Dsp 56001 and Amiga .
15 messages in this thread
A while ago I got to see a message about a DSP Board for Amiga . Would that be
possible to give me more informations on such a Board like : Where to get it
.?
How does it get connected to the Amiga ( On the Zorro bus or ? )
How could we get the software for it .
Could we put more than a set of A/D&D/A to it . Thank you for your time
to answer if so done . Bye Marcel Jacques Quebec City .
Marcel,
The only two boards with a DSP chip for the Amiga that I know of are
the Sunrize AD1012 and AD516 boards. The former is a 12-bit board that
records in mono but can play back 4 tracks and the latter is a 16-bit
board that can record in stereo and play back 8 tracks. They have a DSP
chip, but it's not the 56001. The boards are primarily used for
direct-to-disk recording. They are installed in a Zorro slot. They come
bundled with excellent editing software called Studio 16. They currently
only have analog I/O but a digital option is expected shortly.
I have the AD516. Let me know if you need the phone number of Sunrize.
Dom Fontana
–> Sent from NY via AP <–
Dom: Do you need a Fast SCSI-II DMA controller for that AD516? The Fastlane
Z3 works great in the 4000 and with that board. Talk to Dean Tucker at SunRize
or Larry Lyons at Advanced Systems and Software( the maker of Fastlane)
214-239-2000.
Chris
I am sorry but I will never buy those boards because a Falcon from Atari is
less expensive than that and more flexible . But I was looking specificaly for
one thing that this person talked to another person about a while ago and was
in kit form but not a Market Product .
Marcel,
The Atari Falcon 030 is a great computer, but it doesn't cost less than
the AD-1012. (It does cost less than the AD-516). Also, the built-in
sampler of the Atari offers nowhere near the power, flexibility, and
features of the AD-516.
Sorry, I don't know about the other product you mentioned.
Dom Fontana
–> Sent from NY via AP <–
Why do you compare a 12 bit board to a Falcon . The Falcon has 16 bits . I
really don't understand why you say that the sunrize is more versatile tha n
the Falcon . There is no comparaison possible . Falcon is a computer ( You do
what you want with it ) but the Sunrize board is only a disk recorder and that
is it . Marcel
Marcel,
You had said that you could buy the Falcon for LESS than the Sunrize
boards. I was just saying that the AD1012 costs LESS Than the Falcon. I
wasn't saying you should buy it. Then, I said that even though the AD-516
board does cost more than the Falcon, it is more versatile at hard-disk
recording than the Falcon is.
Dom Fontana
–> Sent from NY via AP <–
On what aspect do you base your analyse to say that the 516 is more verstile ?
I have very deeply analyse both and there is no comparaison that the Falcon is
a best buy in this regard . ( Hard disk recording ) . Maybe you are right with
the soft that deliver Atari but there is very nice soft cheap that does 8
tracks recording a 50 khz sampling . That Sunrize can't do it . Marcel Jacques
From what I've seen of the Falcon's hard-disk feature list, it lacks
many of the capabilities of the AD-516.
Anyway the 56001 a 33 mhz is basicaly more powerfullthan what is on the 516 .
Your choice is your choice and mine is mine .
Marcel,
I think we have a language problem here. 😎 I don't care what you get.
You asked about DSP for the Amiga and I mentioned the AD1012 and AD516.
You then said the Atari Falcon costs less than both of them. That was
wrong. I then told you the AD1012 costs less than the Falcon and you
wanted to know how I could compare a 12-bit board (AD1012) with the
Falcon, which utilizes 16-bits. I wasn't comparing them. I was just making
you aware of your error that the Falcon costs less than the AD1012.
Then, I said you were right that the Falcon costs less than the AD516,
but the dedicated AD516 was much better at hard disk recording than the
Falcon, which just has rudimentary hard disk recording built in. You
responded that I shouldn't compare the two, since the Falcon was a
computer and you can do a lot more with a computer than you can with one
dedicated sound board.
Anyway, I've heard a lot of good things about the Falcon. And yes, the
Falcon is a complete computer system, that has 16-bit hard disk recording
built in and is a good value. But the fact remains that the AD1012, while
not as good, does cost less than the Falcon, and the AD516, while costing
more than the Falcon, is far superior at hard-disk recording than the
Falcon is. You get what you pay for. The AD1012 costs the least and offers
the least. The AD516 costs the most and is the best. Do you really think
that Atari is capable of offering an entire computer system that has the
capabilities of the AD516 for about half the cost? The Falcon is a good
value, and yes it's also a computer so you can do a lot more. But for
strictly 16-bit hard disk recording and sampling, the AD516 is far
superior to the rudimentary sampler built into the Falcon. There's a lot
more to a sampler/hard disk recorder than the DSP chip. And you'd had to
buy a lot of optional accessories for the Falcon, if they're even
available, before it could begin to match the capabilities that the AD516
has built in.
Take care, Marcel.
Dom Fontana
–> Sent from NY via AP <–
I think I'm the guy you wanted. I run a 56001-based system from the parallel
port of my A500. The system is the GMP board, containing a 56001 @ 27 Mhz,
full static RAM complement, MIDI interface, RS-232 interface, and a custom host
port interface that connects to the parallel port. A/D/A is provided on a
daughterboard using one of the Crystal integrated parts, 64x oversampling
fixed-rate (44.1KHz) system.
The board, alas, only had one or two production runs, and I think the guy who
made it sold the last one a month or two ago. Good news is that he's working
on an even cheaper board using a newer version of the DSP chip, with a little
less flexibility than the original. The original, by the way, went for about
$200 in kit form, with another $100 or so for the A/D/A daughter- board.
Software: I'm using the system with software running under HMSL, a language for
experimental music composition and performance. The software allows
interactive construction of synthesis/analysis "patches" using a graphic
box-and-wire interface, similar to the way Max works with MIDI.
The hardware may have a successor. Tom Erbe, who designed the original board,
may be producing a new, small (stomp-box-sized) version early next year. E-mail
tom@ella.mills.edu for more detail.
Fun stuff. Written a few serious pieces with it, and it works well under
"real" performance conditions.
–rbt
That is too bad because I don't know how to Email that person . Is there any
Demo of the Soft you are using for that board . How can I get in touch with
those Soft and hard ware ? I am sorry to bother you but it sounds interesting .
Marcel Jacques
To email to Tom Erbe: use CServe mail, address
>Internet:tom@ella.mills. edu. The base software is described in the
Proceedings of the Internat- ional Computer Music Conference of 1990
or '91 (author: Phil Burk); my iconic stuff is grafted on to that,
and is not documented or published. I'm considering finishing it up
in the near future.
Marcel: Do you want to run this in a 4000? If so, you'll probably want a Fast
SCSI-II DMA controller that takes up only one slot. It works with the SunRize
AD516 board and you can call Dean Tucker at SunRize or Larry Lyons at
214-239-2000 at Advanced Systems & Software regarding their Fastlane Z3 Fast
SCSI-II DMA controller.
Chris