Nord User Forum

[analogika]

There's 5 Analog Devices ADSP-21489 SHARC chips in there, plus one additional one with a similar size but different markings (can't make them out due to the bar code sticker covering it — I believe it's a "test passed" sticker).

[baekgaard]

There's 5 Analog Devices ADSP-21489 SHARC chips in there, plus one additional one with a similar size but different markings (can't make them out due to the bar code sticker covering it — I believe it's a "test passed" sticker).

Thanks for checking! That sounds like it's more a DSP based design then than a FPGA based one (which is what I would have expected also, for a product that can be produced in higher quantities -- FPGA are more expensive typically).

Apologies for the interruption, and we're now back to your regular program

[Murphy]

Bet backgaard a cup off coffee (payable at some future point in time) it's on an FPGA chip (I hope so anyway)! Is the NE5D on an FPGA chip? Can you show me what an FPGA chip looks like? I'll open up my NE5D, it's off of warranty.

[baekgaard]

I guess the coffee might be cold by the time it crosses the atlantic, but nevertheless

The chips themselves are probably similar just looking from the outside, but the marking on the chips on the board tell what they are. The Analog Devices ADSP-21489 SHARC are all DSPs, not FPGAs.

For those not knowing the difference, here's a somewhat high-level explanation of the differences: A DSP is sort of a special-purpose microprocessor that excel in numerical and possibly also parallel calculations, and typically has a fixed instruction set that tells it what it should do. A FPGA is more like a large number of logic circuits (gates) that you can then connect, typically by describing some functionality using VHDL. This is then converted into a logic circuitry by connecting the gates, and then flashed to the chip itself. For really large volumes, you typically do a custom integrated IC (ASIC) instead (from the same VHDL), but the start-up costs are extremely high. A FPGA can give you similar performance as an ASIC, but the marginal pr. unit price is much higher. You buy standard chips, and program each chip individually with your layout. A DSP is a standard component that is just executing some program you download to it. You can create a DSP with an FPGA, but it will typically be more expensive than using a normal off-the-shelves DSP.

[analogika]

So does that have any bearing on how it may or may not be possible to extend the architecture of the NS3, adding options and/or additional models?

[Obwanz]

What does all this mean regarding fixing the C2D engine so it’s more like a C2D, electro 5, etc?

[baekgaard]

We don't know for sure, but if we assume the NS3 uses a DSP based architecture, then changes will be easier than if it would have been an FPGA based one. It is, however, usually "more tricky" to make changes to DSP code than to "conventional" software.

In any case, we don't know what the bottleneck is in terms of implementing changes: Is the current functionality limited wrt processing power, memory, internal bandwidth or something else? We may guess, but we don't know.

Had it been an FPGA based architecture, it would likely have been more difficult to do any (substantial) changes -- but if the different boards share the same underlying modular and configurable architecture, then changes to parameters of the model could be more easy to implement.

I'm not going to give my own guess, as there is too little information at this point

[Obwanz]

Well, I at least hope they are aware of the organ problems, and are working on it.

[DJKeys]

As a side note, I have found there is a distinct difference between the 122 and 122 Close. The 122 Close setting interacts much more with the Reverb than the 122, and I prefer it-

-dj

[Gambold]

>I have found there is a distinct difference between the 122 and 122 Close.<

Well, that makes one of you...your audience won't know the difference, ever. Neither will your band-mates, although they might try to be nice and say they do - when they are not asking you to ape some synth part from the latest Walk the Moon single.

Reminds me when Olivia de Havilland asked her producer why she was wearing period underwear on the set of "Gone With The Wind" when there's no way the movie audience would know it. "Ah, but YOU will know it," he replied.

Revel in your Leslies. And don't take it personally - no-one in the audience hears the difference between all those Rhodes models either.