[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index]

Re: eventide general question

Re: eventide general questionHi Richard!

>> I suppose it depends on what "most powerful hardware FX processor" 
> Apples and oranges. We're in the realm of marketing-speak. If the
> goal is to be strictly accurate then we have to be rigorous in our
> comparisons AND our vocabulary.

Agreed!  And the common vocabulary changes.  For example, "hardware" used 
mean "no computer".  Now it means "no computer interface", i.e., it doesn't
look like a Mac/Windows/Linux/etc screen.  These days, virtually every
"hardware looper" contains a computer.

>> In raw processor power, clearly a Kyma system is tops with 28 DSPs 
2 on the Orville.
> Although just the number of DSPs isn't an accurate metric in many
> cases (the chips' capabilities may vary) in this  case you're probably
> The Capybara 320 uses 80 MHz Motorola DSP-56309 DSPs; a fully-loaded
> system is rated at 4.48 billion operations per second (BIPS or GIPS).
> uses a mixed bag of both Motorola and proprietary chips, but I believe
> using two 56303s (roughly equivalent to the 56309).

Yes, that's my understanding too.  I'm not sure what the proprietary chip

>> On the other hand, the Eventide units can function standalone while Kyma
requires an attached computer.
> That would probably make it the "most powerful standalone hardware FX


>> Then there's the DRE-S777.  It does reverb modelling based on near
>> convolution.  This feat is unequaled by *any* other device that I know
>> Perhaps that makes it "most powerful hardware FX processor"?
> That would probably make it the "most powerful convolution-based hardware
reverberation processor."

2 X Yep!

Dennis Leas