Re: [Sursound] Making a standalone 8ch PLayer

[Bo-Erik Sandholm]

Found a price indication on the other USB to I2S module, a bit high 250 Euro 
second hand :-)
This is a bit more reasonable.
http://www.amanero.com/
 79 Euro + vat and postage + Batches 60+ € 39

If we don't look in to assembling modules, then if someone does all the work 
for free, then the actual hardware cost could be low.

Found I had not sent this...
Bo-Erik
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Making a standalone 8ch player

[David Pickett]

At 02:03 28/5/2013, Dave Malham wrote:

>On 15ips tape - yes, this is fairly limited in one way, that 20 k or less
>was often the cut-off frequency, that was the 3dB point, but the roll off
>was very slow, often only 6dB per Octave at first until near the first
>extinction point caused by the head gap so it doesn't have the artefacts of
>the brickwall filters on an apparently similar bandwidth 44/48 k digital
>system.

As Dave implicitly states, the frequency response of analog tape is 
limited by the playback gap length.  However, while the peak of this 
response is usually around 15kHz, the first zero output is only an 
octave higher and thus the slope has to be quite steep.  (I have no 
access to graphs at present.)  But it does sound good!


David 


___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Making a standalone 8ch player

[Augustine Leudar]

Apparently the reason that above 48 khz is frowned on by some is nothing to
do with niquist/the range of human hearing etc but rather distortions in
reproduction equipment when using very high sample rates that can introduce
artifacts and actually make things sound worse. This article makes this
point and evewn includes some experiments and filesw you can use to test on
your own eqwuipment to see if these artifacts are produced on your system :

http://productionadvice.co.uk/high-sample-rates-make-your-music-sound-worse/

As for bit rate - well most people agree, especially in the mixing stages,
a higher bit rate is a good thing.
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Making a standalone 8ch player

[Dave Malham]

My two penny worth...

On 15ips tape - yes, this is fairly limited in one way, that 20 k or less
was often the cut-off frequency, that was the 3dB point, but the roll off
was very slow, often only 6dB per Octave at first until near the first
extinction point caused by the head gap so it doesn't have the artefacts of
the brickwall filters on an apparently similar bandwidth 44/48 k digital
system. As a result it generally sounds "nicer" even though less accurate.
Used creatively this can be a positive boon, but it remains far more
distinguishable from the original sounds from the mics than even a modest
digital recorder like the original pcmf1.

On what is needed - I am always dubious about  things when people say this
is all that is "needed".  I can't help remembering that every major advance
in recording technology, cylinder->disk, mechanical->electrical,
disk->tape, shellac->vinyl, vinyl->CD has been accompanied by claims of
"indistinguishable from the real thing". On the other hand, we do have more
real scientific evidence these days. I'm quite happy to use 16/48 (properly
dithered) in a concert situation (often had to in the past because we had
to use Adat light pipe converters) but I would only use it for recording if
I had absolutely no choice. I would normally go for 24/96  for that unless
I was absolutely sure no processing would happen to the sound afterwards.
incidentally, I'm surprised that the Beeb came up with Jazz as the worst
case dynamic range - obviously never came up against electro-acoustic music!

Anyway, I don't know why people worry any longer - memory is so
ridiculously cheap so why not just do the best you can? The first digital
audio workstation we had was based on a PDP11 16 bit computer running Music
11 and it had the grand total of 5 megabytes (yes, 5,000,000 bytes) on two
RK05 hard drives. They cost over a thousand pounds second hand - I have
several terabytes on my home machine which cost, in all, about half that.
The great thing about earlier (analogue) systems is that the recording
process generally captured more than the contemporaneous replay systems
could reproduce - why save pennies on digital systems to reverse that?

  Dave

On 28 May 2013 03:41, Ronald C.F. Antony  wrote:

> On 27 May 2013, at 21:23, Sampo Syreeni  wrote:
>
> > 24/96 is already twice as much even as a non-shaped format, but perhaps
> has to be chosen evenso if we want to be sure it's transparent; as the next
> common format which includes both sufficient sampling rate and sufficiently
> low self-noise to truly cover even the most nastiest of circumstances. If
> nothing else, we can be fully sure nothing above that will *ever* be needed
> even if we just treat it as a naively, TPDF-dithered, somewhat frequency
> limited at the upper end channel.
>
> One notable exception: pitch processing e.g. in a sampler when sort of
> "slow down" playback, or digital "spinning" of "disks" by DJs etc.
>
> Also, digital volume controls may benefit from higher than 20-bit word
> length.
>
> But one would think capture at 96/24 should cover 98% of all scenarios,
> particularly since DJs rarely spin chamber music.
>
> Different story with scientific recordings of sound, think bat or whale
> studies, but that an entirely different game.
>
> Sent from my mobile phone
>
> ___
> Sursound mailing list
> Sursound@music.vt.edu
> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
>



-- 
As of 1st October 2012, I have retired from the University, so this
disclaimer is redundant


These are my own views and may or may not be shared by my employer

Dave Malham
Ex-Music Research Centre
Department of Music
The University of York
Heslington
York YO10 5DD
UK

'Ambisonics - Component Imaging for Audio'
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Making a standalone 8ch player

[Ronald C.F. Antony]

On 27 May 2013, at 21:23, Sampo Syreeni  wrote:

> 24/96 is already twice as much even as a non-shaped format, but perhaps has 
> to be chosen evenso if we want to be sure it's transparent; as the next 
> common format which includes both sufficient sampling rate and sufficiently 
> low self-noise to truly cover even the most nastiest of circumstances. If 
> nothing else, we can be fully sure nothing above that will *ever* be needed 
> even if we just treat it as a naively, TPDF-dithered, somewhat frequency 
> limited at the upper end channel.

One notable exception: pitch processing e.g. in a sampler when sort of "slow 
down" playback, or digital "spinning" of "disks" by DJs etc.

Also, digital volume controls may benefit from higher than 20-bit word length.

But one would think capture at 96/24 should cover 98% of all scenarios, 
particularly since DJs rarely spin chamber music.

Different story with scientific recordings of sound, think bat or whale 
studies, but that an entirely different game.

Sent from my mobile phone

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Making a standalone 8ch player

[Sampo Syreeni]

On 2013-05-27, David Pickett wrote:

Correct me if I am wrong, but it seems to me that the reference in 
this documents to "12 bits" concerns an already packed signal, which 
needs to start off at a higher bit rate.


That's right. What they talk about is the final distribution format, 
where you can do willy-nilly in-band noise shaping. If you don't do 
that, but try to just go with a rectangular rate-depth window, then it's 
going to be something like 56kS/s times 19-20b/S. That is what you 
pretty much have to do in any case in intermediate formats where you 
expect that your signal will be processed again, because otherwise 
you'll *certainly* end up with recodig artifacts and noise accumulation 
even with this sort of plain, minimal, PCM.


(I've been coding a little something in the subtractive dither vein, 
which might help here. But even that doesn't fully take away the basic 
problem. Subtractive dither can take away all of a single quantized PCM 
channel's distortions, but it can't negate all of the noise accumulation 
over multiple requantizations.)


The BBC did a study years ago and I seem to recall that they decided 
that the worst case was the dynamic range of big band jazz which, they 
determined needed 20 bits of linear PCM.


The numbers I'm citing are for the absolute worst case. That is, so that 
the loudest sound you are able to reproduce breaks your eardrums, and 
the softest sounds are just below the hearing threshold.


Be that as it may, somethin likeg 24/96, as a simple rectangular window, 
is always and everywhere just perfect. The only reason we ever need over 
16 bits is if we want to cater to those with anechoic rooms. The only 
reason we would ever want to sample at over 40kHz is because certain 
very young individuals at some point in their life apparently can just 
hear upto 25kHz, momentarily, and so we need 50kHz sampling plus a small 
relative margin of error so as to do the anti-aliasing filters right. 
24/96 is already twice as much even as a non-shaped format, but perhaps 
has to be chosen evenso if we want to be sure it's transparent; as the 
next common format which includes both sufficient sampling rate and 
sufficiently low self-noise to truly cover even the most nastiest of 
circumstances. If nothing else, we can be fully sure nothing above that 
will *ever* be needed even if we just treat it as a naively, 
TPDF-dithered, somewhat frequency limited at the upper end channel.


As far as sample rate is concerned, I agree about 48kHz before 
sampling, but there are a lot of 15ips tapes that sound excellent but 
which hardly made it to 20kHz.


Yes. And I repeat: the above numbers are the absolute, awesomest, most 
special case which covers the best known cases of child prodigy put in a 
below-measurement-floor-quiet room as well. For every practical 
application something like 36kHz/20bits would already suffice, even in a 
rectangular channel, and in-band noise shaping could bring that back 
into 40/14 or so. The above numbers are the absolute worst case ones for 
a rectangular, non-shaped channels.

--
Sampo Syreeni, aka decoy - de...@iki.fi, http://decoy.iki.fi/front
+358-50-5756111, 025E D175 ABE5 027C 9494 EEB0 E090 8BA9 0509 85C2
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Making a standalone 8ch player

[Len Moskowitz]

Are you familiar with the JoeCo Blackbox Player?

http://www.joeco.co.uk/main/BBP_models.html


Len Moskowitz (mosko...@core-sound.com)
Core Sound LLC
www.core-sound.com
Home of TetraMic

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Making a standalone 8ch player

[David Pickett]

At 16:19 27/5/2013, Sampo Syreeni wrote:

In that debate, I'd take a look at the Acoustical Reneissance for 
Audio position paper, aimed at influencing the rates and bitdepths 
of DVD-A, at the time. (http://www.meridian.co.uk/ara/araconta.htm) 
The limits it sets out says 48k is mostly enough, 56k is most 
certainly okay for anything and everything, so that of the commonly 
used rates at least 88.2kHz minimally covers it all with a large 
margin. It also makes it clear that 24 bits at that rate would be 
much more than necessary. Many fewer bits suffice, and if you think 
about the final distribution format, where you can apply in-band 
noise shaping willy-nilly, as few as 12 bits might just suffice.


Correct me if I am wrong, but it seems to me that the reference in 
this documents to "12 bits" concerns an already packed signal, which 
needs to start off at a higher bit rate.  The BBC did a study years 
ago and I seem to recall that they decided that the worst case was 
the dynamic range of big band jazz which, they determined needed 20 
bits of linear PCM. Of course, everyone knew that 16-bits was chosen 
for CD because it was cutting edge state of the art in 1980. As far 
as sample rate is concerned, I agree about 48kHz before sampling, but 
there are a lot of 15ips tapes that sound excellent but which hardly 
made it to 20kHz.


David

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Making a standalone 8ch player

[Sampo Syreeni]

On 2013-05-27, Augustine Leudar wrote:

That would be fine - there seems to be considerable debate amongst 
engineers as to whether higher sampling rates than 48k are worth using 
anyway


In that debate, I'd take a look at the Acoustical Reneissance for Audio 
position paper, aimed at influencing the rates and bitdepths of DVD-A, 
at the time. (http://www.meridian.co.uk/ara/araconta.htm) The limits it 
sets out says 48k is mostly enough, 56k is most certainly okay for 
anything and everything, so that of the commonly used rates at least 
88.2kHz minimally covers it all with a large margin. It also makes it 
clear that 24 bits at that rate would be much more than necessary. Many 
fewer bits suffice, and if you think about the final distribution 
format, where you can apply in-band noise shaping willy-nilly, as few as 
12 bits might just suffice.


That paper then came from a bunch of pretty believable people. Not only 
ambisonically knowledgeable people, but folks recognized by e.g. the AES 
as being knowledgeable about PCM tech; it ain't under Meridian's site 
for no reason... So, do take a look at their analysis every time you 
choose PCM rates and depths, and if you doubt the analysis, read through 
their references and all of the papers within the audio literature which 
have since referred them. I mean, I for one consider their rationale 
pretty much the best that is out there, and few have seriously disagreed 
with the total body of work around theirs, even to date.

--
Sampo Syreeni, aka decoy - de...@iki.fi, http://decoy.iki.fi/front
+358-50-5756111, 025E D175 ABE5 027C 9494 EEB0 E090 8BA9 0509 85C2
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Making a standalone 8ch player

[Augustine Leudar]

That would be fine - there seems to be considerable debate amongst
engineers as to whether higher sampling rates than 48k are worth using
anyway

On 27 May 2013 16:00, Dave Malham  wrote:

> I should have pointed out that the output boards were connected via the
> O2's PCi bus and were only 16 bit/48k - but then the processor's clock was
> only 180 MHz (iirc) in the machines we had.
>
> Dave
>
> On 27 May 2013 12:30, Augustine Leudar  wrote:
>
> > Hi Jörn,
> > Thanks for making me aware of the unit -  its a way better solution than
> > buying a motu and a larger computer. do you think this will run all 8
> > channel  on the rasberry pis version of linux ?I laid 20m long unbalanced
> > RCA cables at the last installation wihout any problems so that should be
> > ok. Im still going to have a crack at building my own standalone box
> > eventually though ,
> > cheers,
> > Gus
> >
> >
> > On 27 May 2013 13:20, Jörn Nettingsmeier  > >wrote:
> >
> > > On 05/23/2013 01:25 PM, Augustine Leudar wrote:
> > >
> > >> Hello all,
> > >> I want to start making a standalone 8 channel player (maybe more)  -
> > >> something that can be used in museums, festivals etc for sound
> > >> installations that can just be turned on and will instantly start
> > looping
> > >> a
> > >> multichannel composition on an sd card. At the moment I am using
> rather
> > >> unwieldly setups of small computers and multi channel soundcards such
> as
> > >> RME and motu. Cables can easily be jogged loose and it would be nice
> to
> > >> have something more robust and that staff can easily just turn on and
> > off.
> > >> So I have looked into the arduino (only 12 bit audio) and the
> raspberry
> > pi
> > >> but neither seem suitable . Systems already avaailable are ludicrously
> > >> expensive (1000s of euros) Has anyone got any ideas on the best way to
> > go
> > >> about this - is there something maybe Im missing with the raspberry
> pi/
> > >> arduino that could be customised ? Perhaps a custom made circuit
> board ?
> > >> Ideas ?
> > >> best,
> > >> Gus
> > >>
> > >
> > > i was thinking of looking into a raspberry pi combined with a usb 1.1
> > > class compliant audio device such as the ESI Gigaport HD+. that's less
> > than
> > > 200 euros in hardware for eight channels of output.
> > > the only downside to this setup is that the outputs are unbalanced rca.
> > if
> > > necessary, two 4way DI boxes can be added at reasonable extra cost, but
> > > then those will be 10 times the size of the actual player unit...
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Jörn Nettingsmeier
> > > Lortzingstr. 11, 45128 Essen, Tel. +49 177 7937487
> > >
> > > Meister für Veranstaltungstechnik (Bühne/Studio)
> > > Tonmeister VDT
> > >
> > > http://stackingdwarves.net
> > >
> > >
> > > __**_
> > > Sursound mailing list
> > > Sursound@music.vt.edu
> > > https://mail.music.vt.edu/**mailman/listinfo/sursound<
> > https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound>
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > 07580951119
> >
> > augustine.leudar.com
> > -- next part --
> > An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> > URL: <
> >
> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20130527/68e1dca7/attachment.html
> > >
> > ___
> > Sursound mailing list
> > Sursound@music.vt.edu
> > https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
> >
>
>
>
> --
> As of 1st October 2012, I have retired from the University, so this
> disclaimer is redundant
>
>
> These are my own views and may or may not be shared by my employer
>
> Dave Malham
> Ex-Music Research Centre
> Department of Music
> The University of York
> Heslington
> York YO10 5DD
> UK
>
> 'Ambisonics - Component Imaging for Audio'
> -- next part --
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20130527/f87363e9/attachment.html
> >
> ___
> Sursound mailing list
> Sursound@music.vt.edu
> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
>



-- 
07580951119

augustine.leudar.com
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Making a standalone 8ch player

[Sampo Syreeni]

On 2013-05-27, Dave Malham wrote:

I should have pointed out that the output boards were connected via 
the O2's PCi bus and were only 16 bit/48k - but then the processor's 
clock was only 180 MHz (iirc) in the machines we had.


If I'm not wrong, the O2 had a pretty decent I/O architecture apart from 
its processor, too. That makes a big difference for data heavy and 
latency sensitive operations like pushing multichannel around, and 
obviously power efficiency too, if we're talking about the modern 
situation. I dunno what the situation is with pi, there, but provided it 
does anything comparable to standard PC practice, it'll have even more 
powerful DMA and bus mastering facilities than anything in the earlier 
SGI arsenal. Not necessarily in too clean of a design, but still with 
plenty of autonomous bandwidth to go around.

--
Sampo Syreeni, aka decoy - de...@iki.fi, http://decoy.iki.fi/front
+358-50-5756111, 025E D175 ABE5 027C 9494 EEB0 E090 8BA9 0509 85C2
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Making a standalone 8ch player

[Dave Malham]

I should have pointed out that the output boards were connected via the
O2's PCi bus and were only 16 bit/48k - but then the processor's clock was
only 180 MHz (iirc) in the machines we had.

Dave

On 27 May 2013 12:30, Augustine Leudar  wrote:

> Hi Jörn,
> Thanks for making me aware of the unit -  its a way better solution than
> buying a motu and a larger computer. do you think this will run all 8
> channel  on the rasberry pis version of linux ?I laid 20m long unbalanced
> RCA cables at the last installation wihout any problems so that should be
> ok. Im still going to have a crack at building my own standalone box
> eventually though ,
> cheers,
> Gus
>
>
> On 27 May 2013 13:20, Jörn Nettingsmeier  >wrote:
>
> > On 05/23/2013 01:25 PM, Augustine Leudar wrote:
> >
> >> Hello all,
> >> I want to start making a standalone 8 channel player (maybe more)  -
> >> something that can be used in museums, festivals etc for sound
> >> installations that can just be turned on and will instantly start
> looping
> >> a
> >> multichannel composition on an sd card. At the moment I am using rather
> >> unwieldly setups of small computers and multi channel soundcards such as
> >> RME and motu. Cables can easily be jogged loose and it would be nice to
> >> have something more robust and that staff can easily just turn on and
> off.
> >> So I have looked into the arduino (only 12 bit audio) and the raspberry
> pi
> >> but neither seem suitable . Systems already avaailable are ludicrously
> >> expensive (1000s of euros) Has anyone got any ideas on the best way to
> go
> >> about this - is there something maybe Im missing with the raspberry pi/
> >> arduino that could be customised ? Perhaps a custom made circuit board ?
> >> Ideas ?
> >> best,
> >> Gus
> >>
> >
> > i was thinking of looking into a raspberry pi combined with a usb 1.1
> > class compliant audio device such as the ESI Gigaport HD+. that's less
> than
> > 200 euros in hardware for eight channels of output.
> > the only downside to this setup is that the outputs are unbalanced rca.
> if
> > necessary, two 4way DI boxes can be added at reasonable extra cost, but
> > then those will be 10 times the size of the actual player unit...
> >
> >
> > --
> > Jörn Nettingsmeier
> > Lortzingstr. 11, 45128 Essen, Tel. +49 177 7937487
> >
> > Meister für Veranstaltungstechnik (Bühne/Studio)
> > Tonmeister VDT
> >
> > http://stackingdwarves.net
> >
> >
> > __**_
> > Sursound mailing list
> > Sursound@music.vt.edu
> > https://mail.music.vt.edu/**mailman/listinfo/sursound<
> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound>
> >
>
>
>
> --
> 07580951119
>
> augustine.leudar.com
> -- next part --
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20130527/68e1dca7/attachment.html
> >
> ___
> Sursound mailing list
> Sursound@music.vt.edu
> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
>



-- 
As of 1st October 2012, I have retired from the University, so this
disclaimer is redundant


These are my own views and may or may not be shared by my employer

Dave Malham
Ex-Music Research Centre
Department of Music
The University of York
Heslington
York YO10 5DD
UK

'Ambisonics - Component Imaging for Audio'
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Making a standalone 8ch player

[Dave Malham]

I suspect it probably would run it if you don't use too high a sampling
rate. Our old Unix based SGI O2's use to run 8 channels quite happily, even
if the audio was sent over Ethernet using the server/client part of the
TCL/Tk Snack audio toolkit. The processors in the Beagle boards are a bit
quicker if the pi is just marginal.

Dave

On 27 May 2013 12:30, Augustine Leudar  wrote:

> Hi Jörn,
> Thanks for making me aware of the unit -  its a way better solution than
> buying a motu and a larger computer. do you think this will run all 8
> channel  on the rasberry pis version of linux ?I laid 20m long unbalanced
> RCA cables at the last installation wihout any problems so that should be
> ok. Im still going to have a crack at building my own standalone box
> eventually though ,
> cheers,
> Gus
>
>
> On 27 May 2013 13:20, Jörn Nettingsmeier  >wrote:
>
> > On 05/23/2013 01:25 PM, Augustine Leudar wrote:
> >
> >> Hello all,
> >> I want to start making a standalone 8 channel player (maybe more)  -
> >> something that can be used in museums, festivals etc for sound
> >> installations that can just be turned on and will instantly start
> looping
> >> a
> >> multichannel composition on an sd card. At the moment I am using rather
> >> unwieldly setups of small computers and multi channel soundcards such as
> >> RME and motu. Cables can easily be jogged loose and it would be nice to
> >> have something more robust and that staff can easily just turn on and
> off.
> >> So I have looked into the arduino (only 12 bit audio) and the raspberry
> pi
> >> but neither seem suitable . Systems already avaailable are ludicrously
> >> expensive (1000s of euros) Has anyone got any ideas on the best way to
> go
> >> about this - is there something maybe Im missing with the raspberry pi/
> >> arduino that could be customised ? Perhaps a custom made circuit board ?
> >> Ideas ?
> >> best,
> >> Gus
> >>
> >
> > i was thinking of looking into a raspberry pi combined with a usb 1.1
> > class compliant audio device such as the ESI Gigaport HD+. that's less
> than
> > 200 euros in hardware for eight channels of output.
> > the only downside to this setup is that the outputs are unbalanced rca.
> if
> > necessary, two 4way DI boxes can be added at reasonable extra cost, but
> > then those will be 10 times the size of the actual player unit...
> >
> >
> > --
> > Jörn Nettingsmeier
> > Lortzingstr. 11, 45128 Essen, Tel. +49 177 7937487
> >
> > Meister für Veranstaltungstechnik (Bühne/Studio)
> > Tonmeister VDT
> >
> > http://stackingdwarves.net
> >
> >
> > __**_
> > Sursound mailing list
> > Sursound@music.vt.edu
> > https://mail.music.vt.edu/**mailman/listinfo/sursound<
> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound>
> >
>
>
>
> --
> 07580951119
>
> augustine.leudar.com
> -- next part --
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20130527/68e1dca7/attachment.html
> >
> ___
> Sursound mailing list
> Sursound@music.vt.edu
> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
>



-- 
As of 1st October 2012, I have retired from the University, so this
disclaimer is redundant


These are my own views and may or may not be shared by my employer

Dave Malham
Ex-Music Research Centre
Department of Music
The University of York
Heslington
York YO10 5DD
UK

'Ambisonics - Component Imaging for Audio'
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Making a standalone 8ch player

[Augustine Leudar]

Hi Jörn,
Thanks for making me aware of the unit -  its a way better solution than
buying a motu and a larger computer. do you think this will run all 8
channel  on the rasberry pis version of linux ?I laid 20m long unbalanced
RCA cables at the last installation wihout any problems so that should be
ok. Im still going to have a crack at building my own standalone box
eventually though ,
cheers,
Gus


On 27 May 2013 13:20, Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote:

> On 05/23/2013 01:25 PM, Augustine Leudar wrote:
>
>> Hello all,
>> I want to start making a standalone 8 channel player (maybe more)  -
>> something that can be used in museums, festivals etc for sound
>> installations that can just be turned on and will instantly start looping
>> a
>> multichannel composition on an sd card. At the moment I am using rather
>> unwieldly setups of small computers and multi channel soundcards such as
>> RME and motu. Cables can easily be jogged loose and it would be nice to
>> have something more robust and that staff can easily just turn on and off.
>> So I have looked into the arduino (only 12 bit audio) and the raspberry pi
>> but neither seem suitable . Systems already avaailable are ludicrously
>> expensive (1000s of euros) Has anyone got any ideas on the best way to go
>> about this - is there something maybe Im missing with the raspberry pi/
>> arduino that could be customised ? Perhaps a custom made circuit board ?
>> Ideas ?
>> best,
>> Gus
>>
>
> i was thinking of looking into a raspberry pi combined with a usb 1.1
> class compliant audio device such as the ESI Gigaport HD+. that's less than
> 200 euros in hardware for eight channels of output.
> the only downside to this setup is that the outputs are unbalanced rca. if
> necessary, two 4way DI boxes can be added at reasonable extra cost, but
> then those will be 10 times the size of the actual player unit...
>
>
> --
> Jörn Nettingsmeier
> Lortzingstr. 11, 45128 Essen, Tel. +49 177 7937487
>
> Meister für Veranstaltungstechnik (Bühne/Studio)
> Tonmeister VDT
>
> http://stackingdwarves.net
>
>
> __**_
> Sursound mailing list
> Sursound@music.vt.edu
> https://mail.music.vt.edu/**mailman/listinfo/sursound
>



-- 
07580951119

augustine.leudar.com
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Making a standalone 8ch player

[Jörn Nettingsmeier]

On 05/23/2013 01:25 PM, Augustine Leudar wrote:

Hello all,
I want to start making a standalone 8 channel player (maybe more)  -
something that can be used in museums, festivals etc for sound
installations that can just be turned on and will instantly start looping a
multichannel composition on an sd card. At the moment I am using rather
unwieldly setups of small computers and multi channel soundcards such as
RME and motu. Cables can easily be jogged loose and it would be nice to
have something more robust and that staff can easily just turn on and off.
So I have looked into the arduino (only 12 bit audio) and the raspberry pi
but neither seem suitable . Systems already avaailable are ludicrously
expensive (1000s of euros) Has anyone got any ideas on the best way to go
about this - is there something maybe Im missing with the raspberry pi/
arduino that could be customised ? Perhaps a custom made circuit board ?
Ideas ?
best,
Gus


i was thinking of looking into a raspberry pi combined with a usb 1.1 
class compliant audio device such as the ESI Gigaport HD+. that's less 
than 200 euros in hardware for eight channels of output.
the only downside to this setup is that the outputs are unbalanced rca. 
if necessary, two 4way DI boxes can be added at reasonable extra cost, 
but then those will be 10 times the size of the actual player unit...



--
Jörn Nettingsmeier
Lortzingstr. 11, 45128 Essen, Tel. +49 177 7937487

Meister für Veranstaltungstechnik (Bühne/Studio)
Tonmeister VDT

http://stackingdwarves.net

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Making a standalone 8ch PLayer

[Ben Bloomberg]

Sampo, the problem with ASIC is you have to spend millions to get a working
chip. FPGA is much, much more flexible and basically the stepping stone to
designing ASIC (i.e. a lot of the tools are the same, but if you screw up
you can just reflash instead of having to order a new chip). So its worth
creating FPGA before going to ASIC; it is still much cheaper (and obviously
more flexible) if you will be making less than 100,000 (?) chips. That's
why people like Studer or Digico use FPGA in their mixers. In the case of
Studer, you can reflash the whole desk and exactly choose the number of
buses, channels, processing, etc...

Also for what its worth, none of these configurable chip technologies are
quite as simple as you make them out to be. Yeah, you can write code, but
you need to take a lot of other stuff into account before your design will
run. Like timing. For example, if there is some sequence of logic
operations (multipliers, memory reads, etc...), can it actually complete in
the period of one clock cycle? Sometimes that period can be as small as
1ns. Compile time can be 45 minutes even for simple stuff. Sometimes
modules will simulate fine but not actually run in hardware (requiring more
equipment to debug). Although its way easier than EE/old-school IC design,
you still can't be 'just' writing code (for that you may as well use
ARM/x86). You can get an FPGA dev board with plenty of oomph and high speed
USB for $60, but you'll have a hell of a time squeezing any complex
C-compiled code on there.

If you are interested in higher level FPGA design tools, check out
Bluespec
(also
here ). I haven't
used it myself, but it is supposed to be pretty useful. Otherewise, VHDL or
Verilog are the way to go.

Intel has some cheap Atom dev boards with both FPGA and 1.6Ghz Atom,
network, PCI, etc...  I haven't had great experience putting audio on ARM
platforms if anything else is happening at the same time (like control,
network streaming, etc...). But most of our ARM experiments have been on
phones and raspberry pi, so that's probably not the best platform.

Digging up code from 4 years ago for those who are (still) interested, will
try to get it up beginning of next week if I can track it all down.

Ben




On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 7:21 AM, Dave Malham  wrote:

> For info, some approx prices ( inc uk vat);
>  Beaglebone£36
> AM3359 CPU  £30
> ADAU1966 DAC (16 channel 24 bit balanced out, 200kHz
>   £13  (yes that's thirteen...)
> The evaluation board for the DAC is around £250 so not a viable option for
> production but a good way of trying it out as it goes to a standard loom
> with D type connectors at one end and xlr's at the other.
>
> Particularly in terms of the DAC, I don't think daisy chaining of cheaper
> stereo units could possibly be cheaper, though if you wanted to go for 8
> channel chunks there's the AD1933/4 at about half the price of adau1966.
>
> Dave
>
> On 24 May 2013 09:36, Michael Chapman  wrote:
>
> > Sampo à écrit:
> >
> > Seriously, if even this kind of a list really wanted to make something
> > happen, we could easily forget about PLAs, FPGAs, Arms, Intels and
> > everything else. The price of a pure pedal-to-the-metal ASIC is so low,
> > and it's allure so great to major hardware manufacturers (if done
> > right), that we could actually jump to that final semiconductor
> > technology right now. Seriously. :)
> > ___
> >
> > I'm usually negative about IP (patents, registered designs, ...), but an
> > anecdote:
> > Knew a zoologist who invented a wonderful gadget. Published the design.
> > Then went to a manufacturer.
> > They agreed it was wonderful, but said that tooling up to make it did not
> > make commercial sense, as once they'd 'created the market' they would be
> > undercut and they'd lose out.
> > So if you want to be sure of a manufacturer you may need to be able to
> > licence it.
> > Sure you can insist on sensible pricing as part of the licence (and not
> > take any revenue oneself ...).
> >
> > Michael
> >
> >
> > PS Minor point,not worth responding at the time: But my 'daisy-chaining'
> > argument did involve a 'chain', i.e. a bit of wire between boxes ... for
> > the synch, the clock, whatever ...
> > MC
> >
> > ___
> > Sursound mailing list
> > Sursound@music.vt.edu
> > https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
> >
>
>
>
> --
> As of 1st October 2012, I have retired from the University, so this
> disclaimer is redundant
>
>
> These are my own views and may or may not be shared by my employer
>
> Dave Malham
> Ex-Music Research Centre
> Department of Music
> The University of York
> Heslington
> York YO10 5DD
> UK
>
> 'Ambisonics - Component Imaging for Audio'
> -- next part --
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> https://mail

Re: [Sursound] Making a standalone 8ch PLayer

[Dave Malham]

For info, some approx prices ( inc uk vat);
 Beaglebone£36
AM3359 CPU  £30
ADAU1966 DAC (16 channel 24 bit balanced out, 200kHz
  £13  (yes that's thirteen...)
The evaluation board for the DAC is around £250 so not a viable option for
production but a good way of trying it out as it goes to a standard loom
with D type connectors at one end and xlr's at the other.

Particularly in terms of the DAC, I don't think daisy chaining of cheaper
stereo units could possibly be cheaper, though if you wanted to go for 8
channel chunks there's the AD1933/4 at about half the price of adau1966.

Dave

On 24 May 2013 09:36, Michael Chapman  wrote:

> Sampo à écrit:
>
> Seriously, if even this kind of a list really wanted to make something
> happen, we could easily forget about PLAs, FPGAs, Arms, Intels and
> everything else. The price of a pure pedal-to-the-metal ASIC is so low,
> and it's allure so great to major hardware manufacturers (if done
> right), that we could actually jump to that final semiconductor
> technology right now. Seriously. :)
> ___
>
> I'm usually negative about IP (patents, registered designs, ...), but an
> anecdote:
> Knew a zoologist who invented a wonderful gadget. Published the design.
> Then went to a manufacturer.
> They agreed it was wonderful, but said that tooling up to make it did not
> make commercial sense, as once they'd 'created the market' they would be
> undercut and they'd lose out.
> So if you want to be sure of a manufacturer you may need to be able to
> licence it.
> Sure you can insist on sensible pricing as part of the licence (and not
> take any revenue oneself ...).
>
> Michael
>
>
> PS Minor point,not worth responding at the time: But my 'daisy-chaining'
> argument did involve a 'chain', i.e. a bit of wire between boxes ... for
> the synch, the clock, whatever ...
> MC
>
> ___
> Sursound mailing list
> Sursound@music.vt.edu
> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
>



-- 
As of 1st October 2012, I have retired from the University, so this
disclaimer is redundant


These are my own views and may or may not be shared by my employer

Dave Malham
Ex-Music Research Centre
Department of Music
The University of York
Heslington
York YO10 5DD
UK

'Ambisonics - Component Imaging for Audio'
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Making a standalone 8ch PLayer

[Bo-Erik Sandholm]

Borrowing ideas from 
http://www.audiorail.com/faqs.htm#F4.
for linking  units might  be a good idea.

Will slow down and stop spamming the group for a while :-)
- Bo-Erik


-Original Message-
From: sursound-boun...@music.vt.edu [mailto:sursound-boun...@music.vt.edu] On 
Behalf Of Michael Chapman
Sent: den 24 maj 2013 10:36
To: Surround Sound discussion group 
Subject: Re: [Sursound] Making a standalone 8ch PLayer

Sampo à écrit:

Seriously, if even this kind of a list really wanted to make something happen, 
we could easily forget about PLAs, FPGAs, Arms, Intels and everything else. The 
price of a pure pedal-to-the-metal ASIC is so low, and it's allure so great to 
major hardware manufacturers (if done right), that we could actually jump to 
that final semiconductor technology right now. Seriously. :) ___

I'm usually negative about IP (patents, registered designs, ...), but an
anecdote:
Knew a zoologist who invented a wonderful gadget. Published the design.
Then went to a manufacturer.
They agreed it was wonderful, but said that tooling up to make it did not make 
commercial sense, as once they'd 'created the market' they would be undercut 
and they'd lose out.
So if you want to be sure of a manufacturer you may need to be able to licence 
it.
Sure you can insist on sensible pricing as part of the licence (and not take 
any revenue oneself ...).

Michael


PS Minor point,not worth responding at the time: But my 'daisy-chaining'
argument did involve a 'chain', i.e. a bit of wire between boxes ... for the 
synch, the clock, whatever ...
MC

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Making a standalone 8ch PLayer

[Michael Chapman]

Sampo à écrit:

Seriously, if even this kind of a list really wanted to make something
happen, we could easily forget about PLAs, FPGAs, Arms, Intels and
everything else. The price of a pure pedal-to-the-metal ASIC is so low,
and it's allure so great to major hardware manufacturers (if done
right), that we could actually jump to that final semiconductor
technology right now. Seriously. :)
___

I'm usually negative about IP (patents, registered designs, ...), but an
anecdote:
Knew a zoologist who invented a wonderful gadget. Published the design.
Then went to a manufacturer.
They agreed it was wonderful, but said that tooling up to make it did not
make commercial sense, as once they'd 'created the market' they would be
undercut and they'd lose out.
So if you want to be sure of a manufacturer you may need to be able to
licence it.
Sure you can insist on sensible pricing as part of the licence (and not
take any revenue oneself ...).

Michael


PS Minor point,not worth responding at the time: But my 'daisy-chaining'
argument did involve a 'chain', i.e. a bit of wire between boxes ... for
the synch, the clock, whatever ...
MC

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Making a standalone 8ch PLayer

[Bo-Erik Sandholm]

As a follow up to the postings of Dave Malham and  Sampo Syreeni  I want to put 
in a bit of information that Google have found for me during a number of hours.

As far as I can find I2S based DA audio interface is the way to go. 
Until very recently most if not all DIY interfaces have been done for just 2 
channels with the exception below that I found today.
As far as I can find software examples for I2S drivers seems to be simple to 
find :-)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I%C2%B2S

Multichannel asynchronous USB to I2S audio interface delivering 384 kHz 32bit 
low-jitter bit-perfect performance - 8 Channels
Could this concept be expanded to 16 or more channels?
Eliminate the intermediate USB interface and instead  directly connect to an 
ARM processor 
http://exadevices.com/exaU2I/Overview.aspx
Or follow davids idea and change interface to Ethernet and synchronize several 
8 channel devices or expand the device to at least 16 channels - I will not 
user mot than 16 loudspeakers I thing.

Here is something with 8 channel I2S DAC but totally wrong pricelevel
http://www.twistedpearaudio.com/digital/buffalo8.aspx

Use this instead to get multiple of 8 output channels for low cost but good 
enough?
http://www.wolfsonmicro.com/products/dacs/WM8768/

If we want to go directly from I2S to Loudspeakers.
TAS5715PHP 25-W Stereo I2S Audio Amplifier With Speaker EQ, 2-Band DRC, And DC 
Protection The TAS5715 is a 25-W, efficient, digital audio-power amplifier for 
driving stereo bridge-tied speakers. One serial data
 http://www.digchip.com/datasheets/parts/datasheet/477/TAS5715.php

A software component
http://github.xcore.com/sc_i2s/summary.html

So there are several design decisions to make, I actually belive the ideal 
"product" for me would be a 
16 channel dac with Ethernet input and unbalanced outouts on a pin row to take 
36 or 50 pin flatcable to for example a centronics panel connector, or 
interface to a circuit board with RCA connectors for power amp connectivity.

Combine this with ambdec and a streaming protocol would be good. 
Just a SD card bformat playing ARM singlecard computer would be OK :-)

Best Regards
Bo-Erik Sandholm 


___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Making a standalone 8ch PLayer

[Sampo Syreeni]

On 2013-05-23, Dave Malham wrote:

I looked into this a year ago and the RPi unfortunately is crippled 
for this because the processor used only supports two channels of 
audio - HDMI iirc actually only allows for multichannel though it 
mandates stereo.


BTW, this discussion brings to my mind an old low level hardware 
question of mine. Namely, how about making your own A/D/A? What's really 
the absolute minimum in hardware cost for a de novo design you can think 
of, for outputting and/or inputting each incremental channel count 
required by the successive ambisonic orders? Those (n+1)^2 channels, for 
each successive, realistic n? N=0 and n=1 are trivial, because whatever 
they use for 5.1 already carries it. But how about n=2..4? That's 9 to 
16 channels. What's the cheapest means of getting at least CD quality on 
each of them, without undue burden in software development, and an undue 
penalty in things like (hardware, software?) synchronization capability? 
Presuming any and all circuit topologies are allowed? Has anybody 
thought of this kind of amateur approach of late, on the digital side of 
things, as they once did on the analog frontier?


By the back of my envelope, at least third order could be done reliably 
at CD quality at very low cost, even as a (separately powered) USB 
peripheral. It's 16*16*44.1e3 bps, yielding ~26mbps, so that it's 
roughly 1/4 of the total bandwidth of 100mpbs Ethernet. It isn't too 
much magic to fit that into the newer versions of USB either, and in 
particular a simple packing of the bits into an Ethernet frame buys you 
everything you need for it. Then, an external power source (one of the 
ultracheap Chinese ones for mobile phone charging?), maybe some synch 
logic around them individual multichannel (Crystal/Analog?) chips, and 
you're game. I think.


What's the minimum cost? I'd argue that it's in the vicinity of $10-20 
at cost, and perhaps $50 after all is said and done. For sixteen phase 
coherent, CD-like, line-level, unbalanced, analog output channels which 
are then usable at will for not only ambisonic, but for whatever you 
want. Maybe $70-80 if you want a strictly synchronized A/D set as well. 
It wouldn't look pretty with all of those cords and connectors running 
off the thing, but it'd royally get the thing done. You could instrument 
your granny with something like that.


I might well be wrong since I'm no hardware guru. But still, has anybody 
else thought about revisiting the early (quad era or so) DIY-thinking, 
with a view towards the current digital age? Instead of picking the 
cheapest valves and/or transistors for an analog circuit design and vice 
versa, now picking the densest multichannel converter chips on the same 
kind of cost/benefit curve?


If they have, where do people twiddle those particular kinds of 
bits? I'd like to see it done and perhaps contribute. Maybe the new 
breed of SDR minded radio amateurs might be of help, since the ham 
circuit certainly retains the DIY mindset, even in an explicitly legally 
sanctioned form. Those folks know their DSP and their hardware by 
necessity. Who else?


If nobody minds low tech, multiband, nerd audio band I/O appliances, do 
we need a new forum for such work? Is anybody interested in such a thing 
now/yet?


The BeagleBoard (or rather the BeagleBone) is a better choice though 
slightly more expensive.


As you can imagine, I hate it when people talk about named products 
instead of talking about the technology underlying them. "Beagle" 
doesn't tell me anything, apart from the fact that I'm not getting it 
any time soon.


By this, I mean more or less three things: 1) I'm an exemplar of a 
person who cannot afford most of the high software or hardware which we 
talk about (and I very much like to talk about, and dream of having some 
day yet), so that I can maybe speak a bit for "the great unwashed", 2) 
eventhough I'm just a wannabe engineer, I still like to return the 
discussion to the most basic/basest of things, in order to cut away the 
bullshit/hype/extraneous complexity, and 3) I thus like to remind the 
list of the humble quad beginnings and seamless scalability promises of 
ambisonic, because that's where the adoption necessarily has to begin 
with; not with e.g. Ralph Glascal's better-than-best setup.


It has to start with the greatest common denominator, even if we scheme 
for world domination. Of late, I haven't seen too much analysis of the 
simplest things on-list. So I complain. :)


I have one and a multichannel audio board which I've been meaning to 
hook up since last year. The DAC is on an evaluation board for the 
ADAU1966 (which has 16 outputs).


Strike me dead, they now really integrate it all the way upto third 
order capability. So, how expensive is that in small numbers, and what 
sort of support circuitry (mostly buffer amps and power delivery) does 
it require in order for it to reliably drive an external analog 
chain*16? Can the same be done cheape

Re: [Sursound] Making a standalone 8ch PLayer

[Dave Malham]

I looked into this a year ago and the RPi unfortunately is crippled for
this because the processor used only supports two channels of audio - HDMI
iirc actually only allows for multichannel though it mandates stereo. The
BeagleBoard (or rather the BeagleBone) is a better choice though slightly
more expensive. I have one and a multichannel audio board which I've been
meaning to hook up since last year. The DAC is on an evaluation board for
the ADAU1966 (which has 16 outputs )  I also have a sample of the AD1934
which I will need to make a pcb for. The eventual end result (as a product)
would be a board with an Arm, a dac and an SD card interface, nowt much
more. Given the ridiculously low cost of Arms (and similar processors)
these days I'm very dubious about using arrays for anything but a mass
market product with large sales (or something that needed to be thoroughly
copy protected)  - 10 years ago I would have said the opposite.

Dave

On 23 May 2013 18:31, dw  wrote:

> On 23/05/2013 17:17, Simon Edmonds wrote:
>
>> Ooops - I'll try that again
>>
>> Raspberry Pi has HDMI
>>
>> HDMI supports 8 channels of HD digital audio
>>
>
> I wasted a lot of time trying. I think the RPi only supports two channels
> on HDMI, or did six months ago.
> Jackd also seemed to be broken, although some sort of  fix emerged.
> BruteFIR worked though :-)
>
>
>
>
>> then a breakout box to take the 8 channels of audio to analogue?
>>
>> Simon Edmonds
>>
>> Logic Workshop Limited | Strategic, Technical & Creative Marketing
>> Services
>> __**__
>>
>> Ty Llwyd House | Nantyderry | Abergavenny | Monmouthshire | NP7 9DG | UK
>> __**__
>>
>> M: +44 (0)7740 194680
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> __**_
>> Sursound mailing list
>> Sursound@music.vt.edu
>> https://mail.music.vt.edu/**mailman/listinfo/sursound
>>
>>
> __**_
> Sursound mailing list
> Sursound@music.vt.edu
> https://mail.music.vt.edu/**mailman/listinfo/sursound
>



-- 
As of 1st October 2012, I have retired from the University, so this
disclaimer is redundant


These are my own views and may or may not be shared by my employer

Dave Malham
Ex-Music Research Centre
Department of Music
The University of York
Heslington
York YO10 5DD
UK

'Ambisonics - Component Imaging for Audio'
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Making a standalone 8ch PLayer

[dw]

On 23/05/2013 17:17, Simon Edmonds wrote:

Ooops - I'll try that again

Raspberry Pi has HDMI

HDMI supports 8 channels of HD digital audio


I wasted a lot of time trying. I think the RPi only supports two 
channels on HDMI, or did six months ago.

Jackd also seemed to be broken, although some sort of  fix emerged.
BruteFIR worked though :-)





then a breakout box to take the 8 channels of audio to analogue?

Simon Edmonds

Logic Workshop Limited | Strategic, Technical & Creative Marketing Services


Ty Llwyd House | Nantyderry | Abergavenny | Monmouthshire | NP7 9DG | UK


M: +44 (0)7740 194680





___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound



___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Making a standalone 8ch PLayer

[Simon Edmonds]

Ooops - I'll try that again

Raspberry Pi has HDMI

HDMI supports 8 channels of HD digital audio

then a breakout box to take the 8 channels of audio to analogue?

Simon Edmonds 

Logic Workshop Limited | Strategic, Technical & Creative Marketing Services


Ty Llwyd House | Nantyderry | Abergavenny | Monmouthshire | NP7 9DG | UK
 

M: +44 (0)7740 194680





___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Making a standalone 8ch PLayer

[Simon Edmonds]

then a breakout box to take the 8 channels of audio to analogue?

Simon Edmonds 


Logic Workshop Limited | Strategic, Technical & Creative Marketing Services


Ty Llwyd House | Nantyderry | Abergavenny | Monmouthshire | NP7 9DG | UK
 

M: +44 (0)7740 194680





___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Making a standalone 8ch player

[Augustine Leudar]

Thanks Ben and Alexis ! Great info - Ben I would definitely be
interested in that code - Alexis your project sounds amazing (;
best,
Gus
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Making a standalone 8ch player

[Ben Bloomberg]

Cool I'll put things on Github !

Ben


On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 9:55 AM, Bo-Erik Sandholm <
bo-erik.sandh...@ericsson.com> wrote:

> Hi
> I would love to get any code, schematics  or any other information you can
> release on this.
> I would some day like to try and combine low cost FPGA chips and many
> channels of DA chips to build simple multiple of 8 channel sound cards that
> could receive channels over adat, i2s or just a multichannel pcm stream.
>
> Preferably avoiding going via expensive intermediate interfaces. I thing a
> RPi as a multichannel player with simple interface to a FPGA based
> ambisonic decoder with loadbale speaker configurations would be a very neat
> thing.
>
> Best Regards
> Bo-Erik Sandholm
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: sursound-boun...@music.vt.edu [mailto:sursound-boun...@music.vt.edu]
> On Behalf Of Ben Bloomberg
> Sent: den 23 maj 2013 15:28
> To: Surround Sound discussion group
> Subject: Re: [Sursound] Making a standalone 8ch player
>
> I have some FPGA code to drive 4 and 8 channel Burr Brown DACs (PCM3168a,
> PCM1608) I could pass along.
>
> It's quite messy and I haven't worked on it in a while (4 years) but it
> also implements a 3rd order ambisonic encoder/decoder and streaming input
> via USB. The coefficients are all stored in a LUT in onboard memory to
> avoid lots of multiplication/trig. It wouldn't be too hard to modify it to
> grab wavs from an SD card. I've been using the Nexys2 platform from
> digilent.  FPGALink is a pretty cool USB library that does highspeed IO.
> PCM3168 is a tough chip to solder though...
>
> Ben
>
>
>
> On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 8:47 AM, Alexis Shaw 
> wrote:
>
> > I am working on a system that can drive 40 or so channels based on a
> > zynq
> > 7020 processor.
> >
> > The zedboard which is the dev kit i am working with costs 320 for
> > academics and ~400 for commercial uses.
> >
> > This will then drive a series of dac boards that I am working on. They
> > are likely to cost about 200 each for 8 channels (ESS).
> >
> > Cheaper dac boards could be invisiged, or even direct driving digital
> > class D modulators. I am mainly working on the player-control hardware.
> >
> > Regards.
> >
> >
> > On Thursday, May 23, 2013, Augustine Leudar wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Alexis,
> > > yes the box would need DA converters if thats what you mean. I am
> > thinking
> > > 8 outputs to start with min 16 bit 44.1 but it would be nice to have
> > > something that could be easily customisable for more
> > >
> > > On 23 May 2013 14:08, Alexis Shaw  > > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > >  Do you need internal dacs.
> > > >
> > > > How many channels do you need implemented.
> > > >
> > > > I am working on a solution to the same problem at the moment.
> > > >
> > > > On Thursday, May 23, 2013, Marc Lavallée wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > That's an interesting idea: clustering Raspberry Pis with cheap
> > > > > 8 channels usb modules and jackd2.
> > > > > --
> > > > > Marc
> > > > >
> > > > > "Michael Chapman" 
> > > > > >
> > a
> > > écrit :
> > > > >
> > > > > > > Hello all,
> > > > > > > I want to start making a standalone 8 channel player (maybe
> > > > > > > more)
> > >  -
> > > > > > > something that can be used in museums, festivals etc for
> > > > > > > sound installations that can just be turned on and will
> > > > > > > instantly start looping a multichannel composition on an sd
> > > > > > > card. At the moment I am using rather unwieldly setups of
> > > > > > > small computers and multi channel soundcards such as RME and
> > > > > > > motu. Cables can easily be jogged
> > loose
> > > > > > > and it would be nice to have something more robust and that
> > > > > > > staff can easily just turn on and off. So I have looked into
> > > > > > > the
> > arduino
> > > > > > > (only 12 bit audio) and the raspberry pi but neither seem
> > > > > > > suitable . Systems already avaailable are ludicrously
> > > > > > > expensive (1000s of euros) Has anyone got any ideas on the
> > > > > > > best way to go about this - is there s

Re: [Sursound] Making a standalone 8ch player

[Ben Bloomberg]

That sounds awesome and very useful.

This system was intended to be very, very low cost with home-theater grade
DACs. The whole thing including processing and DACs is intended to be under
$200 for up to 32 channels to put this stuff in the hands of high school
and academic theaters, who could buy this and use it instead of an audio
interface.

 FPGA are great for this kind of thing because much of the heavy lifting
can happen in parallel on the chip. Anyway, then I started doing larger
scale stuff and sort of dropped the project. But all the pieces are still
there...

Ben


On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 9:38 AM, Alexis Shaw  wrote:

> I'm working on having this implement a 4th order ambisonic decoder.
>
> The cool thing here is that there is a dual core arm processor on board
> that can
> run linux, so I can have a 40 or more channel hardware interface and
> have it act as
> an output that takes a 4th order ambisonic signal from software. Or at
> least that is
> the idea.
>
> There actually seems to be enough io to output to well over 100 channels.
> And there
> Is a heap of DSP resources on this thing.
>
> I don't know how popular this would be or how much time it will take,
> however there
> Is a huge amount that can be done here.
>
> On Thursday, May 23, 2013, Ben Bloomberg wrote:
>
> > I have some FPGA code to drive 4 and 8 channel Burr Brown DACs (PCM3168a,
> > PCM1608) I could pass along.
> >
> > It's quite messy and I haven't worked on it in a while (4 years) but it
> > also implements a 3rd order ambisonic encoder/decoder and streaming input
> > via USB. The coefficients are all stored in a LUT in onboard memory to
> > avoid lots of multiplication/trig. It wouldn't be too hard to modify it
> to
> > grab wavs from an SD card. I've been using the Nexys2 platform from
> > digilent.  FPGALink is a pretty cool USB library that does highspeed IO.
> > PCM3168 is a tough chip to solder though...
> >
> > Ben
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 8:47 AM, Alexis Shaw  >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I am working on a system that can drive 40 or so channels based on a
> zynq
> > > 7020 processor.
> > >
> > > The zedboard which is the dev kit i am working with costs 320 for
> > academics
> > > and ~400 for commercial uses.
> > >
> > > This will then drive a series of dac boards that I am working on. They
> > are
> > > likely to cost about 200 each for 8 channels (ESS).
> > >
> > > Cheaper dac boards could be invisiged, or even direct driving digital
> > class
> > > D modulators. I am mainly working on the player-control hardware.
> > >
> > > Regards.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thursday, May 23, 2013, Augustine Leudar wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Alexis,
> > > > yes the box would need DA converters if thats what you mean. I am
> > > thinking
> > > > 8 outputs to start with min 16 bit 44.1 but it would be nice to have
> > > > something that could be easily customisable for more
> > > >
> > > > On 23 May 2013 14:08, Alexis Shaw  >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >  Do you need internal dacs.
> > > > >
> > > > > How many channels do you need implemented.
> > > > >
> > > > > I am working on a solution to the same problem at the moment.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thursday, May 23, 2013, Marc Lavallée wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > That's an interesting idea: clustering Raspberry Pis
> > > > > > with cheap 8 channels usb modules and jackd2.
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Marc
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "Michael Chapman"  
> > > > > > >
> > > a
> > > > écrit :
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hello all,
> > > > > > > > I want to start making a standalone 8 channel player (maybe
> > more)
> > > >  -
> > > > > > > > something that can be used in museums, festivals etc for
> sound
> > > > > > > > installations that can just be turned on and will instantly
> > start
> > > > > > > > looping a
> > > > > > > > multichannel composition on an sd card. At the moment I am
> > using
> > > > > > > > rather unwieldly setups of small computers and multi channel
> > > > > > > > soundcards such as RME and motu. Cables can easily be jogged
> > > loose
> > > > > > > > and it would be nice to have something more robust and that
> > staff
> > > > > > > > can easily just turn on and off. So I have looked into the
> > > arduino
> > > > > > > > (only 12 bit audio) and the raspberry pi but neither seem
> > > > > > > > suitable . Systems already avaailable are ludicrously
> expensive
> > > > > > > > (1000s of euros) Has anyone got any ideas on the best way to
> go
> > > > > > > > about this - is there something maybe Im missing with the
> > > raspberry
> > > > > > > > pi/ arduino that could be customised ? Perhaps a custom made
> > > > > > > > circuit board ? Ideas ? best,
> > > > > > > > Gus
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > If you are thinking of wider applications I would really
> > encourage
> > > > > > > you to go modular ... that is daisy chainable devices:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 2+2+2+2 = 8
> > > > > > > 4+4 = 8
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 2+2+2+2+ ... = "maybe more"
> > > >

Re: [Sursound] Making a standalone 8ch player

[Bo-Erik Sandholm]

Hi
I would love to get any code, schematics  or any other information you can 
release on this.
I would some day like to try and combine low cost FPGA chips and many channels 
of DA chips to build simple multiple of 8 channel sound cards that could 
receive channels over adat, i2s or just a multichannel pcm stream.

Preferably avoiding going via expensive intermediate interfaces. I thing a RPi 
as a multichannel player with simple interface to a FPGA based ambisonic 
decoder with loadbale speaker configurations would be a very neat thing.

Best Regards
Bo-Erik Sandholm


-Original Message-
From: sursound-boun...@music.vt.edu [mailto:sursound-boun...@music.vt.edu] On 
Behalf Of Ben Bloomberg
Sent: den 23 maj 2013 15:28
To: Surround Sound discussion group
Subject: Re: [Sursound] Making a standalone 8ch player

I have some FPGA code to drive 4 and 8 channel Burr Brown DACs (PCM3168a,
PCM1608) I could pass along.

It's quite messy and I haven't worked on it in a while (4 years) but it also 
implements a 3rd order ambisonic encoder/decoder and streaming input via USB. 
The coefficients are all stored in a LUT in onboard memory to avoid lots of 
multiplication/trig. It wouldn't be too hard to modify it to grab wavs from an 
SD card. I've been using the Nexys2 platform from digilent.  FPGALink is a 
pretty cool USB library that does highspeed IO.
PCM3168 is a tough chip to solder though...

Ben



On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 8:47 AM, Alexis Shaw  wrote:

> I am working on a system that can drive 40 or so channels based on a 
> zynq
> 7020 processor.
>
> The zedboard which is the dev kit i am working with costs 320 for 
> academics and ~400 for commercial uses.
>
> This will then drive a series of dac boards that I am working on. They 
> are likely to cost about 200 each for 8 channels (ESS).
>
> Cheaper dac boards could be invisiged, or even direct driving digital 
> class D modulators. I am mainly working on the player-control hardware.
>
> Regards.
>
>
> On Thursday, May 23, 2013, Augustine Leudar wrote:
>
> > Hi Alexis,
> > yes the box would need DA converters if thats what you mean. I am
> thinking
> > 8 outputs to start with min 16 bit 44.1 but it would be nice to have 
> > something that could be easily customisable for more
> >
> > On 23 May 2013 14:08, Alexis Shaw  > >
> > wrote:
> >
> > >  Do you need internal dacs.
> > >
> > > How many channels do you need implemented.
> > >
> > > I am working on a solution to the same problem at the moment.
> > >
> > > On Thursday, May 23, 2013, Marc Lavallée wrote:
> > >
> > > > That's an interesting idea: clustering Raspberry Pis with cheap 
> > > > 8 channels usb modules and jackd2.
> > > > --
> > > > Marc
> > > >
> > > > "Michael Chapman"  
> > > > >
> a
> > écrit :
> > > >
> > > > > > Hello all,
> > > > > > I want to start making a standalone 8 channel player (maybe 
> > > > > > more)
> >  -
> > > > > > something that can be used in museums, festivals etc for 
> > > > > > sound installations that can just be turned on and will 
> > > > > > instantly start looping a multichannel composition on an sd 
> > > > > > card. At the moment I am using rather unwieldly setups of 
> > > > > > small computers and multi channel soundcards such as RME and 
> > > > > > motu. Cables can easily be jogged
> loose
> > > > > > and it would be nice to have something more robust and that 
> > > > > > staff can easily just turn on and off. So I have looked into 
> > > > > > the
> arduino
> > > > > > (only 12 bit audio) and the raspberry pi but neither seem 
> > > > > > suitable . Systems already avaailable are ludicrously 
> > > > > > expensive (1000s of euros) Has anyone got any ideas on the 
> > > > > > best way to go about this - is there something maybe Im 
> > > > > > missing with the
> raspberry
> > > > > > pi/ arduino that could be customised ? Perhaps a custom made 
> > > > > > circuit board ? Ideas ? best, Gus
> > > > >
> > > > > If you are thinking of wider applications I would really 
> > > > > encourage you to go modular ... that is daisy chainable devices:
> > > > >
> > > > > 2+2+2+2 = 8
> > > > > 4+4 = 8
> > > > >
> > > > > 2+2+2+2+ ... = "maybe more"
> > >

Re: [Sursound] Making a standalone 8ch player

[Alexis Shaw]

I'm working on having this implement a 4th order ambisonic decoder.

The cool thing here is that there is a dual core arm processor on board
that can
run linux, so I can have a 40 or more channel hardware interface and
have it act as
an output that takes a 4th order ambisonic signal from software. Or at
least that is
the idea.

There actually seems to be enough io to output to well over 100 channels.
And there
Is a heap of DSP resources on this thing.

I don't know how popular this would be or how much time it will take,
however there
Is a huge amount that can be done here.

On Thursday, May 23, 2013, Ben Bloomberg wrote:

> I have some FPGA code to drive 4 and 8 channel Burr Brown DACs (PCM3168a,
> PCM1608) I could pass along.
>
> It's quite messy and I haven't worked on it in a while (4 years) but it
> also implements a 3rd order ambisonic encoder/decoder and streaming input
> via USB. The coefficients are all stored in a LUT in onboard memory to
> avoid lots of multiplication/trig. It wouldn't be too hard to modify it to
> grab wavs from an SD card. I've been using the Nexys2 platform from
> digilent.  FPGALink is a pretty cool USB library that does highspeed IO.
> PCM3168 is a tough chip to solder though...
>
> Ben
>
>
>
> On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 8:47 AM, Alexis Shaw 
> >
> wrote:
>
> > I am working on a system that can drive 40 or so channels based on a zynq
> > 7020 processor.
> >
> > The zedboard which is the dev kit i am working with costs 320 for
> academics
> > and ~400 for commercial uses.
> >
> > This will then drive a series of dac boards that I am working on. They
> are
> > likely to cost about 200 each for 8 channels (ESS).
> >
> > Cheaper dac boards could be invisiged, or even direct driving digital
> class
> > D modulators. I am mainly working on the player-control hardware.
> >
> > Regards.
> >
> >
> > On Thursday, May 23, 2013, Augustine Leudar wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Alexis,
> > > yes the box would need DA converters if thats what you mean. I am
> > thinking
> > > 8 outputs to start with min 16 bit 44.1 but it would be nice to have
> > > something that could be easily customisable for more
> > >
> > > On 23 May 2013 14:08, Alexis Shaw 
> > > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > >  Do you need internal dacs.
> > > >
> > > > How many channels do you need implemented.
> > > >
> > > > I am working on a solution to the same problem at the moment.
> > > >
> > > > On Thursday, May 23, 2013, Marc Lavallée wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > That's an interesting idea: clustering Raspberry Pis
> > > > > with cheap 8 channels usb modules and jackd2.
> > > > > --
> > > > > Marc
> > > > >
> > > > > "Michael Chapman"  
> > > > > >
> > a
> > > écrit :
> > > > >
> > > > > > > Hello all,
> > > > > > > I want to start making a standalone 8 channel player (maybe
> more)
> > >  -
> > > > > > > something that can be used in museums, festivals etc for sound
> > > > > > > installations that can just be turned on and will instantly
> start
> > > > > > > looping a
> > > > > > > multichannel composition on an sd card. At the moment I am
> using
> > > > > > > rather unwieldly setups of small computers and multi channel
> > > > > > > soundcards such as RME and motu. Cables can easily be jogged
> > loose
> > > > > > > and it would be nice to have something more robust and that
> staff
> > > > > > > can easily just turn on and off. So I have looked into the
> > arduino
> > > > > > > (only 12 bit audio) and the raspberry pi but neither seem
> > > > > > > suitable . Systems already avaailable are ludicrously expensive
> > > > > > > (1000s of euros) Has anyone got any ideas on the best way to go
> > > > > > > about this - is there something maybe Im missing with the
> > raspberry
> > > > > > > pi/ arduino that could be customised ? Perhaps a custom made
> > > > > > > circuit board ? Ideas ? best,
> > > > > > > Gus
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If you are thinking of wider applications I would really
> encourage
> > > > > > you to go modular ... that is daisy chainable devices:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 2+2+2+2 = 8
> > > > > > 4+4 = 8
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 2+2+2+2+ ... = "maybe more"
> > > > > >
> > > > > > even if it is
> > > > > > 8+ ... = "maybe more"
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Good hunting,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Michael
> > > > > ___
> > > > > Sursound mailing list
> > > > > Sursound@music.vt.edu   
> > > > > https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
> > > > >
> > > > -- next part --
> > > > An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> > > > URL: <
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20130523/46a19a71/attachment.html
> > > > >
> > > > ___
> > > > Sursound mailing list
> > > > Sursound@music.vt.edu  
> > > > https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > 07580951119
> > >
> > > augustine.leudar.com
> > > -- next part ---

Re: [Sursound] Making a standalone 8ch player

[Ben Bloomberg]

I have some FPGA code to drive 4 and 8 channel Burr Brown DACs (PCM3168a,
PCM1608) I could pass along.

It's quite messy and I haven't worked on it in a while (4 years) but it
also implements a 3rd order ambisonic encoder/decoder and streaming input
via USB. The coefficients are all stored in a LUT in onboard memory to
avoid lots of multiplication/trig. It wouldn't be too hard to modify it to
grab wavs from an SD card. I've been using the Nexys2 platform from
digilent.  FPGALink is a pretty cool USB library that does highspeed IO.
PCM3168 is a tough chip to solder though...

Ben



On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 8:47 AM, Alexis Shaw  wrote:

> I am working on a system that can drive 40 or so channels based on a zynq
> 7020 processor.
>
> The zedboard which is the dev kit i am working with costs 320 for academics
> and ~400 for commercial uses.
>
> This will then drive a series of dac boards that I am working on. They are
> likely to cost about 200 each for 8 channels (ESS).
>
> Cheaper dac boards could be invisiged, or even direct driving digital class
> D modulators. I am mainly working on the player-control hardware.
>
> Regards.
>
>
> On Thursday, May 23, 2013, Augustine Leudar wrote:
>
> > Hi Alexis,
> > yes the box would need DA converters if thats what you mean. I am
> thinking
> > 8 outputs to start with min 16 bit 44.1 but it would be nice to have
> > something that could be easily customisable for more
> >
> > On 23 May 2013 14:08, Alexis Shaw >
> > wrote:
> >
> > >  Do you need internal dacs.
> > >
> > > How many channels do you need implemented.
> > >
> > > I am working on a solution to the same problem at the moment.
> > >
> > > On Thursday, May 23, 2013, Marc Lavallée wrote:
> > >
> > > > That's an interesting idea: clustering Raspberry Pis
> > > > with cheap 8 channels usb modules and jackd2.
> > > > --
> > > > Marc
> > > >
> > > > "Michael Chapman"  >
> a
> > écrit :
> > > >
> > > > > > Hello all,
> > > > > > I want to start making a standalone 8 channel player (maybe more)
> >  -
> > > > > > something that can be used in museums, festivals etc for sound
> > > > > > installations that can just be turned on and will instantly start
> > > > > > looping a
> > > > > > multichannel composition on an sd card. At the moment I am using
> > > > > > rather unwieldly setups of small computers and multi channel
> > > > > > soundcards such as RME and motu. Cables can easily be jogged
> loose
> > > > > > and it would be nice to have something more robust and that staff
> > > > > > can easily just turn on and off. So I have looked into the
> arduino
> > > > > > (only 12 bit audio) and the raspberry pi but neither seem
> > > > > > suitable . Systems already avaailable are ludicrously expensive
> > > > > > (1000s of euros) Has anyone got any ideas on the best way to go
> > > > > > about this - is there something maybe Im missing with the
> raspberry
> > > > > > pi/ arduino that could be customised ? Perhaps a custom made
> > > > > > circuit board ? Ideas ? best,
> > > > > > Gus
> > > > >
> > > > > If you are thinking of wider applications I would really encourage
> > > > > you to go modular ... that is daisy chainable devices:
> > > > >
> > > > > 2+2+2+2 = 8
> > > > > 4+4 = 8
> > > > >
> > > > > 2+2+2+2+ ... = "maybe more"
> > > > >
> > > > > even if it is
> > > > > 8+ ... = "maybe more"
> > > > >
> > > > > Good hunting,
> > > > >
> > > > > Michael
> > > > ___
> > > > Sursound mailing list
> > > > Sursound@music.vt.edu  
> > > > https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
> > > >
> > > -- next part --
> > > An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> > > URL: <
> > >
> >
> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20130523/46a19a71/attachment.html
> > > >
> > > ___
> > > Sursound mailing list
> > > Sursound@music.vt.edu 
> > > https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > 07580951119
> >
> > augustine.leudar.com
> > -- next part --
> > An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> > URL: <
> >
> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20130523/92db3b54/attachment.html
> > >
> > ___
> > Sursound mailing list
> > Sursound@music.vt.edu 
> > https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
> >
> -- next part --
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20130523/f309bbc8/attachment.html
> >
> ___
> Sursound mailing list
> Sursound@music.vt.edu
> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
>
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Sursound m

Re: [Sursound] Making a standalone 8ch player

[Alexis Shaw]

I am working on a system that can drive 40 or so channels based on a zynq
7020 processor.

The zedboard which is the dev kit i am working with costs 320 for academics
and ~400 for commercial uses.

This will then drive a series of dac boards that I am working on. They are
likely to cost about 200 each for 8 channels (ESS).

Cheaper dac boards could be invisiged, or even direct driving digital class
D modulators. I am mainly working on the player-control hardware.

Regards.


On Thursday, May 23, 2013, Augustine Leudar wrote:

> Hi Alexis,
> yes the box would need DA converters if thats what you mean. I am thinking
> 8 outputs to start with min 16 bit 44.1 but it would be nice to have
> something that could be easily customisable for more
>
> On 23 May 2013 14:08, Alexis Shaw >
> wrote:
>
> >  Do you need internal dacs.
> >
> > How many channels do you need implemented.
> >
> > I am working on a solution to the same problem at the moment.
> >
> > On Thursday, May 23, 2013, Marc Lavallée wrote:
> >
> > > That's an interesting idea: clustering Raspberry Pis
> > > with cheap 8 channels usb modules and jackd2.
> > > --
> > > Marc
> > >
> > > "Michael Chapman"  > a
> écrit :
> > >
> > > > > Hello all,
> > > > > I want to start making a standalone 8 channel player (maybe more)
>  -
> > > > > something that can be used in museums, festivals etc for sound
> > > > > installations that can just be turned on and will instantly start
> > > > > looping a
> > > > > multichannel composition on an sd card. At the moment I am using
> > > > > rather unwieldly setups of small computers and multi channel
> > > > > soundcards such as RME and motu. Cables can easily be jogged loose
> > > > > and it would be nice to have something more robust and that staff
> > > > > can easily just turn on and off. So I have looked into the arduino
> > > > > (only 12 bit audio) and the raspberry pi but neither seem
> > > > > suitable . Systems already avaailable are ludicrously expensive
> > > > > (1000s of euros) Has anyone got any ideas on the best way to go
> > > > > about this - is there something maybe Im missing with the raspberry
> > > > > pi/ arduino that could be customised ? Perhaps a custom made
> > > > > circuit board ? Ideas ? best,
> > > > > Gus
> > > >
> > > > If you are thinking of wider applications I would really encourage
> > > > you to go modular ... that is daisy chainable devices:
> > > >
> > > > 2+2+2+2 = 8
> > > > 4+4 = 8
> > > >
> > > > 2+2+2+2+ ... = "maybe more"
> > > >
> > > > even if it is
> > > > 8+ ... = "maybe more"
> > > >
> > > > Good hunting,
> > > >
> > > > Michael
> > > ___
> > > Sursound mailing list
> > > Sursound@music.vt.edu  
> > > https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
> > >
> > -- next part --
> > An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> > URL: <
> >
> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20130523/46a19a71/attachment.html
> > >
> > ___
> > Sursound mailing list
> > Sursound@music.vt.edu 
> > https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
> >
>
>
>
> --
> 07580951119
>
> augustine.leudar.com
> -- next part --
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20130523/92db3b54/attachment.html
> >
> ___
> Sursound mailing list
> Sursound@music.vt.edu 
> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
>
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Making a standalone 8ch player

[Augustine Leudar]

Hi Alexis,
yes the box would need DA converters if thats what you mean. I am thinking
8 outputs to start with min 16 bit 44.1 but it would be nice to have
something that could be easily customisable for more

On 23 May 2013 14:08, Alexis Shaw  wrote:

>  Do you need internal dacs.
>
> How many channels do you need implemented.
>
> I am working on a solution to the same problem at the moment.
>
> On Thursday, May 23, 2013, Marc Lavallée wrote:
>
> > That's an interesting idea: clustering Raspberry Pis
> > with cheap 8 channels usb modules and jackd2.
> > --
> > Marc
> >
> > "Michael Chapman" > a écrit :
> >
> > > > Hello all,
> > > > I want to start making a standalone 8 channel player (maybe more)  -
> > > > something that can be used in museums, festivals etc for sound
> > > > installations that can just be turned on and will instantly start
> > > > looping a
> > > > multichannel composition on an sd card. At the moment I am using
> > > > rather unwieldly setups of small computers and multi channel
> > > > soundcards such as RME and motu. Cables can easily be jogged loose
> > > > and it would be nice to have something more robust and that staff
> > > > can easily just turn on and off. So I have looked into the arduino
> > > > (only 12 bit audio) and the raspberry pi but neither seem
> > > > suitable . Systems already avaailable are ludicrously expensive
> > > > (1000s of euros) Has anyone got any ideas on the best way to go
> > > > about this - is there something maybe Im missing with the raspberry
> > > > pi/ arduino that could be customised ? Perhaps a custom made
> > > > circuit board ? Ideas ? best,
> > > > Gus
> > >
> > > If you are thinking of wider applications I would really encourage
> > > you to go modular ... that is daisy chainable devices:
> > >
> > > 2+2+2+2 = 8
> > > 4+4 = 8
> > >
> > > 2+2+2+2+ ... = "maybe more"
> > >
> > > even if it is
> > > 8+ ... = "maybe more"
> > >
> > > Good hunting,
> > >
> > > Michael
> > ___
> > Sursound mailing list
> > Sursound@music.vt.edu 
> > https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
> >
> -- next part --
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20130523/46a19a71/attachment.html
> >
> ___
> Sursound mailing list
> Sursound@music.vt.edu
> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
>



-- 
07580951119

augustine.leudar.com
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Making a standalone 8ch player

[Augustine Leudar]

>
> Hi Michael ,
>
been there done that - I synced up multiple stereo players that
automatically start playing on power on on many occasions  - however I dont
want to do that anymore partly because the SD card players that start
playing on powerup  are expensive and because I dont trust the timing and
partly becuase I dont want to mess around with lots of boxes and power
supllies etc - I just want to have one box not lots synced together - thus
this post.



> If you are thinking of wider applications I would really encourage you to
> go modular ... that is daisy chainable devices:
>
> 2+2+2+2 = 8
> 4+4 = 8
>
> 2+2+2+2+ ... = "maybe more"
>
> even if it is
> 8+ ... = "maybe more"
>
> Good hunting,
>
> Michael
>
> ___
> Sursound mailing list
> Sursound@music.vt.edu
> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
>



-- 
07580951119

augustine.leudar.com
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Making a standalone 8ch player

[Alexis Shaw]

 Do you need internal dacs.

How many channels do you need implemented.

I am working on a solution to the same problem at the moment.

On Thursday, May 23, 2013, Marc Lavallée wrote:

> That's an interesting idea: clustering Raspberry Pis
> with cheap 8 channels usb modules and jackd2.
> --
> Marc
>
> "Michael Chapman" > a écrit :
>
> > > Hello all,
> > > I want to start making a standalone 8 channel player (maybe more)  -
> > > something that can be used in museums, festivals etc for sound
> > > installations that can just be turned on and will instantly start
> > > looping a
> > > multichannel composition on an sd card. At the moment I am using
> > > rather unwieldly setups of small computers and multi channel
> > > soundcards such as RME and motu. Cables can easily be jogged loose
> > > and it would be nice to have something more robust and that staff
> > > can easily just turn on and off. So I have looked into the arduino
> > > (only 12 bit audio) and the raspberry pi but neither seem
> > > suitable . Systems already avaailable are ludicrously expensive
> > > (1000s of euros) Has anyone got any ideas on the best way to go
> > > about this - is there something maybe Im missing with the raspberry
> > > pi/ arduino that could be customised ? Perhaps a custom made
> > > circuit board ? Ideas ? best,
> > > Gus
> >
> > If you are thinking of wider applications I would really encourage
> > you to go modular ... that is daisy chainable devices:
> >
> > 2+2+2+2 = 8
> > 4+4 = 8
> >
> > 2+2+2+2+ ... = "maybe more"
> >
> > even if it is
> > 8+ ... = "maybe more"
> >
> > Good hunting,
> >
> > Michael
> ___
> Sursound mailing list
> Sursound@music.vt.edu 
> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
>
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Making a standalone 8ch player

[Marc Lavallée]

That's an interesting idea: clustering Raspberry Pis
with cheap 8 channels usb modules and jackd2.
--
Marc

"Michael Chapman"  a écrit :

> > Hello all,
> > I want to start making a standalone 8 channel player (maybe more)  -
> > something that can be used in museums, festivals etc for sound
> > installations that can just be turned on and will instantly start
> > looping a
> > multichannel composition on an sd card. At the moment I am using
> > rather unwieldly setups of small computers and multi channel
> > soundcards such as RME and motu. Cables can easily be jogged loose
> > and it would be nice to have something more robust and that staff
> > can easily just turn on and off. So I have looked into the arduino
> > (only 12 bit audio) and the raspberry pi but neither seem
> > suitable . Systems already avaailable are ludicrously expensive
> > (1000s of euros) Has anyone got any ideas on the best way to go
> > about this - is there something maybe Im missing with the raspberry
> > pi/ arduino that could be customised ? Perhaps a custom made
> > circuit board ? Ideas ? best,
> > Gus
> 
> If you are thinking of wider applications I would really encourage
> you to go modular ... that is daisy chainable devices:
> 
> 2+2+2+2 = 8
> 4+4 = 8
> 
> 2+2+2+2+ ... = "maybe more"
> 
> even if it is
> 8+ ... = "maybe more"
> 
> Good hunting,
> 
> Michael
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Making a standalone 8ch player

[Michael Chapman]

> Hello all,
> I want to start making a standalone 8 channel player (maybe more)  -
> something that can be used in museums, festivals etc for sound
> installations that can just be turned on and will instantly start looping
> a
> multichannel composition on an sd card. At the moment I am using rather
> unwieldly setups of small computers and multi channel soundcards such as
> RME and motu. Cables can easily be jogged loose and it would be nice to
> have something more robust and that staff can easily just turn on and off.
> So I have looked into the arduino (only 12 bit audio) and the raspberry pi
> but neither seem suitable . Systems already avaailable are ludicrously
> expensive (1000s of euros) Has anyone got any ideas on the best way to go
> about this - is there something maybe Im missing with the raspberry pi/
> arduino that could be customised ? Perhaps a custom made circuit board ?
> Ideas ?
> best,
> Gus

If you are thinking of wider applications I would really encourage you to
go modular ... that is daisy chainable devices:

2+2+2+2 = 8
4+4 = 8

2+2+2+2+ ... = "maybe more"

even if it is
8+ ... = "maybe more"

Good hunting,

Michael

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

[Sursound] Making a standalone 8ch player

[Augustine Leudar]

Hello all,
I want to start making a standalone 8 channel player (maybe more)  -
something that can be used in museums, festivals etc for sound
installations that can just be turned on and will instantly start looping a
multichannel composition on an sd card. At the moment I am using rather
unwieldly setups of small computers and multi channel soundcards such as
RME and motu. Cables can easily be jogged loose and it would be nice to
have something more robust and that staff can easily just turn on and off.
So I have looked into the arduino (only 12 bit audio) and the raspberry pi
but neither seem suitable . Systems already avaailable are ludicrously
expensive (1000s of euros) Has anyone got any ideas on the best way to go
about this - is there something maybe Im missing with the raspberry pi/
arduino that could be customised ? Perhaps a custom made circuit board ?
Ideas ?
best,
Gus
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound