23 Nov
2009
23 Nov
'09
4:28 p.m.
Recent discussion on LAU morphed into an idea for an Ethernet driven
sound card, and as this is now becoming a real development the
suggestion was made that it would be better to transfer the discussion
here.
The rationale in brief:
No proprietry hardware soundcard needed.
Almost all modern computers have reasonably fast Ethernet connections.
Potentially up to 20 channels per card - reality will probably be a lot
different!
FOSS drivers to connect Ethernet to whatever audio server is on the
computer - looking at jack right now.
FOSS within the soundcard module so that protocols/algorythings can be
tuned for best results.
FOSH design enabling hardware to be developed and inproved by anyone.
A number of people have shown interest in this, and we are at the stage
of starting to knock together some basic hardware for a feasibility
study.
State of play:
On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 14:39:48 +0100 (CET)
karl(a)aspodata.se (Karl Hammar) wrote:
Folderol:
Others would be welcome to come on board - pardon the pun!
--
Will J Godfrey
http://www.musically.me.uk
Say you have a poem and I have a tune.
Exchange them and we can both have a poem, a tune, and a song.
On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 12:25:36 +0100 (CET)
karl(a)aspodata.se (Karl Hammar) wrote:
<snip>
Ok, I should get starting then.
Regards,
/Karl Would this project plan be ok:
software and hw: Karl
testing and spec's: Folderol
publication via web: anyone??
git repo: git://aspodata.se/openhw.git
mailing list: hopefully this list, else I put one up at my site
web site: ??
intial platforms (both by Atmel):
. ATNGW100 (cheap), and
. AT91SAM9260-EK (expensive)
Next step:
. set up development platform
. simple test with spi and shift registers
Regards,
/Karl
This is all fine by me, but I would make quite clear that if someone
comes along with access to a {loadsamoney} spectrum analyser I'd be
perfectly happy to step back and take a more supporting role. 
23 Nov
23 Nov
5:24 p.m.
On 23 November 2009 at 20:28, Folderol <folderol(a)ukfsn.org> wrote:
Recent discussion on LAU morphed into an idea for an
Ethernet
driven sound card, and as this is now becoming a real
development the suggestion was made that it would be better to
transfer the discussion here.
The rationale in brief:
No proprietry hardware soundcard needed.
Almost all modern computers have reasonably fast Ethernet connections.
Potentially up to 20 channels per card - reality will probably be a lot
different!
FOSS drivers to connect Ethernet to whatever audio server is on the
computer - looking at jack right now.
FOSS within the soundcard module so that protocols/algorythings can be
tuned for best results.
FOSH design enabling hardware to be developed and inproved by anyone.
A number of people have shown interest in this, and we are at the stage
of starting to knock together some basic hardware for a feasibility
study.
State of play:
On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 14:39:48 +0100 (CET)
karl(a)aspodata.se (Karl Hammar) wrote:
It would seem that the discussion of this development, if it gets to
be pretty active, might swamp LAU. Maybe we should wait & see. But,
another mailing list, wiki or something might be in order.
I'm interested to see how far people have got with setting up the
collaboration environment, requirements, spec's, etc. I'm an analog
electrical engineer, and might be able to lend some help, advice,
whatever.
Where was this initial discussion, that subsequently moved here?
Would it be useful for interested parties to review what was written
there? If so, could you please publish a link?
Thanks....
--
Kevin
Folderol:
> On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 12:25:36 +0100 (CET)
> karl(a)aspodata.se (Karl Hammar) wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> > Would this project plan be ok:
> >
> > software and hw: Karl
> > testing and spec's: Folderol
> > publication via web: anyone??
> >
> > git repo: git://aspodata.se/openhw.git
> > mailing list: hopefully this list, else I put one up at my site
> > web site: ??
> >
> > intial platforms (both by Atmel):
> > . ATNGW100 (cheap), and
> > . AT91SAM9260-EK (expensive)
> >
> > Next step:
> > . set up development platform
> > . simple test with spi and shift registers
> >
> > Regards,
> > /Karl
>
> This is all fine by me, but I would make quite clear that if someone
> comes along with access to a {loadsamoney} spectrum analyser I'd be
> perfectly happy to step back and take a more supporting role.
Others would be welcome to come on board - pardon the pun! 
5:10 a.m.
On Tuesday 24 November 2009 09:44:24 Lorenzo wrote:
Given the fact that AD/DA converters introduce more then one ms latency(*)
already: No.
Arnold
(*) Measured with jdelay at 48kHz and corrected by the latency obtained with a
spdif loop.
> Recent
discussion on LAU morphed into an idea for an Ethernet
> driven sound card, and as this is now becoming a real
> development
So I will plug this into my ethernet and have < 1ms latency? :)
5:15 a.m.
Arnold,
That depends on the converter and the sample frequency. Fast converters
can go as low as 5 samples conversion latency.
Flo
--
Machines can do the work, so people have time to think.
public key DA43FEF4 x-hkp://wwwkeys.eu.pgp.net
So I will plug
this into my ethernet and have < 1ms latency? :)
Given the fact that AD/DA
converters introduce more then one ms latency(*)
already: No. 
6:23 a.m.
On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 10:15:05AM +0100, Florian Faber wrote:
That depends on the converter and the sample frequency. Fast converters
can go as low as 5 samples conversion latency.
It's not the AD/DA conversion that introduces most of the delay.
At 44.1 or 48 kHz the antialiasing filters are the main cause
of delay. A linear phase filter with a transition band of 1khz
(e.g. unity gain up to 21 kHz and near zero at 22 kHz) must
have a delay of around 1/1kHz or 1 ms.
Short delays are possible at 96 kHz, where you can have full gain
up to say 28 kHz going down to zero at 48 kHz. That's a range of
20 kHz, corresponding to 0.05 ms. It's one of the few advantages
of higher sample rates (but only if you don't use the full band-
width).
Ciao,
--
FA
Io lo dico sempre: l'Italia è troppo stretta e lunga.
So I will plug this into my ethernet and have < 1ms
latency? :)
Given the fact that AD/DA converters introduce more then one ms
latency(*)
already: No. 
6:08 a.m.
Lorenzo:
The "this" part is currently only in our minds for the moment, but if
you solve the issue of connecting our "minds" to your ethernet port,
I'll solve the 1ms latency part :)
A simple ping:
$ ping granat
PING granat.lcl.aspodata.se (192.168.93.37) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from granat.lcl.aspodata.se (192.168.93.37): icmp_seq=1 ttl=15 time=0.758 ms
gives me a round trip of < 1ms, so it should be possible.
So the time from analog, pushing out samples from the sender port,
till it is received the receiver port would be lower bounded by:
sample conversion time
lcl transport time to cpu
cpu processing
cpu to ethernet tranceiver
ethernet preamble (assume quiet net)
cable delay
packet bit speed * packet length
Add to this any processing on the receiving side.
To help achieve low (network) latency one can:
. set up fixed arp entries (see arp(8))
. use fixed ip-addresses, no dhcp, no mDNS, no autoconfiguration or
other talky protocols
. don't mix other hosts on the lan, make it as quiet as possible
. no DNS, use /ets/hosts files
. if possible use a crossover cable [1]
What kind of latency do you think would be a goal to strive to ?
Regards,
/Karl
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethernet_crossover_cable
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Karl Hammar Aspö Data karl(a)aspodata.se
Lilla Aspö 148 Networks
S-742 94 Östhammar +46 173 140 57 Computers
Sweden +46 70 511 97 84 Consulting
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Recent
discussion on LAU morphed into an idea for an Ethernet
> driven sound card, and as this is now becoming a real
> development
So I will plug this into my ethernet and have < 1ms latency?
:) 
6:16 a.m.
Lorenzo:
The "this" part is currently only in our minds for the moment, but if
you solve the issue of connecting our "minds" to your ethernet port,
I'll solve the 1ms latency part :)
:)
>
Recent discussion on LAU morphed into an idea for an Ethernet
> driven sound card, and as this is now becoming a real
> development
>
So I will plug this into my ethernet and have < 1ms latency? :)
5:25 a.m.
Kevin Cosgrove:
On 23 November 2009 at 20:28, Folderol
<folderol(a)ukfsn.org> wrote:
> Recent discussion on LAU morphed into an idea for an Ethernet
> driven sound card, and as this is now becoming a real
> development the suggestion was made that it would be better to
> transfer the discussion here.
...
I'm interested to see how far people have got with
setting up the
collaboration environment, requirements, spec's, etc. I'm an analog
electrical engineer, and might be able to lend some help, advice,
whatever.
Help is welcome !
Patrick Shirkey promised web:
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/pipermail/linux-audio-user/2009-November/065004…
Where was this initial discussion, that subsequently
moved here?
Would it be useful for interested parties to review what was written
there? If so, could you please publish a link?
Ken Restivo put the question:
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/pipermail/linux-audio-user/2009-November/064562…
and I responded:
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/pipermail/linux-audio-user/2009-November/064568…
Regards,
/Karl
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Karl Hammar Aspö Data karl(a)aspodata.se
Lilla Aspö 148 Networks
S-742 94 Östhammar +46 173 140 57 Computers
Sweden +46 70 511 97 84 Consulting
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
29 Nov
29 Nov
12:25 a.m.
On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 10:25:08AM +0100, Karl Hammar wrote:
Kevin Cosgrove:
Heh. This makes me tremendously happy. Perhaps the 10 years I spent as a Product Manager
was not time wasted. At least I must have learned the right questions to ask.
I'm even more excited that you-all have made so much progress on this so quickly and
smoothly.
-ken
On 23 November 2009 at 20:28, Folderol
<folderol(a)ukfsn.org> wrote:
> Recent discussion on LAU morphed into an idea for an Ethernet
> driven sound card, and as this is now becoming a real
> development the suggestion was made that it would be better to
> transfer the discussion here.
...
I'm interested to see how far people have got
with setting up the
collaboration environment, requirements, spec's, etc. I'm an analog
electrical engineer, and might be able to lend some help, advice,
whatever.
Help is welcome !
Patrick Shirkey promised web:
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/pipermail/linux-audio-user/2009-November/065004…
Where was this initial discussion, that
subsequently moved here?
Would it be useful for interested parties to review what was written
there? If so, could you please publish a link?
Ken Restivo put the question:
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/pipermail/linux-audio-user/2009-November/064562…
24 Nov
24 Nov
4:27 p.m.
Just a quick apology for effectively causing the spamming of two
groups. {ducks}
I started this thread on L.A.D. and only CC'd here to alert people to
the fact that the discussion was now 'there'.
So, can we take all the *development* discussions to L.A.D. only, and
we'll keep you informed here when we've got something to show you :)
--
Will J Godfrey
http://www.musically.me.uk
Say you have a poem and I have a tune.
Exchange them and we can both have a poem, a tune, and a song.
6:18 a.m.
Folderol wrote:
Recent discussion on LAU morphed into an idea for an
Ethernet driven
sound card, and as this is now becoming a real development the
suggestion was made that it would be better to transfer the discussion
here.
This sounds very promissing (I know it's only "in our minds" ATM).
I wonder why no company took up this idea already, it seems so sleek and
logical. (Almost) every computer has ethernet and the ethernet standard
is (in my experience) problem free...
--
Atte
http://atte.dk http://modlys.dk http://virb.com/atte
6:26 a.m.
Atte André Jensen wrote:
I wonder why no company took up this idea already, it
seems so sleek and
logical. (Almost) every computer has ethernet and the ethernet standard
is (in my experience) problem free...
A lot of companies are working on this, but for anything but a simple
audio in/audio out you need technology that's not yet available to the
broad public - at least not to the usual prices. Check out the AVB
specification (IEEE 802.1).
In the broadcast/studio segment, transport over ethernet is already in
use by some manufacturers.
Flo
--
Machines can do the work, so people have time to think.
public key DA43FEF4 x-hkp://wwwkeys.eu.pgp.net
6:36 a.m.
Florian Faber wrote:
Atte André Jensen wrote:
Yes, there is an overview over protocols here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audio_over_Ethernet
/ Hans
I wonder why no company took up this idea
already, it seems so sleek and
logical. (Almost) every computer has ethernet and the ethernet standard
is (in my experience) problem free...
A lot of companies are working on this, but for anything but a simple
audio in/audio out you need technology that's not yet available to the
broad public - at least not to the usual prices. Check out the AVB
specification (IEEE 802.1).
In the broadcast/studio segment, transport over ethernet is already in
use by some manufacturers.
Flo
3:14 p.m.
On 24 November 2009 at 11:36, Hans Wilmers <hanswil(a)notam02.no> wrote:
Seems like the latter reference is quite far ahead of the IEEE
thoughts.
--
Kevin
A lot of
companies are working on this, but for anything but a simple
audio in/audio out you need technology that's not yet available to the
broad public - at least not to the usual prices. Check out the AVB
specification (IEEE 802.1).
In the broadcast/studio segment, transport over ethernet is already in
use by some manufacturers.
Yes, there is an overview over protocols here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audio_over_Ethernet
3:25 p.m.
Kevin Cosgrove wrote:
And how many of them are open standards?
Flo
--
Machines can do the work, so people have time to think.
public key DA43FEF4 x-hkp://wwwkeys.eu.pgp.net
Yes, there is
an overview over protocols here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audio_over_Ethernet
Seems like the latter reference
is quite far ahead of the IEEE
thoughts.
3:15 p.m.
I thought I saw someone mention trying to create open hardware for
Linux which would communicate over ethernet/internet. Has that
thread been pursued? If so, where?
Thanks...
--
Kevin
3:12 p.m.
On 24 November 2009 at 11:26, Florian Faber <faber(a)faberman.de> wrote:
A lot of companies are working on this, but for
anything but a simple
audio in/audio out you need technology that's not yet available to the
broad public - at least not to the usual prices. Check out the AVB
specification (IEEE 802.1).
In the broadcast/studio segment, transport over ethernet is already in
use by some manufacturers.
If a standard, like AVB IEEE 802.1 is in place, or a draft proposed,
then we'd be served well by aiming for it. If not, then learning
from what's out there would be prudent. Whatever is done,
implementing appropriate abstraction levels in the libraries, API,
etc. are a must to minimize rototilling the entire implementation.
--
Kevin
7:07 a.m.
Atte Andre' Jensen wrote:
Folderol wrote:
I believe there are already musical instruments with Ethernet
connectivity ... ah, sounds much like what Gibson was doing back in 2004:
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/12.01/guitar.html
Their technology is proprietary (probably patented), and a previous
Google search found a number of patents, just to add to the minefield.
And here's an entry from Fender in 2005:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/11/21/wed.enabled.guitar/index.html
--
David
gnome(a)hawaii.rr.com
authenticity, honesty, community
Recent discussion on LAU morphed into an idea for
an Ethernet driven
sound card, and as this is now becoming a real development the
suggestion was made that it would be better to transfer the discussion
here.
This sounds very promissing (I know it's only "in our minds" ATM).
I wonder why no company took up this idea already, it seems so sleek and
logical. (Almost) every computer has ethernet and the ethernet standard
is (in my experience) problem free... 
9:04 a.m.
Some notes (this goes to LAU only please mirror to LAD if necessary):
Have a look into AVB it seems to become the de-facto standard if that is
possible (don't know about hardware/ethernet interface requirements)
Tim Blechmann has written an alsa driver for the digigram lx6464es card,
which is used in some ethersound products (Tim?)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EtherSound
Rimas Avizienis at CNMAT and Meyersound built hardware alongside a UDP
protocol to stream many channels of audio to custom built hardware, as
for example used in a 120 channel loudspeaker array:
http://cnmat.berkeley.edu/publication/compact_120_independent_element_spher…
regards, Peter
Folderol wrote:
Recent discussion on LAU morphed into an idea for an
Ethernet driven
sound card, and as this is now becoming a real development the
suggestion was made that it would be better to transfer the discussion
here.
The rationale in brief:
No proprietry hardware soundcard needed.
Almost all modern computers have reasonably fast Ethernet connections.
Potentially up to 20 channels per card - reality will probably be a lot
different!
FOSS drivers to connect Ethernet to whatever audio server is on the
computer - looking at jack right now.
FOSS within the soundcard module so that protocols/algorythings can be
tuned for best results.
FOSH design enabling hardware to be developed and inproved by anyone.
A number of people have shown interest in this, and we are at the stage
of starting to knock together some basic hardware for a feasibility
study.
State of play:
On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 14:39:48 +0100 (CET)
karl(a)aspodata.se (Karl Hammar) wrote:
Folderol:
Others would be welcome to come on board - pardon the pun!
On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 12:25:36 +0100 (CET)
karl(a)aspodata.se (Karl Hammar) wrote:
<snip>
Ok, I should get
starting then.
Regards,
/Karl Would this project plan be ok:
software and hw: Karl
testing and spec's: Folderol
publication via web: anyone??
git repo: git://aspodata.se/openhw.git
mailing list: hopefully this list, else I put one up at my site
web site: ??
intial platforms (both by Atmel):
. ATNGW100 (cheap), and
. AT91SAM9260-EK (expensive)
Next step:
. set up development platform
. simple test with spi and shift registers
Regards,
/Karl
This is all fine by me, but I would make quite clear that if someone
comes along with access to a {loadsamoney} spectrum analyser I'd be
perfectly happy to step back and take a more supporting role. 
11:06 a.m.
On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 8:04 AM, Peter Plessas <plessas(a)mur.at> wrote:
Have a look into AVB it seems to become the de-facto
standard if that is
possible (don't know about hardware/ethernet interface requirements)
Don't know how you are defining standard there.. to me a standard has
to actually be in common use, and believe me the closest thing there
is to a standard in my world of any sort to mutichannel digital audio
cabling/transport is either AES/EBU or MADI depending. Cable Ethernet
there are to many 'competing' standards and AVB is very much the
newcomer that I don't know of a single usage of it around me.
Seablade
5507
days inactive
5512
days old
linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org
20 comments
13 participants
participants (13)
-
Arnold Krille -
Atte André Jensen -
david -
Florian Faber -
Folderol -
fons＠kokkinizita.net -
Hans Wilmers -
karl＠aspodata.se -
Ken Restivo -
Kevin Cosgrove -
Lorenzo -
Peter Plessas -
Thomas Vecchione