Kyo Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 Hi,I wonder if Midibox SID will benefit from STM_32 core in a future version.Underlying question is:What is the best choice ? Build a MB-6582 or build a modular SID V2 so that new cores can be plugged in when this new version would arise ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MMorph Posted May 10, 2009 Report Share Posted May 10, 2009 Well, I think I should let TK speak for himself (I rarely take part on any conversation in here anyway so who am I to reply?), but according to this post there will be another version at some point: http://www.midibox.org/forum/index.php/topic,12673.msg106686.html#msg106686However TK probably wants to say something about this as well :)That said something I can speak about: I decided to go for MB-6582. My original intention was to make a version of my own with some modifications, but the ready made PCB is just priced fair enough so I thought to save my precious time for another time and go with a known good design. Plus it's alot less hassle compared to building the thing from a separate modules - again saves my precious time.However I'm still thinking about implementing part of the mods I've had in my mind (to try them out if they make any sense). When/if there will be MBSID V3, I will start from scratch and re-make the synth with the new design. I'm actually all thrilled about the STM32 core (wonder if I could collaborate somehow). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
latigid on Posted May 10, 2009 Report Share Posted May 10, 2009 I guess the question is, what would 32-bit do for SID?The obvious:FasterC programming is easier (what else would you add? More sequencers?)"unlimited" memory using external cardsThe negative:Can't use CAN buss and USB simultaneously, so any multi SID setup couldn't be controlled over USB etc.It's a tricky one. Does the PIC SID V2/MB-6582 do enough for you? If so, go for it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SLP Posted May 10, 2009 Report Share Posted May 10, 2009 The negative:Can't use CAN buss and USB simultaneously, so any multi SID setup couldn't be controlled over USB etc.What about letting one Core control more than 2 SIDs? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MMorph Posted May 10, 2009 Report Share Posted May 10, 2009 What about letting one Core control more than 2 SIDs?Wouldn't be surprised if one Core could handle all the SIDs. These beasts are quite different type of league... Btw, here's another post by TK that popped on my mind: http://www.midibox.org/forum/index.php/topic,12632.msg106231.html#msg106231I don't know if 32-bits give any unconditional advantage over PIC (MBSID is just great thing already!), so it's also something up to the end user to decide. But sure it gives alot of freedom for new features (although the original HW design may be also limiting this but dunno, the STM32 does not have external bus anyway). I think the biggest down sides in 32-bit designs are the fine-pitch SMD cases and somewhat more complicated development tools. But nothing that one couldn't survive! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilba Posted May 11, 2009 Report Share Posted May 11, 2009 MB-SID V3 is still a long way in the future... I won't even hypothesize about actual hardware design... some people might recall that MB-SID V2 was going to use PIC18F4620 and require two IIC_MIDI modules, which is how I designed the original MB-6582 "prototype"... and then that got superseded by PIC18F4685 and CAN bus master/slave comms. Luckily TK didn't change his mind on how stereo SID pairs would be controlled by one PIC. :)However, I am fairly confident that there will be an "upgrade path" for MB-6582, so people can upgrade their MB-6582 to MB-SID V3 firmware running on (I assume) an STM32... i.e. using a Core32 "module" as an expansion board. It seems very unlikely that such a thing won't be possible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyo Posted May 11, 2009 Author Report Share Posted May 11, 2009 However, I am fairly confident that there will be an "upgrade path" for MB-6582, so people can upgrade their MB-6582 to MB-SID V3 firmware running on (I assume) an STM32... i.e. using a Core32 "module" as an expansion board. It seems very unlikely that such a thing won't be possible.This would be really great. It is really amazing to see MBHP and derivative projects (like MB-6582) are offering such pro and open solutions.Anyway I made up my mind over the week end. I will go for a MB-6582. If the STM32 upgrade is possible great. If not I could still sale it on the flea market with no SIDs :p Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TK. Posted May 11, 2009 Report Share Posted May 11, 2009 MB-SID V3 is still a long way in the future... I won't even hypothesize about actual hardware design... some people might recall that MB-SID V2 was going to use PIC18F4620 and require two IIC_MIDI modules, which is how I designed the original MB-6582 "prototype"... and then that got superseded by PIC18F4685 and CAN bus master/slave comms. Luckily TK didn't change his mind on how stereo SID pairs would be controlled by one PIC. :)True words! ;)Currently I would say, that connecting a MBHP_CORE_STM32 module to a MB-6582 via CAN will give us the most powerful options, since PICs can be used to access the SIDs while STM32 is doing the sound engine, communication and user interface work.If more than two SIDs would be connected to a single STM32 w/o the usage of additional microcontrollers, the firmware would mainly be busy to transfer data to the SIDs and wouldn't have so much time to calculate modulation sources and pathes - the problem: write accesses to SIDs have to be synchronized to the 1 MHz clock, this costs 2..3 SID cycles. While for a PIC this means the loss of 20..30 instructions, for a STM32 this means a loss of ca. 200 instructions per write access!Another advantage of using PICs: STM32 could send some "background jobs" to the PICs which are handled in parallel. E.g., FM modulation or playing samples. They could be handled with incredible high speed (e.g. 20 kHz - note: a C64 usually accessed the SID with 50 Hz) without loading the "master processor".There are two options I'm planning to evaluate in the next months before starting to program the firmware.1) (over)clocking the SIDs with 2, 4 or 8 MHz! This would result into faster transfers. Disadvantage: lower frequencies cannot be played accurately anymore, and VCA envelopes are faster (*). Advantages: this could allow to handle 8 SIDs from a single STM32 w/o such a high performance loss. This could also allow to apply the ADSR workaround much faster, which means, that such an option could lead to the world-first "real SID" synthesizer with perfectly working ADSRs ;)Note that this option would work with PICs as well, which means that re-using the PICs from an existing MB-6582 is again the most powerful solution, everything else is only a cost-saving measure./edit: (*) can also be seen as an advantage!2) STM32 introduced a new connectivity line with derivatives which contain USB, two (!) CANs and an ethernet controller (unfortunately w/o PHY layer) beside of other useful peripherals.Two CANs means even higher bandwidth, USB can be used in parallel, and integrated ethernet controller is the cherry at the top (MIOS32_OSC is already up&running, in addition it would be possible to download new patches directly from the internet ;))These chips are not available yet, but it will be possible to prepare the firmware for such an upgrade option, which could be used for the final design.Best Regards, Thorsten. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stryd_one Posted May 15, 2009 Report Share Posted May 15, 2009 USB can be used in parallel,Yummy. I was wondering if they were still exclusive on those chips, now I know. Looking forward to that one ;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matrix12x Posted June 17, 2013 Report Share Posted June 17, 2013 I was flipping through older topics and this looked very interesting. Was there any progress on the MBSID 32? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TK. Posted June 18, 2013 Report Share Posted June 18, 2013 I haven't continued to work on the MBSID V3 firmware in the last years, because of more interesting projects where I see more potential. Best Regards, Thorsten. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.