So the question again: Which synths uses sharc-dsp's and would therfore be relativly easy to port to our great platform?
And which one of these would posses both the synth-value and marketing-value needed?
Cheers!
Thomas
Which hardware synths uses sharc-dsps?
I'm asking this question because of the latest fuzz about the new Powercore/Virus-solution - And while synths is not something I'm feeling an enourmes need to have more of, I do see the marketing value of getting a really famous and modern synth like the Virus ported to our platform.
So the question again: Which synths uses sharc-dsp's and would therfore be relativly easy to port to our great platform?
And which one of these would posses both the synth-value and marketing-value needed?
Cheers!
Thomas
So the question again: Which synths uses sharc-dsp's and would therfore be relativly easy to port to our great platform?
And which one of these would posses both the synth-value and marketing-value needed?
Cheers!
Thomas
OK, I know these are not synths. But you know how there are all these experts saying that the Sharcs are "ancient" technology, and why aren't Creamware using the newer TigerSharcs etc. First off the TigerSharcs are not aimed at the Proaudio market from what I can gather (medical yes). I don't know of any pro-audio device using the TigerSharc DSP's. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
The same "old" pulsar sharcs are being used in the brand new SSL digital consoles! Why aren't they using TigerSharcs?
They are used in the new Euphonix broadcast consoles and actual Creamware cards + algorythyms are used in the Failight DREAM systems costing $$$$$$.
My understanding is AD are only *now* just designing or have designed a replacement for the *ancient* Sharc DSP chip.
I think there is a lot of confusion between the capabilities of a DSP chip as opposed to a CPU.
The same "old" pulsar sharcs are being used in the brand new SSL digital consoles! Why aren't they using TigerSharcs?
They are used in the new Euphonix broadcast consoles and actual Creamware cards + algorythyms are used in the Failight DREAM systems costing $$$$$$.
My understanding is AD are only *now* just designing or have designed a replacement for the *ancient* Sharc DSP chip.
I think there is a lot of confusion between the capabilities of a DSP chip as opposed to a CPU.
the bang-for-buck-ratio of the 'regular' SHARC is much better than TigerSHARC's.
Just add the number of chips needed to 'replace' the stronger one and you'll find that a TigerSHARC will cost significantly more.
Compared to the processing power needed in ultrasound-imaging DAWs are just basic calculators
I really would have loved to have that stuff around 15 years ago - it was one of my most impressive experiences (hands-on in a hospital).
But SHARCs are always euphorically mentioned when it comes to reviews of high-end audio gear and they find one of Analog's chips inside
cheers, Tom
Just add the number of chips needed to 'replace' the stronger one and you'll find that a TigerSHARC will cost significantly more.
Compared to the processing power needed in ultrasound-imaging DAWs are just basic calculators
I really would have loved to have that stuff around 15 years ago - it was one of my most impressive experiences (hands-on in a hospital).
But SHARCs are always euphorically mentioned when it comes to reviews of high-end audio gear and they find one of Analog's chips inside
cheers, Tom