Graphical EQ like PEQ4 but with more bands?

[dante]

sorry there is no yes or no answer in my opinion_it depends on more than just dsp specs_as soon as there is a board avail and i have realized a filter for it i tell you_
good vibes

I saw EZKit Lite for them here :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6rdda46N ... ure=relmfu

And a run down of features here :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3xsq87CJ ... ure=relmfu

At 1:54 he speaks of the FFT, FIR accelerators.

They are made w/ extra heat resistance for automotive applications

[garyb]

i could be wrong, but i suispect that there's nothing surprising for Thomas there.

Dante! i think you're a candidate!

[tgstgs]

the ezkit is for sure nice if you want to build HW;
but people developing audioSW should get in touch with sc_
there is no better than xite_sdk avail atm.

good vibes

[dante]

Dante! i think you're a candidate!

No way. To take up DSP programming even as a hobby, I would have to give away music, Scoperise and other parts of life to take it seriously. SDK alone wouldnt be enough I would need C++ and the experts are years ahead making already the devices I want.

the ezkit is for sure nice if you want to build HW; but people developing audioSW should get in touch with sc_there is no better than xite_sdk avail atm.
good vibes

Agreed. But I was thinking of a future w/ some important parts of algos already built into chips that today must be hand coded.

It amazes me though that the most powerful of these chips end up in cars (automotive ??) - when they can do the blow away stuff that they do for the audio multitracking world, and that music world hardly takes much notice.

[tgstgs]

_
sdk without coding /means creating your own atoms/ is more like a low level modular;
you do not have to be a coder to get some very good results with modular or sdk;
--
if you want to get deeper_
i would say codeing in c with some advantages of c++ for the stuff running on host cpu;
but the main stuff in xite is happening on the dsps coded in assembler;
--
mattomat f.e. would even run standalone all is running on the dsps_
all new dspcode hand coded btw.
you need the host cpu just for loading the code into the dsp AND for the GUI;
lets say you want to build a hw unit out of it;
you just need to realise a 1 dsp board with midiin/out and a hw controller for interfacing;
how is it called btw. a HUI HardwareUserInterface?

so mattomat could easy be implemented in any synth using sharcs

any manufacturer interested vibes?

[jksuperstar]

It amazes me though that the most powerful of these chips end up in cars (automotive ??) - when they can do the blow away stuff that they do for the audio multitracking world, and that music world hardly takes much notice.

Don't assume that! Cars use pretty basic processing, and minimal DSP at that (anti-roll/ABS really is the peak, engine tuning is basic microcontrollers). DSP is fairly "generic" in a sense, with some serious power available these days. ADI is one of the few that adds optimization for audio apps (Texas Instruments specializing in motor control and such). And if you do ever code with ADI (sorry, Analog Devices), their VisualDSP compiler is pretty incredible to use & visualize not only code, but your data...which for DSPs is important. Not to mention the DSP building blocks that come with the compiler. It really makes things easy on the programmer. (I played a bunch with a BlackFin a few years ago, and had an audio processor up & running in a few minutes, with the only misstep I had was needing to move from little endian to big endian ).

tgstgs, are you allowed to describe the tool flow at all? I'm curious what's involved with xite development down at the lowest level.

[tgstgs]

tools????

any editor worx;
im using a personialized notepad++ for assembler;

is this what you mean vibes

are you developing??


edit and for sure no building blocks
but this goes more and more off topic__

[jksuperstar]

No, not the editor. I use emacs and vi

I was thinking of the dsp compiler...if there is an API or library that SC provides for VisualDSP, or if they have their own tools that are part of the SDK (which my exposure to has only been with 5.1, and to me seems like a version of scope that allows lower level connections with atoms and writing out devices). But I'm thinking of the creation of atoms.

I would like to do development. not as full time, so I am wondering what investment of time I would need to get full development going, and what there is to learn before I can be efficient at creating scope devices and modular devices. The SDK for 5.1 was sparse regarding documentation, and also the number of atoms included seemed limited to what was available in the past. I only have xite, no pci, so going to an older version is not possible.

All good vibes!

[garyb]

afaik, there is a LOT, more than most devices require, that can be done without EVER coding. SDK modules function like electronic components, or Scope modular....

[tgstgs]

learn?
check out the instruction set from analog devices_
time?
depends on your backround_
but check the instruction sets all answers are there_

talk with holger he is the lord;
if he says you are in i can give you examples of how to make dsp sys dll
if you need something special atom you cant live without and this thing is good for the platform pmme_

good vibes from vienna

[jksuperstar]

Part of the reason for me in investing in the XITE was the possibility for development at multiple levels. Wire studio, wire a modular synth, write DSP code. I like diving in, understanding, and creating at that low level. Need isn't the only drive. For me, curiosity sparks creativity, not to mention the "one thing leads to another" in the realm of happy mistakes and unexpected results.

I'll speak with Holger about the possibility of development at the atomic level.