|
Post by Blackdawg on Mar 20, 2019 16:43:59 GMT -6
I still love my Moog 500 delay, a bit irritated with myself that I didn't get a second. That said a reamp box and a ZOD are really fun to use with pedals. I want two so freaking bad. The Ladder unit is kind of cool too.
|
|
|
Post by Blackdawg on Mar 20, 2019 16:44:49 GMT -6
No way you could get a bricasti in a 500 module. The things are deep as it is. TONS of processing power in them.
Would be cool though. Errr, hmm kinda it's all relative. As far as I understand it the Bricasti's use dual core Blackfin's, which (I'm guessing here) will be along the ADSP-BF line. They're 500mhz dual cores with 2X 40-bit ALU's / 148K / 256k L1 + L2 SRAM, they were originally developed around 2001(ish)??! DSP's will always be more efficient but due to SIMD operations (compiler applicable) the gap isn't quite what they used to be, also in the last nearly two decades microprocessors have become ridiculously more powerful (and even more general purpose). It appears the M7 is running six of these dsp units, therefore you probably couldn't run the algo off a single I7 core. But you might be able to get away with a single ARM Cortex A-76. I know nothing of how the dev created the Bricasti, although from experience I don't see a reason why an extensive reverb couldn't be run on a 500 series rack. It's a massive amount of power dedicated to a digital reverb for sure, although compared to modern processors not so much. P.S It's a shame the transfer buffer to GPU's ends up making them worse for audio applications than SIMD accelerated CPU's, there's a lot of wasted power there. The amount of heat an M7 puts out alone means it could never be in a 500 rack.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 20, 2019 16:51:20 GMT -6
Errr, hmm kinda it's all relative. As far as I understand it the Bricasti's use dual core Blackfin's, which (I'm guessing here) will be along the ADSP-BF line. They're 500mhz dual cores with 2X 40-bit ALU's / 148K / 256k L1 + L2 SRAM, they were originally developed around 2001(ish)??! DSP's will always be more efficient but due to SIMD operations (compiler applicable) the gap isn't quite what they used to be, also in the last nearly two decades microprocessors have become ridiculously more powerful (and even more general purpose). It appears the M7 is running six of these dsp units, therefore you probably couldn't run the algo off a single I7 core. But you might be able to get away with a single ARM Cortex A-76. I know nothing of how the dev created the Bricasti, although from experience I don't see a reason why an extensive reverb couldn't be run on a 500 series rack. It's a massive amount of power dedicated to a digital reverb for sure, although compared to modern processors not so much. P.S It's a shame the transfer buffer to GPU's ends up making them worse for audio applications than SIMD accelerated CPU's, there's a lot of wasted power there. The amount of heat an M7 puts out alone means it could never be in a 500 rack. If developers can manage low heat output in a mobile phone more powerful than their combined dsp's, I'm pretty sure a hefty reverb unit could be adapted to a 500 series unit. Not saying it would be cheap or even remotely worth it but what's technically possible and what's worth doing are two completely separate things.
|
|
|
Post by Blackdawg on Mar 20, 2019 16:57:00 GMT -6
The amount of heat an M7 puts out alone means it could never be in a 500 rack. If developers can manage low heat output in a mobile phone more powerful than their combined dsp's, I'm pretty sure a hefty reverb unit could be adapted to a 500 series unit. Not saying it would be cheap or even remotely worth it but what's technically possible and what's worth doing are two completely separate things. Maybe so. Im not sure though. They come with fans and I don't think there would be space in a 500 rack for a bricasti reverb to get the right cooling. It's likely not very worth it. However. On that note, I forgot about these units. the Meris! Pretty cool unit. Love the not correct SM7 orientation lol However, that unit is cool, its a pedal design thats been adapter to 500 series. The Ottobit is the same card with just different algorithms too. Some cool units and not too expensive. But not a super versatile reverb. Fun though and interesting.
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Mar 21, 2019 23:22:11 GMT -6
I'm looking at my three guitar delay pedals that also handle line level (and a chorus pedal that is KILLER on synths) and I have to imagine the hardware delay/reverb thing is pretty well handled by the myriad of guitar pedals out on the market. I dig 'em for mixing purposes, anyway. A delay is far, far simpler than a reverb. There very, very few decent sounding small format digital reverbs AFAIK.
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,967
|
Post by ericn on Mar 22, 2019 8:50:01 GMT -6
No way you could get a bricasti in a 500 module. The things are deep as it is. TONS of processing power in them.
Would be cool though. Errr, hmm kinda it's all relative. As far as I understand it the Bricasti's use dual core Blackfin's, which (I'm guessing here) will be along the ADSP-BF line. They're 500mhz dual cores with 2X 40-bit ALU's / 148K / 256k L1 + L2 SRAM, they were originally developed around 2001(ish)??! DSP's will always be more efficient but due to SIMD operations (compiler applicable) the gap isn't quite what they used to be, also in the last nearly two decades microprocessors have become ridiculously more powerful (and even more general purpose). It appears the M7 is running six of these dsp units, therefore you probably couldn't run the algo off a single I7 core. But you might be able to get away with a single ARM Cortex A-76. I know nothing of how the dev created the Bricasti, although from experience I don't see a reason why an extensive reverb couldn't be run on a 500 series rack. It's a massive amount of power dedicated to a digital reverb for sure, although compared to modern processors not so much. P.S It's a shame the transfer buffer to GPU's ends up making them worse for audio applications than SIMD accelerated CPU's, there's a lot of wasted power there. I/O limitations, it would have to be either computer or remote controlled, if any on unit controls and would have to be small and scaled back, probably 2 spaces at least. You develop this product and find only 30% of your market has a 500 series rack 1/3 of that has a lunch box and your product would take 1/3 of that real estate. 100% of your market has a rack or desktop. So do you sink a bunch of development $ in a clumsy format for 1/3 of your market? Ask your favorite gear pimp how many of that Eventide 500 series delay he’s sold. Oh your competition isn’t new boxes it’s classic used pieces selling for next to nothing.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 22, 2019 8:52:50 GMT -6
Errr, hmm kinda it's all relative. As far as I understand it the Bricasti's use dual core Blackfin's, which (I'm guessing here) will be along the ADSP-BF line. They're 500mhz dual cores with 2X 40-bit ALU's / 148K / 256k L1 + L2 SRAM, they were originally developed around 2001(ish)??! DSP's will always be more efficient but due to SIMD operations (compiler applicable) the gap isn't quite what they used to be, also in the last nearly two decades microprocessors have become ridiculously more powerful (and even more general purpose). It appears the M7 is running six of these dsp units, therefore you probably couldn't run the algo off a single I7 core. But you might be able to get away with a single ARM Cortex A-76. I know nothing of how the dev created the Bricasti, although from experience I don't see a reason why an extensive reverb couldn't be run on a 500 series rack. It's a massive amount of power dedicated to a digital reverb for sure, although compared to modern processors not so much. P.S It's a shame the transfer buffer to GPU's ends up making them worse for audio applications than SIMD accelerated CPU's, there's a lot of wasted power there. I/O limitations, it would have to be either computer or remote controlled, if any on unit controls and would have to be small and scaled back, probably 2 spaces at least. You develop this product and find only 30% of your market has a 500 series rack 1/3 of that has a lunch box and your product would take 1/3 of that real estate. 100% of your market has a rack or desktop. So do you sink a bunch of development $ in a clumsy format for 1/3 of your market? Ask your favorite gear pimp how many of that Eventide 500 series delay he’s sold. Oh your competition isn’t new boxes it’s classic used pieces selling for next to nothing. Could you not just have it as a dual slot stereo in / out? Anyway as for the rest that's exactly what I said on the other page ..
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,967
|
Post by ericn on Mar 22, 2019 9:04:14 GMT -6
I/O limitations, it would have to be either computer or remote controlled, if any on unit controls and would have to be small and scaled back, probably 2 spaces at least. You develop this product and find only 30% of your market has a 500 series rack 1/3 of that has a lunch box and your product would take 1/3 of that real estate. 100% of your market has a rack or desktop. So do you sink a bunch of development $ in a clumsy format for 1/3 of your market? Ask your favorite gear pimp how many of that Eventide 500 series delay he’s sold. Oh your competition isn’t new boxes it’s classic used pieces selling for next to nothing. Could you not just have it as a dual slot stereo in / out? Anyway as for the rest that's exactly what I said on the other page .. Yeah but here’s a dirty little secret the outboard buyer likes tactile controls. Over the years there have been some obscure orphaned DSP solutions that are orphaned because nobody bought any so why invest in support! The other thing is unless you build a chassis with intergrated USB FireWire or dedicated control routed out the back, most find cables on the front of the rack clumsy, sure mic jacks are great for a quick simple gig but permanently it’s a hard sell.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 22, 2019 9:34:58 GMT -6
Could you not just have it as a dual slot stereo in / out? Anyway as for the rest that's exactly what I said on the other page .. Yeah but here’s a dirty little secret the outboard buyer likes tactile controls. Over the years there have been some obscure orphaned DSP solutions that are orphaned because nobody bought any so why invest in support! The other thing is unless you build a chassis with intergrated USB FireWire or dedicated control routed out the back, most find cables on the front of the rack clumsy, sure mic jacks are great for a quick simple gig but permanently it’s a hard sell. I completely understand, although we were talking about whether or not it's "technically" possible. Which it is.! Again, whether or not it's a good idea in any sense is another matter.
|
|