By the way, USB3 is now hitting the mainstream, with PCI boards,
motherboards, disk drives and USB sticks from all the major vendors.
It provides a significant bandwidth boost over USB2 (it's designed for
3Gbits/sec, both ways simultaneously). This would be very useful to
any newly designed USR
> If one desired USB instead, then a simple [Cypress] EZ-FX2 USB-2.0
> card with an FMC connector on it, and whatever logic was necessary
> to grab samples from the ADC could be designed and built.
By the way, USB3 is now hitting the mainstream, with PCI boards,
motherboards, disk drives and USB s
On 12.01.2011 20:22, Marcus D. Leech wrote:
If connected to a Xilinx board, FIR and decimation could still be done in the
FPGA.
Agreed.
There's a cheap one here, with USB2 and Spartan3, only 70€ (<$100)
http://www.ztex.de/usb-fpga-1/usb-fpga-1.2.d.html
Or this one for 145€?
http://www.cesys.co
On 12.01.2011 20:22, Marcus D. Leech wrote:
> http://www.sbrac.org/files/digital_receiver2.pdf
>
The RF range is interesting, from 70 MHz to 2.2 GHz.
For USRP you would need 2 different boards to cover that range,
or invest much more money into the WBX transceiver.
> This has a "reasonable" RF Rx
schrieb Marcus D. Leech am 2011-01-12 02:40:
There is a lot of people outside the Linux world, especially in the
non-academic hobbyist corner. These people seem to me to try to work
with least possible changes, that is install no new OS, install no
additional tricky exotic drivers, and at most plu
On 01/12/2011 08:17 AM, Patrick Strasser wrote:
>
> Now that is not exactly the cheap one, but with its 150MSPS it would be
> quite a frequency range with low additional effort.
>
> What would be the goal for such a device? Which bandwidth are of
> interest, which dynamic ranges? Which frequency ra
schrieb Marcus D. Leech am 2011-01-12 02:40:
> Well, I *personally* don't care very much about random-disk-noise, errr,
> I mean Windows,
> but I'm sure others do :-)
There is a lot of people outside the Linux world, especially in the
non-academic hobbyist corner. These people seem to me to try
schrieb Marcus D. Leech on 2011-01-12 01:44:
You just ad a second interface that is HID, which is available on every
platform and easy to handle. That's how all the soundcard-like DDS do it.
Ah, yes of course.
The only problem is that Microsoft promised in 2005 to implement UAC2,
but "forgot"
On Jan 11, 2011, at 5:15 PM, Patrick Strasser wrote:
> The only problem is that Microsoft promised in 2005 to implement UAC2,
> but "forgot" to do it until now. BTW they have a big mess with USB, as
> Daniel Mack, Linux UAC2 author wrote: "Inevery cruel reincarnation of
> their OS, it has differen
schrieb Marcus D. Leech on 2011-01-12 01:44:
> Another thought I had earlier today is that with UAC2 (USB Audio Class
> version 2), there's no limit on the sample rate that a UAC2 device
> can advertise, so it might be nice to make a USB-SDR device "appear"
> to be a UAC2 compliant device. [Well,
schrieb Marcus D. Leech on 2011-01-12 01:16:
> For certain classes of high-bandwidth applications, you're willing to
> sacrifice
> number of bits for bandwidth.
For sure. But you have to commit that your usecase is more the corner
case then the mainstream. With your CPLD mentions below this sho
11 matches
Mail list logo
