stryd_one

It sounds like Doug was 'playing an upright' ;D DW: I'll ask him next week.

Nice! Hahaha welcome to fingerprint city :)

lief! I was wondering where you'd gone buddy! Knew you'd appear on this thread sooner or later heheh Yeh we'll do a proper bulk order when it's all tested OK and we have PCBs made up :) I've just bought those 12 chips, seems there's plenty of interest.

Not *that* kind of lab, that's cheating!

Amen. Testify! *waves hands*

I had this kind of thing happen when I was feeding the core slightly too little voltage.... I found that with a bare core and LCD, I needed at least 8.6V or it just locked up sometimes, but at 8.4 it would just brownout and reset. ... It's weird I know cause it should brownout whenever the voltage is too low, so I think it's the regulator starting to drop off, staying at 5V output, and just not supplying enough current. But it only happens in a very small window between brownout reset and working fine. Maybe turn your PSU up to 9.5V or more. The 7805 should take care of it no worries, at least for a short time for testing, but you may want to heatsink it. Your thumb will tell you ;) Edit: maybe it's something about feeding regulated power into the regulating circuit.... Really we should turn down to 5V and power via J2. I wired mine to J1 to test it, and never went back to it after it powered on...

Hehehe catch up fellas! Didn't you notice the massive log when you updated that time? I thought my local repo was screwey because it was so long I thought it'd updated the entire trunk again ;D Unfortunately I looked at the log and went "oh, that's that editor, cool. WTF do I do with all these files anyway?" and proceded to tactically ignore it *whack*

Hey MTE, Question: why the low power 7912 with a full power 7812? I think you coud mix'n'match them for this circuit anyway, but...juts curious :) (learning) Ain't it just?

Bah we can get around those kind of problems.... However I'm still trying to nut out how you've done it... I can't find anything in the doc about the digital signals.... I would have thought that the way you'd do it is to chain the serial IO and clock, buffered up if necessary (which it should not be for the SDI/O, but maybe for the clock), and have an SR driving the chip selects? As for the latency concerns if it gets really big...well if people like moogah and I want to be stupid about things then we can figure out a multi-core design. Don't sweat about making your design work with my little dreams ;) If you really want to know, you'll hear it at about 2ms, so divide that by the time it takes to load a PGA chip. How far does mute go? Just the main, Just the FX, one for each? Mute = Mute, kill it all. CC96 "Increment".. Channel Volume? CC97 "Decrement".. Channel Volume? Yeh but I wouldn't bother, pretty much nothing else uses these CC's CC120 "All Sound Off".. By mutes, or full preset? Mute the master out After an "All Sound Off", how do we get it back "On"?? Unmute CC121 "Reset All Controllers". Sounds like we could load a "preset all to default state". User defines that state! Default should really be all at 0.... Keeps the monitors safe ;) I still need to research "SysEx Master Volume". I saw it somewhere around here. Err, I forget... http://www.borg.com/~jglatt/tech/midispec.htm ;)

Oh you must have confused my world with a democracy. See my sig ;D hehehee The suggestion was actually one that was suggested to me with some convincing arguments, which is why I put it here, but hey... I'm not too picky.... We will need to feature-freeze soon though, if we're gonna stay public it could be good for people to watch and learn from, but it should be mostly a 'spectator sport'.... too many chefs spoil the broth... Err, yeh, definitely these should be done as separate layouts! The biggest reason for this is that the 8113 doesn't need the external buffers, and as such it doesn't really need to have the same analog pinouts as the AD75019 board, but instead it should have the same pinout as the external buffer board. This simplifies connection of additional I/O circuitry (balancing, amps, Lyle's mixer, whatever) Eh? The 8113 was all-but ruled out as being too expensive for general use. I'd say it should be: MT88* = cheap everyman's option AD75019 = for people with concerns about audio quality who don't mind a little extra $$ AD8113 = For borderline boutique snobbery types who don't mind paying 4 times as much $$ Given that, I'd say the AD8113 would be the last option.... Me personally I'd probably be building for the 75019 first, not because it's what I personally want/need, but because it's in the best interest of the community project (given that the MT88* is already taken care of) I've talked to the guy on ebay with the 75019 and he's cut me a pretty good deal.... Short of it is: $16.50 each, for 12, with sockets (actual deal is 12, with sockets, for the price of 9, with free ship. Nice!). That's aussie dollars, shipped to me in Melbourne. Who wants in?

LMAO. It's funny because it's true :)

Hahahahah I was sitting there waiting for that massive image to load from that very slow server, looking at your tiles, wondering why you didn't crop it.... Then I figured that it was because you wanted to show us that pubic hair in the top corner ;D Pretty precise drilling for a DIY job, good one!

That is so freakin awesome! Another 10 points for originality!

It would be if they could, but God holds the patent....

OK either I've missed something or my imaginition is on fire... I don't see where the limitation is... Split inputs as necessary, pga volume control to a massive mix for a buss, run the buss wherever (back into the mixer for send/returns, through another set of PGAs at least, for the subs) You know what they say... ugly paintbrush pictures speak better than words: uglymix.JPG

I don't know if anyone's actually tried it yet, so please inform us of your progress :) 15V@666mA definitely, that's lots. 9V@556mA...uhm... Maybe. I hope you don't have lots of LEDs or a hungry backlight on your LCD. Ahh I see you've been doing your reading, nice one. Next time, tell me that you found the answer to the question you asked me, so I don't spend an hour typing something you already learned :D Cool, good luck!

Thanks Foona! I've had this reply on my to-do list, and now I get to take a break, thankyou :) I'll give some quick answers and extra info... Pardon me for being brief, but my browser has crashed 3 times while typing this reply... after the third time, I feel somewhat less poetic ;) That refers to the caps labelled C, or in that diagram, 2xC. See section 4 in that document for the size of those caps, which should be doubled if you use the design you refer to. Yes (see foona's post) You can, and it won't work and may blow things up. Not highly recommended ;) Make sure you get the correct datasheet (see foona's post) well on the seft is the transformer... Diagram one shows a rectifier after that, which is a box with an arrow onit - that's your four diodes. The other symbols which look like an arrow pointing at a wall are diodes. Essentially, they make the electricity only flow in one direction (electrons, ie negative charge, go in the direction of the arrow). This takes the AC current and makes it DC. Yes it's recommended. I will :) Well, no, is the short answer... Long answer goes somewhere though... in the wiki page it says: That's kinda right. The voltage regulators need an input which is 2V greater than their output**. This is because the electronics in there need power. Also, the diodes tend to cause a bit of 'friction' (all those electrons smacking that wall) and that means that they drop about 1V also. So, in total, you should aim for around 3V greater input, than output. So, to get 12V out after the rectifiers and regulators, you really want 15V to be out put by the transformer. Also take note of: The audio circuitry does not use a lot of power, mostly because there are no big flashy lights or heat or moving ports, which all eat lots of power. The quote from the wiki I pasted there is a hint, that perhaps your transformer may actually output a little more than what it is rated to. So ,maybe our 13.6V will actually output as much as 14V or so ** Coming back to the regulators - if your circuit does not draw too much current, then the regulator may need as little as 1.5V greater input than output. This, combined with the above, means we may only need about 14.5V input. If you've done your math ;) You already noticed that we are short by about 0.5V.... So in theory, the pollin transformers should not work.... However nILS put his $$ on the line and tested them, and sure enough he has assured us that they work a treat. Which just goes to show what theory is good for ;) You won't use that at all. Using the above theory, the +8V output of the transformer is meant for a regulated 5V circuit, and the 4.2V is meant for a 3.3V circuit. We don't use any 3.3V componentry, so you can leave that one disconnected :)

Thanks doc! moog: Yeh I remember talking about this with you in the past... I've been keeping your needs in mind ;) tilt: I think that the only pins we really have free, are the AIN and MF jumpers... everything else is used. Never enough IO hehehe all: Who wants to be a guinea pig beta tester alpha tester/developer/designer/whatever? I need to start thinking about how many chips to get and boards to have made... Unfortunately you'll need to buy your own parts, I'd love to shout you but... Damned taxes :( I think that this has reached a stage where we will take it off the forum until there is more news, does that sound about right guys? I think we've planned enough ...

Apologies, I won't update it, cause I haven't written the "Uploading MIOS and Applications" doc yet :) Coming soon to a wiki near you...

Cool, consider me fully teased!

Yeh that's basically what I thought :D Thanks again doc, it's really cool of you guys to offer up this excellent work for us to build on. I hope you'll beta test the patch storage when we do that, it'll have to be done first ;)

Bam-a-lam! Yo I hate to do this to you, but have you scoped out lyle's inputs... Do you reckon we should drag him into an alley and bash him and take them off him? ;D Was wondering who'd bring this up heheh Now that I think about it (after writing the rest of the post heh) I don't think this is a good idea... the other pins need to be stable when the data is clocked in, and if you are updating the whole SR each time you set data, that could be real shaky. I think it's one of those 'works in theory' deals ;) OK news time! Yay! TK and doc have kindly offered up the opportunity to merge these projects together! I think this is the way to go, and I hope you'd all agree :) I had been avoiding this topic, only because I was under the mistaken impression that docmatrix was a private project, and I didn't want to #$@& with it... This is the part where you al point at me and go "derrrr!" :D I'm really excited by this :D The idea with this is to have the system maintain compatibility with the docmatrix, and we will add in features to that. We have all talked a lot about the CS ideas we've had - minimal 2-knobs and a few buttons and LCD, LED matrix, GP buttons for quick loading, SYSEX/CC/Note input, patch storage and recall, etc etc. Let's move onto the chips. Outside of this thread I have gleaned some guruknowledgetm from some audio dudes I know regarding our selection of chip, and applied my audioknowledgetm accordingly. There is no denying, that the MT88* series have a lot of advantages over other options - They're cheap, come in 8x8 and 8x16, crosspoints are individually addressed in a manner which is VERY easy to write to, and they have better crosstalk specs, which we all agreed could be important in CV routing applications. However the distortion figures are high, and that is a knockout blow for some projects, leading to the AD75019. These two chips compare the way they do for good reason - the Zarlink is intended for telephony systems, and you don't want people overhearing neighbouring phonecalls, so crosstalk is critical - but frequency content is not so important, whereas the AD is made for analog audio routing in studio or equipment's internal routings, so the distortion is low as heck, but that comes at the expense of slightly higher crosstalk figures. The catch is, they use a very different method of loading the crosspoints, specifically that the whole chip (or all chips) must be loaded at once. The good news about this, is that if we are going to implement patch storage, then the whole matrix state will have to be stored anyway, so I'm sure we can use this to ensure the ability to use either chip (no mixing chips) with the same CS. As for the 8113... because the whole matrix state will have to be stored anyway, it should be possible to support it in serial mode and parallel ... It's a tough call as to how though - I mean it's really the everything chip, having both parallel and serial modes, and the best crosstalk and distortion specs of all, so it'd be nice (especially if some idiot like me wanted to route CV and audio)... however I'm not sure how practical it would be to allow both serial and parallel programming simultaneously. Let's see: 8113: Parallel: Address, data, CS Serial: Sclk, SD, strobe, CS 75019: Serial: Sclk, SD, strobe, CS 8816: Parallel: Address, data, CS So, it looks like it should be easy right? but how do we tell the app when to write what? It looks like we'll need to have a driver for each IC, which contains two functions for each chip, for EG SetCrossPoint(X,Y,State) and DumpStates() ..... regardless of whether the chip supports it. Then, the driver can handle the incoming data appropriately: 8113: SetCrossPoint: Set the specified switch DumpStates: Dump the whole matrix 75019: SetCrossPoint: Ignore the switch specified, and dump the whole matrix DumpStates: Dump the whole matrix 8816: SetCrossPoint: Set the specified switch DumpStates: Read the individual crosspoints from the stored Preset and set them all one at a time. This means that the drivers will need to hook back into the patch storage and/or editing buffer data, and data regarding the physical configuration of the device (how many chips in what arrangement, for calculating chip enable lines and arranging serial data correctly)... I can't see any problem with this but a nagging feeling in the back of my head tells me that this might be bad programming practice... Anyone see any problems there? Well that takes care of the logical side of it, then it just comes down to wiring it... and that's where it gets tricky, as you've noticed. I think that the easiest way to deal with this, is either 75019 directly in serial mode, or 595's talking to 88* or 8113 in parallel mode, can use J10, and to use another pin, like say J7, for the 8113 serial data - the enable lines can be driven from the 595's as they are in parallel mode. This of course means that we lose motorfaders, and they could be useful... but so far nobody has piped up about them, so I think we could safely drop that.... If someone really wants to have the *does everything* box, then maybe they'll have a better idea (like using J5 or LCD pins)... But I think this covers it all off? If you read this far, I'm surprised! :D

LOL, I don't think screaming at the forum makes for better reading... but you're welcome to edit your post and change it to that same text but WITHOUT THE CAPS!!1!1!!11 hehehe... just click modify :) Then you can post the pics and such in here... FWIW, I'm quietly interested in this one... I fear it'll be worth more than I can afford right now though, cause it's such a nice box!

It may not be a mixer, but it's fricken mixer Lego! it's fantastic!! totally awesome design man.