Split off from here http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/digi...hronous-usb-i2s-interface-10.html#post2483191 
Actually firewire seems on it's way out with what seems to be a LightPeak implementation. Today Apple launched the new MacBook Pro, and while it still retains the firewire it also includes Thunderbolt.
Apple - MacBook Pro - A notebook full of innovations.
DailyTech - Apple Reveals Revamped MacBook Pro Lineup with AMD Graphics, Thunderbolt I/O
If thunderbolt really is fiber optic based this would be extremely cool for high res audio. It would mean no groundloops...
Back ontopic. Just to make sure I understand the clock schematic of the exa device. The system clock is generated onboard, and the PC, as well as the DAC are slaved to the fpga? And the ESS dac would run great on this due to the build-in ASRC?
Thanks!
Actually firewire seems on it's way out with what seems to be a LightPeak implementation. Today Apple launched the new MacBook Pro, and while it still retains the firewire it also includes Thunderbolt.
Apple - MacBook Pro - A notebook full of innovations.
DailyTech - Apple Reveals Revamped MacBook Pro Lineup with AMD Graphics, Thunderbolt I/O
If thunderbolt really is fiber optic based this would be extremely cool for high res audio. It would mean no groundloops...
Back ontopic. Just to make sure I understand the clock schematic of the exa device. The system clock is generated onboard, and the PC, as well as the DAC are slaved to the fpga? And the ESS dac would run great on this due to the build-in ASRC?
Thanks!
It is Intel's intention that Light Peak replace a lot of exixting I/O with a single connection.
dave
That it embeds PCI Express just is brilliant. Was missing PC-card extension when they removed it to create the Unibody - that's why I stayed on the older one. Now PCI comes back... in a rather clever form. And 10G Ethernet and Fibre Channel will allow it to conform to HD post production facilities...
Damn. Good job on that one, Intel!
Damn. Good job on that one, Intel!
RE: Light Peak / Thunderbolt and Fibre Optics
Codename: Light Peak had been in development by Intel for quite some time. Although it was well evolved, they had come up against roadblocks with implementing the fibre connectivity, and were under the belief that copper would not meet the goals.
Where Apple came in (" brought to market with technical collaboration from Apple" is how Intel puts it) was in offering to develop and implement a copper interface that met the goals. They had developed Mini DisplayPort, which they had already released as an openly adoptable subset of the DisplayPort standard, and felt that it could form the basis of a copper implementation.
So, the Thunderbolt is copper via Mini Display Port, and is the official name of the technology from Intel (trademark is registered to Intel, not Apple). Intel still hopes to implement the fibre-based version in the future but has no firm release schedule nor are they positive they will be able to, and so for now there won't be any fibre option. Apparently the controller chip is fibre-ready; it's the rest they have issues with.
Any manufacturer is free to use Thunderbolt. It requires a controller chip from Intel. Apparently Intel has guaranteed Apple supply to 2012 whereupon it will be available to all motherboard manufacturers.
Codename: Light Peak had been in development by Intel for quite some time. Although it was well evolved, they had come up against roadblocks with implementing the fibre connectivity, and were under the belief that copper would not meet the goals.
Where Apple came in (" brought to market with technical collaboration from Apple" is how Intel puts it) was in offering to develop and implement a copper interface that met the goals. They had developed Mini DisplayPort, which they had already released as an openly adoptable subset of the DisplayPort standard, and felt that it could form the basis of a copper implementation.
So, the Thunderbolt is copper via Mini Display Port, and is the official name of the technology from Intel (trademark is registered to Intel, not Apple). Intel still hopes to implement the fibre-based version in the future but has no firm release schedule nor are they positive they will be able to, and so for now there won't be any fibre option. Apparently the controller chip is fibre-ready; it's the rest they have issues with.
Any manufacturer is free to use Thunderbolt. It requires a controller chip from Intel. Apparently Intel has guaranteed Apple supply to 2012 whereupon it will be available to all motherboard manufacturers.
Last edited:
Exactly.
Pretty much any standard interface you care to name - USB, SATA, ethernet, FireWire, etc. - already has a chipset(s) in the market which is designed to go on the motherboard and connect to the CPU side via PCIe. By making Thunderbolt a PCIe tunnel, those existing chips can simply get hooked on to a T-bolt endpoint, and presto - you now have that interface present on the other end of a cable (3m Cu or 100m optical)! From both a hardware and software perspective, it's essentially no different from actually having that IO port right on the motherboard.
Thus, there can be a very short runway for 3rd parties to develop Thunderbolt implementations - the hardware and software pieces already exist.
I'm a bit bemused that more people didn't sniff out what was going on a long time ago... there was a huge clue dropped at IDF 2009 when intel first demo'd Light Peak (check out the YouTube vid of it) - notice which OS was running on the demo platform? No coincidence. Yet, scarcely anyone seemed to take notice at the time...
Pretty much any standard interface you care to name - USB, SATA, ethernet, FireWire, etc. - already has a chipset(s) in the market which is designed to go on the motherboard and connect to the CPU side via PCIe. By making Thunderbolt a PCIe tunnel, those existing chips can simply get hooked on to a T-bolt endpoint, and presto - you now have that interface present on the other end of a cable (3m Cu or 100m optical)! From both a hardware and software perspective, it's essentially no different from actually having that IO port right on the motherboard.
Thus, there can be a very short runway for 3rd parties to develop Thunderbolt implementations - the hardware and software pieces already exist.
I'm a bit bemused that more people didn't sniff out what was going on a long time ago... there was a huge clue dropped at IDF 2009 when intel first demo'd Light Peak (check out the YouTube vid of it) - notice which OS was running on the demo platform? No coincidence. Yet, scarcely anyone seemed to take notice at the time...
The first major downgrade from the initial specs is that they are using copper and not fiber. It seems there are still some problems with it. Fiber would have been great for audio purposes in terms of isolation. I don;t know in terms of latency though.
Second, this stuff is designed for video and audio editing so I expect the standard should be pretty straightforward for audio streaming. It's already supporting 8 channel audio according to the press release. The question is how, through HDMI?
Second, this stuff is designed for video and audio editing so I expect the standard should be pretty straightforward for audio streaming. It's already supporting 8 channel audio according to the press release. The question is how, through HDMI?
myself, i'm glad its copper, one less conversion needed and given this is bound to be buffered, what exactly are you needing isolation from?
one things fir sure, this just delayed my purchase of a mac mini for running my xo until theres a model with it, or silly cheap outdated top models
one things fir sure, this just delayed my purchase of a mac mini for running my xo until theres a model with it, or silly cheap outdated top models
Last edited:
i'm with you, the collaboration between these 2 companies sure seems to be a winner, the possibilities are endless for expanding the capability of smaller computers and creating super computers/crossovers with nodes all connecting together via data and music stream simultaneously
i'm dreaming of 2 x new mac minis with thunderbolt connected with single cable for network protocols, clock and hidef content running all in sync on the same bus and daisy chained to ssd raid and sharing dsp of my favorite pci audio hardware ;D
i'm dreaming of 2 x new mac minis with thunderbolt connected with single cable for network protocols, clock and hidef content running all in sync on the same bus and daisy chained to ssd raid and sharing dsp of my favorite pci audio hardware ;D
Yup, incredible indeed. From what I've heard the bandwidth of this thing is scaling very nicely. Intel is expecting to pump it up to 40Gb once on fiber. This has the potential to revolutionize everything, from audio/video to server communications.
@qusp. Well, isolation would have been interesting for avoiding ground loops between the pc and dac, as well as the additional interferences and RF electrical lines tend to collect. Using optocouplers solves these issues but again I guess they induce some latency. Just as lightpeak on fiber would do presumably.
@qusp. Well, isolation would have been interesting for avoiding ground loops between the pc and dac, as well as the additional interferences and RF electrical lines tend to collect. Using optocouplers solves these issues but again I guess they induce some latency. Just as lightpeak on fiber would do presumably.
!!!! I thought they would launch it later! I wanted to sell my old non unibody macbook pro before, so it would be worth more than 100$... I'll have to keep it till it's dead now I think
I'll give you $150! ;-)
From my perspective this opens whole new world with high end digital photo backs like Phase One. All these years, the bus was the biggest problem in moving files from camera to computer. With such a huge bandwith now camera, mechanically, would not be able to catch up with file transfer, The biggest evolution happened when they switched from SCASI to Fire Wire, somewhere in '99 and still with that we were are able to only make a few shots per sec. FW bus get clogged while dumping images from buffer. So it seems like every 10-11 years we are having a major breakthrough in technology.
This is a major improvement affecting almost any computer user. This allows laptop performance to get closer to desktop, first comes to mind.
The biggest evolution happened when they switched from SCASI to Fire Wire, somewhere in '99 and still with that we were are able to only make a few shots per sec. FW bus get clogged while dumping images from buffer. So it seems like every 10-11 years we are having a major breakthrough in technology.This is a major improvement affecting almost any computer user. This allows laptop performance to get closer to desktop, first comes to mind.
Live view is useles feature anyways. It overheats the back. Phase One was never meant to have one with reason. I have it on P60+ and P45+ backs and it just overheats back that results in noisy captures after use. Live view is useless feature, because it is ackward to focus on 4x5 and to view at the screen. I have no problem focusing on the screen and making capture that will show much better than fuzzy live view. Try live view in back light, hehe
Phase one was never designed to have live view, because the idea was to design camera with only one wire coming out. At the time, that was the big deal because all backs had numerous wires which made them clumsy and hard to work with. Phase One was the first to implement FW and that did not allow for any additional current to be waisted on cooling fan. Any other back at the time like Leaf later incorporated FW and fan, but with additional power supply and wire coming out of back. That is why P1 back needed to be first woken up and than shoot would be taken. That way they managed heat to the minimum - the back is all the time off, and only when the shoot is taken it gets active. That problem was easily overtaken when attached on Hasselblad, or any other medium back through electronic means, but on 4 x 5 was kind of anoying until guy from Kapture Group made wake up cable.
With live view, back is active for too long without any cooling and you risk to blow $ 45K back just because some dumb art director cannot live without it. He, he, not with my digital back, hehehe. I had those conversations, believe me...
yeah i figured thats why, but i'm guessing the reason they couldnt make it work with fiber was exactly these issues, when dealing with such speeds adding wasteful processing and conversion is sure to produce bottlenecks. besides i reckon you'll find its a differential connection and ground linked between devices only for power supply chaining. it is daisy chained rather than connected in parallel any which way, it might be hard to create a loop, since one ground is passed onto the next and onto the next etc etc. transformers are gonna have a hard time at these speeds, so isolation might be a ways off if its needed. its pouzzling since the backbones over the world are fiber, but if intel couldnt make 10gbs work on fiber, what makes you think they can do 40? not doubting, just wondering where that info is coming from?
Neo2k: indeed mate, thats exactly what i mean, so exciting!! wow i bet there is all manner of companies around the planet right now with their head in their hands after spending money and time on development of next gen usb and proprietary transport protocols; only to be wiped out in one swoop. usb 3.0 of course through an adapter will still just work, but it wont be the industry leading thing they planned, and will likely be ignored by the neophytes they were chasing.
Last edited:
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.