Well our poor old G3 mac looks to be on it's last leg. The good news being that we have a new computer in our future (the bad news being of course that we have to buy a new computer). I know the new intel based Macs are able to run windows apps through "boot camp", are you then able to connect to the minidsp using a intel based mac? or are there hardware issues? Any guess on when a native mac version might be ready? We're just looking at options for new computers, and one of my big things is to get a machine that I can process music through (I've even been on the dell web page a couple of times)
thanks
Joe
Hello Joe,
As mentioned below, there aren't anything special for a Mac to discover a miniDSP kit as a USB device. Using Bootcamp/Parallel, some of our clients have been successful at it and didn't have any problems. That's obviously a temporary work around before we actually release the Mac version. When is not a question I can answer now since it's too early, but we're making good progress for the past few days. Device is discovered and we can correctly communicate over Mac some basic test packets, when the complete system will work is too early to say, but rest assure that we have it as a priority.
Good luck for your computer search!
Hello Steph,
Quite a long post and complete analysis, so thanks for your time writing this elaborate post. It however makes me wonder where to start replying to it.
I guess I'd start by saying that there are comments/ideas which we already thought off (and some already in progress), other ideas which we like and will see if our current community members also agree, while others are simply not engineering wise possible or just too much work to support.
I don't know your engineering background and product design experience, so there are maybe things that make sense to you, while others you may have not thought off. Let me give you an example with some of the statements you made:
"free access to the four IIS ports and SPI or I2C for hooking a SPDIF receiver, an ADC converter, and up to 8 DACs to be controlled using SPI or I2C"
I2S is easy (and is already done on all our products), however how would you deal with SPI/i2c? You would have to write a custom driver (and we're not going to do that for each possible/imaginable codecs there are out there) for being able to configure these. Agree? That's not an easy task, or just something you can put together without an SDK. As explained in our FAQ, that's definitely not our plan to release an SDK for developing custom firmware. The amount of support required to do so is simply not manageable. Multi-nationals like Ti and Analog devices already struggling (and believe me that I know this field really well...) to manage the amount of tech support requests they get for such complex products. That's the reason why they overcharge their eval kit and it's definitely not our objective to get into that business. Buying a DSP sdk (like all the many versions available) and letting you code your custom C code, custom software is the way to go if that's what your looking for. The miniDSP kit isn't intended for that market as we pride ourselves to give flexibility without programming knowledge required.
The IIR table is a good idea, but I don't think that we'd agree that it should be the only way to go (as you seem to imply). You may be inclined to think it's sufficient because you're a technical person but there are a lot of people that wouldn't want to go through this process. Our current customers are very happy with the ease of the UI we're providing, giving them all the visual tools they need to tweak real time their systems. The copy&paste IIR table and having to tweak real time a system would seem to me quite a nightmare (but that's from my PA experience) or too much "BruteFIR" looking like to our taste.
However as already mentioned in our previous posts, we're working on releasing a more advanced plug-in (I guess what you'd call miniDSP Lab) which will give you the choice to enter FIR coeffs or IIR coeffs. Not much to say at this point since it's too early, but it will happen and give flexibility more advanced users may want to build their custom filters.
As for the parallel to Behringer or the idea that there is a huge market out there, that's argueable. DCX2496 is a very valid product but although being a DSP processor, very different to what a miniDSP would do. The flexible hardware AND firmware (plug-in) configuration is not something that's going to happen with a DCX so i don't think that we're comparing apples with apples. We tend to believe that all the customers we've had so far came to us because they were looking for something else than a processor. The type of project these boards are used for goes for a wide range of applications. Thinking that current DCX owners would be re-using a DCX frame for our products is an interesting idea, but not sure if it would actually happen like this in owners mind. People tend to look for a complete solution, and if they are at the point of looking for a box for miniDSP, they'll just go for a custom box.
Anyway, even though we don't agree with all you comments, we appreciate your review. Just different points of views. As for publicity, we're doing quite well these days and reviews/media coverage are to come out soon. Doesn't mean that we're not open for others opportunities, so you can always contact us.
Best Regards
Tony
Co-Founder miniDSP
Quite a long post and complete analysis, so thanks for your time writing this elaborate post. It however makes me wonder where to start replying to it.
I guess I'd start by saying that there are comments/ideas which we already thought off (and some already in progress), other ideas which we like and will see if our current community members also agree, while others are simply not engineering wise possible or just too much work to support.
I don't know your engineering background and product design experience, so there are maybe things that make sense to you, while others you may have not thought off. Let me give you an example with some of the statements you made:
"free access to the four IIS ports and SPI or I2C for hooking a SPDIF receiver, an ADC converter, and up to 8 DACs to be controlled using SPI or I2C"
I2S is easy (and is already done on all our products), however how would you deal with SPI/i2c? You would have to write a custom driver (and we're not going to do that for each possible/imaginable codecs there are out there) for being able to configure these. Agree? That's not an easy task, or just something you can put together without an SDK. As explained in our FAQ, that's definitely not our plan to release an SDK for developing custom firmware. The amount of support required to do so is simply not manageable. Multi-nationals like Ti and Analog devices already struggling (and believe me that I know this field really well...) to manage the amount of tech support requests they get for such complex products. That's the reason why they overcharge their eval kit and it's definitely not our objective to get into that business. Buying a DSP sdk (like all the many versions available) and letting you code your custom C code, custom software is the way to go if that's what your looking for. The miniDSP kit isn't intended for that market as we pride ourselves to give flexibility without programming knowledge required.
The IIR table is a good idea, but I don't think that we'd agree that it should be the only way to go (as you seem to imply). You may be inclined to think it's sufficient because you're a technical person but there are a lot of people that wouldn't want to go through this process. Our current customers are very happy with the ease of the UI we're providing, giving them all the visual tools they need to tweak real time their systems. The copy&paste IIR table and having to tweak real time a system would seem to me quite a nightmare (but that's from my PA experience) or too much "BruteFIR" looking like to our taste.
However as already mentioned in our previous posts, we're working on releasing a more advanced plug-in (I guess what you'd call miniDSP Lab) which will give you the choice to enter FIR coeffs or IIR coeffs. Not much to say at this point since it's too early, but it will happen and give flexibility more advanced users may want to build their custom filters.
As for the parallel to Behringer or the idea that there is a huge market out there, that's argueable. DCX2496 is a very valid product but although being a DSP processor, very different to what a miniDSP would do. The flexible hardware AND firmware (plug-in) configuration is not something that's going to happen with a DCX so i don't think that we're comparing apples with apples. We tend to believe that all the customers we've had so far came to us because they were looking for something else than a processor. The type of project these boards are used for goes for a wide range of applications. Thinking that current DCX owners would be re-using a DCX frame for our products is an interesting idea, but not sure if it would actually happen like this in owners mind. People tend to look for a complete solution, and if they are at the point of looking for a box for miniDSP, they'll just go for a custom box.
Anyway, even though we don't agree with all you comments, we appreciate your review. Just different points of views. As for publicity, we're doing quite well these days and reviews/media coverage are to come out soon. Doesn't mean that we're not open for others opportunities, so you can always contact us.
Best Regards
Tony
Co-Founder miniDSP
Great! Now can we have a biquad filter for Linkwitz transforms and shelving lowpass for baffle step correction? Obviously both can be loosely simulated with the graphical EQ version, but it'd be nice to have direct equivalents. Then we'd have a complete toolbox for loudspeaker creation - rounding out nicely the feature set already provided by your crossover and time alignment features.
The only other desirable feature I can think of is 6dB/octave dipole correction - that is, a low order shelving lowpass. (EDIT: Um, nevermind me, it's late - obviously this is just the same thing as baffle step correction, just taken to an extreme.)
This product gets more interesting every time I look at it
Last edited:
I'm sure that what has been provided is sufficient to cover this. When one gets to this level of flexibility, it goes beyond the "building blocks" level of working. You will probably find that you will never use pure textbook filters, for instance. "Linkwitz transform" will simply become "equalisation". E.g., when I designed my first loudspeaker with Speaker Workshop, I equalised a funny looking bump in the woofer's response. The final frequency response was fairly flat, and the sonic results were beyond my expectations (the crossover was understandably not minimalist). It is only later that I learnt about baffle step...
any sonical impressions?
Hi Tony (minidsp)!
Great idea, great product line.
Does anybody have some sonic listening impressions with the minidsp modules?
my situation is as follows:
I have active speaker setup with digital crossover.
Sources are in digital signal path, conversion to analog signal is only in the digital crossover.
Analog signals coming from crossover have an analog buffer/master volume device.
From this multi channel volume device signal goes to amplifiers.
It is also a live-safer for the amps...
The digital crossovers are kind of weak point in the signal chain.
(actually using the known Behringer...)
I have done listening comparison with the cheap and the way more expensive BSS366 Omnidrive.(2.600Euros)
To focus on the DAC-quality aspect:
Also I had some tests with Lavry DA-10 (a-soft-painter, unrealistic sound) and Benchmark DAC-1 (some harshness, not the "real" resolution, some Pro-Audio devices have more "real" sound, at less price)
If the minidsp can give a listening experience near the quality of the BSS 366 then I will buy the minidsp kits!
Although the minidsp modules are targeted to provide low price, my interest is mainly in the sonic quality.
I like the idea to be able to build specific devices and maybe gain some new customers, too.
Any ideas of you, the manufacturer or the community here?
We can all help minidsp company to get a solid stand in this hard business.
Hi Tony (minidsp)!
Great idea, great product line.
Does anybody have some sonic listening impressions with the minidsp modules?
my situation is as follows:
I have active speaker setup with digital crossover.
Sources are in digital signal path, conversion to analog signal is only in the digital crossover.
Analog signals coming from crossover have an analog buffer/master volume device.
From this multi channel volume device signal goes to amplifiers.
It is also a live-safer for the amps...
The digital crossovers are kind of weak point in the signal chain.
(actually using the known Behringer...)
I have done listening comparison with the cheap and the way more expensive BSS366 Omnidrive.(2.600Euros)
To focus on the DAC-quality aspect:
Also I had some tests with Lavry DA-10 (a-soft-painter, unrealistic sound) and Benchmark DAC-1 (some harshness, not the "real" resolution, some Pro-Audio devices have more "real" sound, at less price)
If the minidsp can give a listening experience near the quality of the BSS 366 then I will buy the minidsp kits!
Although the minidsp modules are targeted to provide low price, my interest is mainly in the sonic quality.
I like the idea to be able to build specific devices and maybe gain some new customers, too.
Any ideas of you, the manufacturer or the community here?
We can all help minidsp company to get a solid stand in this hard business.
Non politically correct question...
Ok, first I do not want to offend anyone and I am happy that minidsp/Antoine ask me to open my own thread for this, but I would like anyway to ask the question of the sound quality and performance.
I have spent the last 18 months of hobby time (not much time, lots of hobbies) setting up a 5.1 kit based on PA drives.
There is a short thread here on diyAudio (that I must say I have neglected) and another much longer one here on this French forum, there are pics here as well where you can see the progress in pictures.
I am finished with the mains and I am now working on the sub integration (and room correction that comes with it) where I am planning to use an active filter.
I was considering a DCX(*) (as we all do) or possibly a Peavey VSX-26 stretching the budget a bit, when this thread attracted my attention (and I am so happy I did not miss it).
I read quite a few bad things about the audio qualities of the DCX and as well about the issues with low level unbalanced inputs/outputs that the VSX seem to be suffering even more (coming with hum and hiss) and I am not completely happy with making one of these choices (and as I am not able to listen/try before buying).
At the first glance (though I would like to see 2 or free more pictures to be added) a miniDSP board and the 2.1 plug-in would fit the bill quite well.
It offers "2.1" filtering.
It offers a few points of PEQ (though maybe a few more would be welcome).
It offers gain control and delay on each channel.
It lacks phase control but it could probably be added...
BUT the actual question is : does it sound good ?
And for me does it sound better than a DCX or a VSX ?
I would be happy to hear reviews and opinions of the happy few who did get their units and started playing.
Thanks in advance (and sorry to be blunt Tony),
Jean-Michel
(*):Tony I do understand what you say about comparing miniDSP with Behringer and it makes a lot of sense seen from your point of view. Doing something that would even remotely compare on price and quality with something that is produced by a tycoon like Behringer is an achievement in itself. And I do agree as well that the market is not strictly the same.
The issue you are facing and there is not much you will be able to do about it is that as a user and customer, when you wish to do active filtering and EQ on a budget the DCX, miniDSP and a few others are in the same picture.
There are minute differences, but from where I stand, I can do what I want with your stuff, with a DCX, a VSX (or others) and I am probably not the only one in this situation.
I do not want to upset you with my comment here and let's not hijack this thread further but I am happy to exchange "amicalement" with you on this subject via MP or email in English or en français (though I am miles away of being an expert in audio).
Ok, first I do not want to offend anyone and I am happy that minidsp/Antoine ask me to open my own thread for this, but I would like anyway to ask the question of the sound quality and performance.
I have spent the last 18 months of hobby time (not much time, lots of hobbies) setting up a 5.1 kit based on PA drives.
There is a short thread here on diyAudio (that I must say I have neglected) and another much longer one here on this French forum, there are pics here as well where you can see the progress in pictures.
I am finished with the mains and I am now working on the sub integration (and room correction that comes with it) where I am planning to use an active filter.
I was considering a DCX(*) (as we all do) or possibly a Peavey VSX-26 stretching the budget a bit, when this thread attracted my attention (and I am so happy I did not miss it).
I read quite a few bad things about the audio qualities of the DCX and as well about the issues with low level unbalanced inputs/outputs that the VSX seem to be suffering even more (coming with hum and hiss) and I am not completely happy with making one of these choices (and as I am not able to listen/try before buying).
At the first glance (though I would like to see 2 or free more pictures to be added) a miniDSP board and the 2.1 plug-in would fit the bill quite well.
It offers "2.1" filtering.
It offers a few points of PEQ (though maybe a few more would be welcome).
It offers gain control and delay on each channel.
It lacks phase control but it could probably be added...
BUT the actual question is : does it sound good ?
And for me does it sound better than a DCX or a VSX ?
I would be happy to hear reviews and opinions of the happy few who did get their units and started playing.
Thanks in advance (and sorry to be blunt Tony),
Jean-Michel
(*):Tony I do understand what you say about comparing miniDSP with Behringer and it makes a lot of sense seen from your point of view. Doing something that would even remotely compare on price and quality with something that is produced by a tycoon like Behringer is an achievement in itself. And I do agree as well that the market is not strictly the same.
The issue you are facing and there is not much you will be able to do about it is that as a user and customer, when you wish to do active filtering and EQ on a budget the DCX, miniDSP and a few others are in the same picture.
There are minute differences, but from where I stand, I can do what I want with your stuff, with a DCX, a VSX (or others) and I am probably not the only one in this situation.
I do not want to upset you with my comment here and let's not hijack this thread further but I am happy to exchange "amicalement" with you on this subject via MP or email in English or en français (though I am miles away of being an expert in audio).
Last edited:
To SPIDriver,
Thanks for your comments, I'll just say few words as I think I've tried in a lot of previous threads to highlight some of the points you're asking for.
First off, I won't answer to your question about sound quality since that should be done by our end users, not me. I believe that if you search a bit more this forum, you'll read some experiences about our products. You'll get better results at getting an objective reply to your question. For a manufacturer to answer that question doesn't make sense.
Second, with regards to the products you're trying to compare us to:
1) You must have noticed that they are a 10x even 20x ratio is cost, right? Just checking in case since I'm not really sure how you're trying to compare 2 products that are so far in a cost factor...
2) The type of outputs and inputs are also greatly different. miniDSP has un-balanced in/out while Lavry had balanced, same for BSS. Very different applications (driving long distances, high input/output signal capabilities).
All this to say that maybe before talking about audio quality, I may recommend that you clearly define in your head/on paper what you're looking for and how much you're willing to spend? The range of products you seem to be looking at is too wide (both in price spectrum and features) and I think there may not be an answer to your question, until you figure out what you're actually looking for.
If as you say price isn't an issue, you may as well give a try to our boards since they are so much cheaper than any of the other option you listed!
my 2cts.
Thanks for your comments, I'll just say few words as I think I've tried in a lot of previous threads to highlight some of the points you're asking for.
First off, I won't answer to your question about sound quality since that should be done by our end users, not me. I believe that if you search a bit more this forum, you'll read some experiences about our products. You'll get better results at getting an objective reply to your question. For a manufacturer to answer that question doesn't make sense.
Second, with regards to the products you're trying to compare us to:
1) You must have noticed that they are a 10x even 20x ratio is cost, right? Just checking in case since I'm not really sure how you're trying to compare 2 products that are so far in a cost factor...
2) The type of outputs and inputs are also greatly different. miniDSP has un-balanced in/out while Lavry had balanced, same for BSS. Very different applications (driving long distances, high input/output signal capabilities).
All this to say that maybe before talking about audio quality, I may recommend that you clearly define in your head/on paper what you're looking for and how much you're willing to spend? The range of products you seem to be looking at is too wide (both in price spectrum and features) and I think there may not be an answer to your question, until you figure out what you're actually looking for.
If as you say price isn't an issue, you may as well give a try to our boards since they are so much cheaper than any of the other option you listed!
my 2cts.
Last edited:
To Jean Michel,
Thanks for your comments and no worries, you're not upsetting anybody or hijacking anything here. This forum is indeed for discussing ideas but you got me 100% right that I won't participate to the whole Behringer comparison. Maybe think about starting a separate thread somewhere else if it goes out of control, in order to keep the topic of this thread to what it was meant: "Answer to Technical question"...
One thing I can say is that indeed, most of the technology (say 96%) you see for speaker processing comes from the ProAudio world (Live sound/Install words). Issue being that the systems these units (e.g. DCX2496) are being used is very different from your home:
- Home systems don't need to run meters and meters of wires through on a field/building to a speaker/amplifier, ProAudio Units do
- Home systems typically don't run at +4dBu with a max input of +20dBu, ProAudio units need it to protect their inputs
- Home systems may not want a rack mount unit on top of their fancy hifi, ProAudio units wouldn't be able to sell if they're not rackmount..
- Even down to the processing, there are a lot of differences between hifi world and ProAudio...
and the list goes on & on.. I've been in the field of ProAudio for more than 15years, so believe me that I know this field...
So hopefully, you understand that there are 2 different sets of requirements and can't be compared just by looking at the fact that they share one common word: "DSP". Anyways, the point you're making about noise are indeed something to be aware since ProAudio units are meant to run with a hot signal on the input, not a pro-sumer -10dBv signal from a hifi source.
As for Audio quality, same comments as what i just said to SPIdriver above. For a manufacturer to answer that question doesn't make sense. Of course we're really happy of the performance of that tiny board, and our customers also do. Could we make it better than a 1kUSD piece of gear, sure. Would it cost a lot more by then? Well, it's kindergarden Math.
Hope this information helps,
Thanks for your comments and no worries, you're not upsetting anybody or hijacking anything here. This forum is indeed for discussing ideas but you got me 100% right that I won't participate to the whole Behringer comparison.
Maybe think about starting a separate thread somewhere else if it goes out of control, in order to keep the topic of this thread to what it was meant: "Answer to Technical question"... One thing I can say is that indeed, most of the technology (say 96%) you see for speaker processing comes from the ProAudio world (Live sound/Install words). Issue being that the systems these units (e.g. DCX2496) are being used is very different from your home:
- Home systems don't need to run meters and meters of wires through on a field/building to a speaker/amplifier, ProAudio Units do
- Home systems typically don't run at +4dBu with a max input of +20dBu, ProAudio units need it to protect their inputs
- Home systems may not want a rack mount unit on top of their fancy hifi, ProAudio units wouldn't be able to sell if they're not rackmount..
- Even down to the processing, there are a lot of differences between hifi world and ProAudio...
and the list goes on & on.. I've been in the field of ProAudio for more than 15years, so believe me that I know this field...
So hopefully, you understand that there are 2 different sets of requirements and can't be compared just by looking at the fact that they share one common word: "DSP". Anyways, the point you're making about noise are indeed something to be aware since ProAudio units are meant to run with a hot signal on the input, not a pro-sumer -10dBv signal from a hifi source.
As for Audio quality, same comments as what i just said to SPIdriver above. For a manufacturer to answer that question doesn't make sense. Of course we're really happy of the performance of that tiny board, and our customers also do. Could we make it better than a 1kUSD piece of gear, sure. Would it cost a lot more by then? Well, it's kindergarden Math.
Hope this information helps,
To SPIDriver,
Thanks for your comments, I'll just say few words as I think I've tried in a lot of previous threads to highlight some of the points you're asking for.
First off, I won't answer to your question about sound quality since that should be done by our end users, not me. I believe that if you search a bit more this forum, you'll read some experiences about our products. You'll get better results at getting an objective reply to your question. For a manufacturer to answer that question doesn't make sense.
Second, with regards to the products you're trying to compare us to:
1) You must have noticed that they are a 10x even 20x ratio is cost, right? Just checking in case since I'm not really sure how you're trying to compare 2 products that are so far in a cost factor...
2) The type of outputs and inputs are also greatly different. miniDSP has un-balanced in/out while Lavry had balanced, same for BSS. Very different applications (driving long distances, high input/output signal capabilities).
All this to say that maybe before talking about audio quality, I may recommend that you clearly define in your head/on paper what you're looking for and how much you're willing to spend? The range of products you seem to be looking at is too wide (both in price spectrum and features) and I think there may not be an answer to your question, until you figure out what you're actually looking for.
If as you say price isn't an issue, you may as well give a try to our boards since they are so much cheaper than any of the other option you listed!
my 2cts.
Thank You for this information. We will find the right direction here.
I have done my homework since a longer time.
Meaning, I do know exactly what I want to achieve and to have a meaningful pricing of a product.
So I have clearly defined for myself what I am looking for.
(It is so clearly defined that I am able to help others/customers finding the right solutions for their requirements)
Companies, products:
I am not comparing your products to others. I wanted to give the reader an impression which devices I have listened to and everybody who knows this devices knows of which level of sonic quality I was talking about.
So I will never mention any other companies now in this minidsp thread.
(Only if beeing asked for it)
Sound Quality:
First argument for me is very good listening experience.
Price is second.
The Price is second, because I want to find some hardware and software giving me a (very) good solution to build a product based on my own ideas and requirements.
Because of this it was necessary for me to listen to all kind of devices, regardless the cost.
It let me find a good sounding device, an with a price worth it.
I can not buy everything I want to have in my evaluating listening tests.
So I was happy to have a chance to listen to the expensive ones in my own setup.
I had bad experiences, too. With some high priced devices!!
This was very disappointing and I lost money with buying and selling them.
(i.e. the so called "high-end" DACs)
You are right with giving your boards a try!
This a very low financial risk, or maybe no risk at all.
* Plugins for minidsp, just some thoughts:
You offer plugins.
Is it possible You agree to a business model, having kind of remittance work?
One or some customers have a specific need, they are paying you more money as the usual plugin price.
The resulting plugin is then avaible for purchasing for everybody.
Also with kind of "protection", to give it to the public with some time delay.
(So the sponsor have time to use an advantage with their products)
@ALL:
* Who has some listening impressions with the minidsp?
maybe we can share descriptions of usage in specific setups of the minidsp.
If I have bought and tested, I will share mine here.
We are not Open Source here, but DIY.
* to expand the minidsp: where to find good XLR input and output stages, can be DIY or modules/PCBs. As I need XLR cabling.
solid state, opamp, Lundahl ("Lundahl" meant as a product-line, not talking about companies
) transformers or even tubes...Should sound as clear as a piece of wire and do not add noise.
what is adequate for this?
* no comparison here with manufactures. I do not want to mislead discussion in such a direction.
I have to find solutions for me and my future customers. We all want to enjoy our music.
Despite of some thousand engineers and companies out there, DSP4you had the idea of this product and did the step to invest money to develop, build and sell it. It pleases me very much.
thanks.
* to expand the minidsp: where to find good XLR input and output stages, can be DIY or modules/PCBs. As I need XLR cabling.
solid state, opamp, Lundahl ("Lundahl" meant as a product-line, not talking about companies
Should sound as clear as a piece of wire and do not add noise.
what is adequate for this?
MiniDSP say they are preparing a balanced analog in/out board soon.
To Spdriver,
Thanks for your detailed reply along with your kind comments about this product line! Also, a big welcome to the miniDSP community! It indeed sounds like you did your homework before posting this thread so my bad for mis-understanding your previous post...
FYI, comparing products is perfectly fine and I certainly don't want to sound like I'm trying to "police" this forum, it's definitely not my intention! The only point I'm trying to make is to be careful of not just using the word "DSP" as a common description for all products there are out there. As I tried to explain in multiple threads before, there is a vast range of DSP product for a vast range of applications, therefore having a vast range of initial system requirements when they were designed. (size/flexibility/power requirements...etc). So the hardest maybe to the naked eye is to understand what the differences are between each product. When you look at a credit card size DSP vs a rack mount unit, your head should already spin in thinking: "Well these were 2 complete different products, engineered for 2 complete different applications". That's the only point I'm trying to make...
With regards to your plug-in question, I think that we'll have to discuss this privately for us to better understand what you mean. You can send me an email later @ info@minidsp.com to discuss your ideas. We've got a very busy schedule these days, but are always open to discuss ideas.
For your questions on quality, you may wanna try to ask on our forum since there are a lot more "minidsp" owners hanging out there...
On this note, have fun with your new toy!
Tony
Thanks for your detailed reply along with your kind comments about this product line! Also, a big welcome to the miniDSP community! It indeed sounds like you did your homework before posting this thread so my bad for mis-understanding your previous post...
FYI, comparing products is perfectly fine and I certainly don't want to sound like I'm trying to "police" this forum, it's definitely not my intention!
The only point I'm trying to make is to be careful of not just using the word "DSP" as a common description for all products there are out there. As I tried to explain in multiple threads before, there is a vast range of DSP product for a vast range of applications, therefore having a vast range of initial system requirements when they were designed. (size/flexibility/power requirements...etc). So the hardest maybe to the naked eye is to understand what the differences are between each product. When you look at a credit card size DSP vs a rack mount unit, your head should already spin in thinking: "Well these were 2 complete different products, engineered for 2 complete different applications". That's the only point I'm trying to make... With regards to your plug-in question, I think that we'll have to discuss this privately for us to better understand what you mean. You can send me an email later @ info@minidsp.com to discuss your ideas. We've got a very busy schedule these days, but are always open to discuss ideas.
For your questions on quality, you may wanna try to ask on our forum since there are a lot more "minidsp" owners hanging out there...
On this note, have fun with your new toy!
Tony
I do not know if it is "progress with Apple" already.
Running this software in "dry run".
On my OS X 10.6.x Snow Leopard, the miniDSP Plugins are running.
Installed Adobe AIR, and was able to start the Plugins and play with settings.
Since my ordered boards have not arrived yet, I'm not able to tell if the software is working as supposed.
I will post again here as soon as I have tested it with hardware...
Running this software in "dry run".
On my OS X 10.6.x Snow Leopard, the miniDSP Plugins are running.
Installed Adobe AIR, and was able to start the Plugins and play with settings.
Since my ordered boards have not arrived yet, I'm not able to tell if the software is working as supposed.
I will post again here as soon as I have tested it with hardware...
The answer is Yes, there is progress. Is it as fast as we would hope and under our control. The answer is not really...
As explained earlier, we've had to subcontract this part of the work since none of us is a Mac OSx expert. After a faulty start with what was a wrong choice of contractor, we now have the right one who's been making great progress in building the app we need to communicate with our boards. The past 2 weeks were preliminary work but hopefully, the next 2 will be more advance... Anyway, although the UI works as SPdriver mentions, just to clarify that our soft are NOT Mac compatible Yet!
Hope this clarifies, and of course we'll warn everybody when it's ready...
Welcome to the miniDSP Community and Thanks for your words of encouragement!
Looking forward to seeing your setup.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.