Well, I am getting a little bit confused! Although I unchecked the Bass/Treble when I started the 192 SR I had for core 0 =91% and 1= 91%? With Bass enabled core 0= 103%, core 1=93. So, I closed everything and made new setups. Now 192 Khz pass through showed 71 for core 0 and 69 for core 1.
I distributed all channels the same way I did yesterday (1,2,5,6,7,8) and got now 87 on core 0 and 86 on core 1!! No overflow anymore! And if I check bass/treble I get 91 for both. Can't understand this behaviour! Is there something remaining in the board DSP that first has to be cleaned? by powering off the board?
I observed this also when switching from analog to SPDIF, The DSP load goes higher and remains. Only after a new start from standby I get the original core load.
Well, at least for now all seems solved!! 😉
If load can be reduced by unchecking nr. of channels this would be great. I personally also dont need pre-gain or post- gain adjustment in the channel configuration. The most important is the delay ( can be quite different for other systems)To have the possibility to check what is really needed would be great if it keeps DSP load lower.
Best regards
Sigi
There should be some explanation behind most of the things you can observe. That's why I had asked you to send me your nsf files, that's the place to start looking at if you observe a load which is unexpectedly high (some EQs lying around for example).
The load gets slightly higher when you select the SPDIF input because the routine is different: SPDIF requires that we check a couple of additional things before we can accept the incoming samples (such as the locked status).
Anyway, glad that the problem is solved now 😉
Nick
The load gets slightly higher when you select the SPDIF input because the routine is different: SPDIF requires that we check a couple of additional things before we can accept the incoming samples (such as the locked status).
Anyway, glad that the problem is solved now 😉
Nick
Nick, am also glad to have solved the problem, although I don't know why I have had this overload problem. Never defined any EQ, always unchecked basss/treble. Am using Acourate and the Acourate convolver for speaker and room correction, no need for EQ! This before going into Najda board.
Hope that some day it will be possible to incorporate the correction filters in Najda.
Cheers
Sigi
Hope that some day it will be possible to incorporate the correction filters in Najda.
Cheers
Sigi
Hi Bengt, not yet, but I will today. I tried the other one you have send me, but the result was the same as I posted earlier, overload.
Hello Jcga,
Is there a chance to get the dcx files for the front and rear panels from you?
A hopefull Najda user....
Is there a chance to get the dcx files for the front and rear panels from you?
A hopefull Najda user....
No problem to share the dxf files but I want to check first with the remaining pcbs supposed to arrive home this week.
Jean Claude
Hi jcga,
That sounds very good! Sorry for the mistake, not dcx files ( maybe the long time with the Behringer?) the dxf files i need, if possible.
Best regards
Ulf
That sounds very good! Sorry for the mistake, not dcx files ( maybe the long time with the Behringer?) the dxf files i need, if possible.
Best regards
Ulf
Hi, I tried it now. With expansion port 1 I get 91% on core 0 and 86% on core 1. If I switch to SPDIF I get 108% on core 0 and 86% on core 1.😡
Are your results the same? I checked that bass/treble is really unchecked!
if you intend to use this configuration I would recommend to put the passbands on channel 5 and 6. The rest on channel 1,2 and 7,8
Regards
Sigi
Yes, it overloads if I switch to spdif input. It stays in that way even if I
change back to expansion1 but goes back to the no overload numbers if I
restart the board.
That configuration would mean that mid (that has most done to it) and high freq would
share core 1. Core 0 would only have to cope with one xo point and no eq,
you mean that this would give a more even distribution of resources ? I have
taken it down for more work myself so there is no way to try this rigth now.
Yes, it overloads if I switch to spdif input. It stays in that way even if I
change back to expansion1 but goes back to the no overload numbers if I
restart the board.
What a wonderful build!!
That configuration would mean that mid (that has most done to it) and high freq would
share core 1. Core 0 would only have to cope with one xo point and no eq,
you mean that this would give a more even distribution of resources ? I have
taken it down for more work myself so there is no way to try this rigth now.
O.k. I have same effect. Overload goes back to no overload if you restart the board.
I were successful when I redistributed the passbands to channel 5 and 6. I think this will also help in your case
Regards
Sigi
I have a theory (guessing) that it may even be better to run in 96k if you are close to overloading the cores in 192k. This might be totaly wrong so please correct me if that's the case. Have to try both of course 🙂
The best you can do is probably try by yourself. Have ready 2 identical presets, one at 96 kHz and the other at 192 kHz, and switch between them with the remote controller. Then let us know 😉
It´s going to be a while until I can try it in my "rig" that´s why I asked.
But I have it connected to my laptop and I tried to create a 192khz filter,but with the 4 equs that I have to use with my PA woofer the core was up to about 110% so I figure that´s to much anyway so thats way I figured I use 96khz..
But I have it connected to my laptop and I tried to create a 192khz filter,but with the 4 equs that I have to use with my PA woofer the core was up to about 110% so I figure that´s to much anyway so thats way I figured I use 96khz..