Support |
Re: eventide general questionHi Richard! >> I suppose it depends on what "most powerful hardware FX processor" >means. > > 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 to 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 >versus 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 right. > 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). Eventide > uses a mixed bag of both Motorola and proprietary chips, but I believe they're > using two 56303s (roughly equivalent to the 56309). Yes, that's my understanding too. I'm not sure what the proprietary chip do. >> 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 processor." Yep! >> Then there's the DRE-S777. It does reverb modelling based on near realtime >> convolution. This feat is unequaled by *any* other device that I know of. >> 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 ------------------- dennis@mdbs.com