similar to: Has anyone made a hardware encoder?

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 20000 matches similar to: "Has anyone made a hardware encoder?"

2004 Aug 06
2
Introduction...
I've been following this kist for a while now and I suppose I had better introduce myself. This is going to be rather a long message, but that can't be avoided. My name is Andrew Baker and I work for a company called TeleDesign. We are based in the UK. http//www.teledesign.co.uk I have lots of experience with telecomms, a fair bit with VoIP, quite a bit (but rather less recent) with
2000 Jul 26
5
hardware ogg vorbis decoder
As it seems that the vorbis decoder is now stable with respect to format/features, would it be time to start thinking about a hardware implementation? I would be interested in pursuing this if some there is consensus on requirements. If there is some enthusiasm for it then a module could be set up on the opencores site for a gate-array decoder. cya, Andrew... --- >8 ---- List
2005 Sep 04
2
Supported DSPs
It would be great to get some idea of what chips and DSPs people have tried to compile Speex for, and what success they've had. So, if you've tried Speex on a chip, could you take a second to fill in the following and post it to the list? Chip Name: Speex Version: Floating or Fixed: Encode, Decode, Both or Simultaneous: MIPS (if known): Other comments: Many thanks, Gerv
2006 Apr 20
5
Major internal changes, TI DSP build change
Hi Jim, > Build 11169 in SVN works correctly. Good. I'll try not to forget the EXTEND32 from now on. > I have attached a zip file (renamed > .txt) with a patch to bits.c to make the byteswapping for TI DSPs > consistent. Seems like unzip can't read it. Either it's in an unknown format or the file got corrupted. Could simply send as multiple (uncompressed)
2004 Aug 06
2
Introduction...
> 3. I'm interested in the methodology for creating a fixed point > implementation and guaging how "good" it is relative to the floating > point golden standard My methodology at this stage is to get it working on the floating point DSP first and to gain recent experience in both Speex and the TI DSP range while I do so. Then I'll enter into serious discussions about
2004 Jan 18
4
[ot] Grandstream hardware
Hi Has anyone opened up a grandstream phone or handytone ATA to find out what is inside? What is the CPU? How much RAM? Cheers Rob
2006 Jul 29
2
speex and omap
Hello ! I am developing a kind of phone using TI's OMAP 5912 and speex. The soft works great on ARM, and it is time to move speex and voice processing stuff to DSP. Could some one point me how to do it ? Should I install CCS ? Or it possible to compile speex using just ti_dsptools ? Does anybody ran speex and dsp gateway ? It would be great, if some one share makefile, cmd etc. for
2006 Apr 19
2
Major internal changes, TI DSP build change
> You found it. The SHL32 (not SHR32) line fixes the problem. It must be > doing a 16-bit shift, then extending the result (which is reasonable). As > it happens, that it the same macro which gave us trouble last May > (25th/26th), when the C55 build was more subtlely broken. Yes, that's what I finally remembered. I think I've fixed all occurrences (by adding EXTEND32)
2005 Aug 15
2
Updated MIPs and memory requirements for TI c54x or c55 DSPs
Hi, I can see that there has been some effort to compile the SPEEX codec to operate on the TI c54x and c55x DSPs and I am wondering if anyone would be able to update the mailing list with their current MIPs and Memory resource requirements for their c54x and/or c55x compilation? The only estimate I was able to find in the mailing list archive was 42MIPs but I'm not sure if this is an
2005 Oct 17
1
Speex Example Build for TI DSP C54x C55x C6x DSPs
The attached file contains build files for TI's Code Composer Studio (CCS) for the C54x, C55x, and C6x DSPs. I had intended to post this a couple of months ago, but it took a long time to get around to doing the little bit of cleanup required. This is a file I/O loopback application suitable for running with the CCS simulators, for evaluating memory and MIPs requirements for these
2003 Aug 14
2
Hardware encoder.
Hi people, I am aware of the integer based DEcoder (Tremor) but am more interested in a hardware ENcoder, for use in a solid state portable recorder. Has anyone made *any* steps towards implementing an encoder in a DSP? I ask because I have been investigating MP3 hardware encoders, and apart from being very expensive (to licence - DSPs are as cheap as grains of sand in comparison) I have an
2006 Apr 13
4
How to create a compact Speex library
--- Jean-Marc Valin <jean-marc.valin@usherbrooke.ca> wrote: > > Sorry if this a repost but I want to create the > > smallest Speex library possible to be put in TI's > > TMS320 DSP. I'm only interested in one > configuration: > > 5.97 Kbps narrowband. What part of source code > can I > > remove? Currently, when I compiled the version >
2004 Mar 19
9
How many MIPS for Vorbis Decoder?
Hello, I may be stupid, but I cannot find any data on how "expensive" the Vorbis Decoder is. Looking for an embedded solution I am interested in how many "MIPS" you need to decode a MONO audio stream at reasonable quality (44 kHz, approx. 100 kbps?) Can it be done in a microcontroller, or do I need ultra-expensive DSPs to do it? Thanks for hints Jens --- >8 ---- List
2007 Jul 19
2
How Can I Get involved in Speex Fixed-Point Development?
Hi, My name is Jean Quirion and I am a DSP engineer. Currently I am working on a project where it is desired to implement a VoIP solution over a GSM GPRS link. I would like to use Speex as the vocoder for this application. This application would require the Speex encoder/decoder and possibly the pre-processor to run on a low power fixed-point DSP such as a TI C55x. Thus, I am interested in
2005 Sep 05
1
Supported DSPs
Jean-Marc Valin wrote: > I don't know all the details, but here's a (partial) list of archs on > which I've heard of Speex running. I'm sure there are others (especially > the float version should really run on any chip with an FPU). > > float: > x86/x86-64 (SSE assembly optimizations provided) > PowerPC > SPARC I've had floating decoding running on a
2005 Aug 17
2
Updated MIPs and memory requirements for TI c54x or c55DSPs
Hi, Just a couple tips to reduce complexity. First, I think you'd get a good speedup by enabling the PRECISION16 switch (if it's not done already). This (very) slightly reduces quality, but means you convert a lot of "emulated" 16x32 multiplications into 16x16. There are also several routines that would benefit from platform-specific optimizations. There are already
2007 Oct 28
1
question about speex
Dear Sir\Madam; Thanks for your source codes. You mentioned that your speex source code can be compiled for ti-c54 family; but you use linux command-line as following to compile speex for C54 family: % ./configure -prefix=<path> -enable-ti-c55x % make % make install Is it true?! Then what is the output file for loading on DSP chip (C54)?? As I remember the compiled file for C5x family
2010 Aug 12
2
[LLVMdev] Experimental C64X backend
Hi, Over the past few months I've been developing a LLVM backend for TIs C64X family of DSPs. It can be found as a co-processor in a variety of OMAP-based devices such as gumstix, beagleboard and even Nokia's N900 phone. A project I'm working on [0] has had need to put code on it, and we wanted to avoid TIs proprietary compiler. The DSP itself is a VLIW machine, with 64 32-bit
2007 Jun 19
1
Blackfin inline assembler and VisualDSP++ toolchain
-----Original Message----- From: Jean-Marc Valin [mailto:jean-marc.valin@usherbrooke.ca] Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2007 6:38 PM To: Michael Shatz Cc: speex-dev@xiph.org Subject: Re: [Speex-dev] Blackfin inline assembler and VisualDSP++ toolchain >> Yes, data footprint in the new version is quite manageable. Still I would >> wish better documentation for speex_alloc_scratch(). >
2006 Apr 22
2
Major internal changes, TI DSP build change
> >I fixed it in svn. Could you check that? > > Now all platforms match again. Note that the measured SNR for this test > sample is lower than with the broken code (10.87 vs 11.10), but of course > this is no way to judge the real quality. SNR, especially on a single sample, can be very misleading. Yet, could you just check that the DSP results match what you get on a PC?