[sdiy] New synth DIY site ?

[John L Marshall]

You mean that the signal doesn't magically jump from zero to one and one to
zero without any time in between. Heresy!

Take care,
John



----- Original Message -----
From: Magnus Danielson <cfmd at swipnet.se>
To: <nej22 at hermes.cam.ac.uk>
Cc: <Paul.Maddox at Wavesynth.com>; <synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl>
Sent: Sunday, April 28, 2002 4:58 PM
Subject: Re: [sdiy] New synth DIY site ?


> From: Neil Johnson <nej22 at hermes.cam.ac.uk>
> Subject: Re: [sdiy] New synth DIY site ?
> Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2002 21:33:16 +0100 (BST)
>
> > Magnus,
>
> Neil,
>
> > > > compared to a single PIC/AVR and two DACs this is a BIG/Complex
circuit.
> > > You've totally missed the point. Finally we can LOOSE those f**king
> > > MPUs!
> > > Enjoy the simplicity of pure logic! ;O)
>
>                                          ^
> First, please note the smiley-symbol ----+
>
> > Actually, one could view the *discrete* circuit as just a specialised
> > processor, optimized down to the minimum required to achieve the desired
> > functionality.
> >
> > Put another way, an MPU is "pure logic" that steps through a
user-defined
> > state machine.  Nothing more, nothing less.
>
> Please note that I do have a pretty good comprehention of logic in its
> many fashions. I am not unfriendly with both lower and higher forms of
> CPUs, as well as logic in itself. I happily hack stuff in VHDL for
> FPGAs, but has also been part of the design team rather largish
> ASIC. You will also find me hack C and C++ and odd times also
> Assembler. Daytime I worry about bit-fiddeling in hardware and
> protocol design in software, and how the hell I am going to convey
> that to others.
>
> Given that you now understand that, maybe now you can see both the
> irony in my little statement as well as my childish love for the
> "wrong" solutions.
>
> > Its not really "pure logic" -- it is just a physical interpretation of
> > logical rules (I get too much logic from the theory boys at the lab).
> > And its not really digital either, just analogue that saturates.  DRAMs
> > are better -- at least they have those nice little sense amps doing it
> > properly, ie. amplifying signals and storing charge on dinky little
> > capacitors.
>
> Digital is just a simplification of analog. If you toss any digital
> signal up on a scope, then you see it. As you push the limits for a
> certain technology, then you learn the hard way how un-digitalness
> digital signals really are. If you want to acheive low bit error rates
> in "digital" transmission, you have to pay attention to zillions of
> analog aspects. Oh the joy that it brings.
>
> Few people actually understand the insight that Claude Shannon had
> when he in 1948 explained the benefits of a Pulse Coded Modulation of
> telephony signals. It took until the 70thies for a wider deployment to
> emerge.
>
> Cheers,
> Magnus
>