Sure - when I enter set filter command first time I see F5 or some other number after F which filter was set as output.
But just first time.
FW parsing this output to complete check if filter set successfully. So I'm reading the output and cleaning the buffer.
But any second command fail.
From PC I can do it several time - so issue on Arduino side of course. May be this is HW, may FW, but I need just example of working simple command send several time from Arduino.
May someone has some code used (as part).
That what I'm sending with input and output (working on PC and not from arduino)
->> +++ ;; for enter to uManager
<<- dam1021 uManager Rev 1.24 20210530 FPGA Rev 1.24 Press ? for help. ; bolded part can't read by Arduino but see on PC
->> set filter soft ;; as example set soft filter (F7 from my revision)
<<- F7 # ; output come and read from DAM in Arduino succeed command first time.
->> exit ; doing exit from uManager
<<- Invalid Command ; reply from DAM. All other commands also has fail till full Arduino power cycle.
So I don't see any issue from my side.
Each print / println command are cleared by flush commad before.
Each data ouput read by loop using now readBytes command.
I have understand case when different command fail on unstable HW connection or some voltage settings. But not constantly first success and other fails. It just like some critical issue with my Serial Arduino interface understanding (or bug).
Hmm - I have echoed Filter just in case I'm sending double \r\n\r\n after F5 command.
Is it estimated?
Is it estimated?
Last edited:
Sure, understood, but the issue with uManager only first command still here.
Thanks
Now I have found my bug so now commands without uManager are working.
Thanks a lot for bill6300gp for idea to use it.
I have use EEPROM to save filter was set last time, so power cycle also now restore last filter used.
Currently I finished first simple FW for Arduino and HW parts.
Last step - made good look of DAM DAC.
Thanks for all for reading and supporting.
Gromushka,
Are you read my #171 post (and Arduino codes) here?
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/gb-for-ardam-lite-bare-pcbs.306521/page-9
Are you read my #171 post (and Arduino codes) here?
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/gb-for-ardam-lite-bare-pcbs.306521/page-9
Now yes, but I have done the same functions now.
But I still haven't found Arduino uManager usage.
Are you connecting the Arduino to the DAM via J3’s TX and RX pins? They allow direct command control (read and write). The J10 port is for uManager - which is primarily intended for firmware upgrades. From your posts you appear to be trying to go into uManager via the Arduino to issue commands. If that is what you’re doing then it’s easier to use the J3 TX/RX pins and avoid uManager altogether.
Remember - J3 is TTL.
Remember - J3 is TTL.
Last edited:
No - I'm using J10 (rev 7 board has modified 3 pins connector easy to use)
From HW point of view this is no difference between HW input to logical. Both interfaces come to similar FW points and supporting same possible connection.
J3 different from isolation POV and could be used for sending command during music played to change filter with less impact to power on DAM.
Yes sure. Thanks.
This is 2 reasons was.
First were very stupid I have missed this possibility. In short spec from DAM site I haven't found them but only here in forum.
Second - saving possibility to set filter stored for power cycle too for all parameters included input and volume.
But now I have build small saved in EEPROM structure for use to save parameters and restore them by power on. So it's not required now.
I will share FW when it will be fully done with all functions in case it would be usable for others.
Hi
As done I'm sharing for fee usage: https://github.com/Gromush/adac
Of course this only simple version without volume and input changes (only filter set by one button)
I will do changes soon for support also input changing. Volume for me is not required but code is simple and could be ex. tended in case required.
Thanks for help
As done I'm sharing for fee usage: https://github.com/Gromush/adac
Of course this only simple version without volume and input changes (only filter set by one button)
I will do changes soon for support also input changing. Volume for me is not required but code is simple and could be ex. tended in case required.
Thanks for help
Code updated to use one button functionality.
Short press to show FW version
Long press - enter to change filter (short press to cyclic changing filter used)
Second long press - chang input - same as filter
Third long press - return to main mode
Short press to show FW version
Long press - enter to change filter (short press to cyclic changing filter used)
Second long press - chang input - same as filter
Third long press - return to main mode
Competitors?
As being satified with my four DACs (formerly five) from Soekris, still it is amusing to look at other vendors offerings.
dCS Rossini Apex D/A processor where recently reviewed. Here the design was explained as quoted below.
My question is if the achieved linearity is meaningsful or an over-achievement? Is price/performance ratio justified?
dCS Sales and Marketing John Giolas:
Price: $32,800
https://www.stereophile.com/content/dcs-rossini-apex-da-processor
As being satified with my four DACs (formerly five) from Soekris, still it is amusing to look at other vendors offerings.
dCS Rossini Apex D/A processor where recently reviewed. Here the design was explained as quoted below.
My question is if the achieved linearity is meaningsful or an over-achievement? Is price/performance ratio justified?
dCS Sales and Marketing John Giolas:
"On the surface, the Ring DAC may look like a Ladder DAC. There is a latch and a resistor for each current source, and these current sources are fed to a summing bus. The key difference between the Ring DAC and Ladder DACs ... is that the Ring DAC uses current sources of equal value. This is what is known as a 'unitary-weighted' or 'thermometer coded' DAC architecture.
"Additionally, the Ring DAC does not use the same current source(s) for the same bit every time." (The emphasis is Hales's.) There are 48 current sources within the Ring DAC, all of which produce an equal amount of current. The Field Programmable Gate Array (FPGA)–controlled nature of the Ring DAC allows the sources to be turned on and off in such a way that any component value errors are averaged out over time. Firing the same bit three times on the Ring DAC might give one output slightly high, the next slightly low, the next somewhere in the middle, as opposed to outputting the sample slightly high every time or slightly low every time (as seen in a Ladder DAC, for example).
The dCS Digital Platform (DDP) instructs the Ring DAC which resistor 'latches' to turn off and on via a dCS-designed software system we call the 'mapper'. Its sophisticated quasi-randomization accomplishes this in such a way that any component value errors are averaged out, vastly improving linearity over ladder DACs and other conventional DACs." dCS had previously addressed and improved its mapper technology in 2017, when the Rossini 2.0 upgrade provided a choice of new or legacy mapping algorithms. David Steven, managing director of dCS, noted by email, "The mapping process is vital to the performance of the DAC and is performed in programmable logic (FPGA). As we improve it, we can upgrade the performance of units in the field (eg, most recently with Bartók 2.0). The Apex hardware changes take full advantage of and build upon the high-speed mappers that were installed during the 2.0 software update to the Ring DAC."
"The new Ring DAC Apex hardware features several modifications," Giolas continued. "The reference supply that feeds the Ring DAC circuit board was one of the first areas that dCS engineers looked at during the research and development phase. Their investigation led them to make some significant adjustments and enhancements. The engineers also thoroughly modified and improved all subsequent stages of the Ring DAC, including the summing and filter stages. The Ring DAC output stage responsible for buffering the analogue signals generated by the Ring DAC was redesigned (footnote 5). Other changes to the Ring DAC's hardware included replacing individual transistors on the Ring DAC circuit board with a compound pair, thereby improving symmetry and linearity, and adjusting the layout of components on the Ring DAC circuit board. The result of these various adaptations is a new, enhanced analogue board that is quieter than previous iterations and over 12dB more linear in the second harmonic."
Price: $32,800
https://www.stereophile.com/content/dcs-rossini-apex-da-processor
I could'nt resist comparing the linearity measurements available.
Although the context is different, it is interesting to notice there are no performance differerence noticeable.
The attacked picture shows the two measurements where the scaling is adjusted on the right.
Although the context is different, it is interesting to notice there are no performance differerence noticeable.
The attacked picture shows the two measurements where the scaling is adjusted on the right.
Attachments
Well, then linearity performance is roughy equal
My questions where -
Is the achieved linearity is meaningsful or an over-achievement?
Is a fragment of a dB off-set at -120dB meaningful
Is price/performance ratio justified?
The dCS Rossine apex is charged $32,800
The Soekris dac 1421 is charged Eur 750
That is 2,2% ratio price/performance ratio
My questions where -
Is the achieved linearity is meaningsful or an over-achievement?
Is a fragment of a dB off-set at -120dB meaningful
Is price/performance ratio justified?
The dCS Rossine apex is charged $32,800
The Soekris dac 1421 is charged Eur 750
That is 2,2% ratio price/performance ratio
I think you have been led down the garden path with your Soekris dacs. Chinese dacs available for less than $40 offer a much better spec return on investment. Can you justify your purchases?
From my understanding, unlike the Soekris the DCS converters still do use weighing, averaging, noiseshaping etc., essentially like delta sigma converters.
I've got DCS AD converters, the latest ones (from 15 years ago, when they seized building studio equipment) do sound very good, but the filters are not as good (=transparent) as the one I have loaded into my Soekris DACs.
I've got DCS AD converters, the latest ones (from 15 years ago, when they seized building studio equipment) do sound very good, but the filters are not as good (=transparent) as the one I have loaded into my Soekris DACs.