as pure of heart as the parent), i still think that when the smoke and
dust clear, the Mot arch and asm is simpler to deal with than the
SHArC.  i still am skeptical about the need for floating-point for
most audio, but if you find you need floating-point, then your
decision is much more clear.

in either case, i would perform any FIR kernals in fixed-point.

> > 
> > Does anyone have experience with these kits?
> > Which is easier to use, and will offer the best learning curve?
> > Should I look at Texas Instuments

only if you like pain.

> or other DSPs?

lessee, Mot, ADI, TI, what else is there?  (ignorant question)

> > What kits are the best value for money?
> > 

another possibility, if you like SHArCs, is that Creamware card. 
dunno what it costs.

...
> 
> Since you mentioned crossovers, I assume you need at least 4 channels of 
> DACs. I would get a 21161 EZ-Kit. This 21161 is much faster than the 
> 21065L. It also has SIMD which will work very well for your application.
> 
> The EZ-Kit was 8 channels of 96kHz DACs.

zeus@myth.demon.co.uk wrote in message news:<2drr9ucraffrrnf2ad0bp48u4nmk6tdal3@4ax.com>...
> Wouldn't it be infinitely easier to use a PC and write the software to
> use a Soundblaster live or something? With the Pentium 3, Pentium 4
> and AMD extensions, they can pump out plenty of DSP-alike horsepower.
> MP3 players like Winamp with stereo equalisers only take about 2% of
> the cpu time on my P3-550.

i thought there was a huge and sorta uncontrolled latency problem with
using the PC for real-time DSP.  ain't there?  (not that i ever tried
it myself.)

r b-j