Rockbox Player - Project to design and build a Free/Open hardware audio player

[AlexP]

Why should we tailor the hardware for video? just because everyone is doing that? why should we go to touchscreen? just because everyone is dong that?

I would prefer to pay for an hardware dedicated to audio than a media player, but thats me

You DO NOT need to dedicate it to video.  Add a decent screen, and the CPU you have chosen is perfectly capable of decoding video, that, and here is the crucial bit, will only affect battery life if you play video.  It does not need to affect the audio playback at all.  I do not understand why you seem to think that video playback (for instance) needs to affect audio playback at all.

[casainho]

Add a decent screen, and the CPU you have chosen is perfectly capable of decoding video, that, and here is the crucial bit, will only affect battery life if you play video.

Ok, I agree.

I would like to compare this situation with digital photographic machines and digital video machines. I have and prefer, a specialized photographic machine and a specialized video recording machine. I could buy just one machine to have the both functions, photos and video, however, It will not had nor a good photographic characteristics and a video recording characteristics. What is more attractive? Whats sells better? - probably just one machine with both functions, however, professional prefers specialized machines for each function.

I am afraid of a descharacterized device, that is nor a good hardware audio player nor a good hardware video player.

Okok, this is just chat-chat while there are no news. Right now I can't progress because I am waiting the development board. Also waiting for an answer from 00christian00.

Hi Guys,
   Right now I'm getting parts lined up. I have several devices to take apart, and by the way this is a project with my 13 year old son. Modules are the projects I'm working on now for this. Donated is 900mhz wireless phone with ID caller, dvd player with divx and mp3, and a calculator. This prototype is going to be huge, since there isn't any specified breadboards. Then, any deviations will be in a engineering change.

  Which mp4 format do you all want?

  I want to use modules because of trouble shooting. It will be easier to test them seperate, after they are built.

 I was talking to my son and thinks it would be great to have a solar charger for the batteries.

I don't understand what  are you talking about. Is about some hardware, related to audio/video player? Can you put organized information on a page? - thank you.

[Der Papst]

The DJ tools include a Line out Crossfader, a Headphones Crossfader, Bend, Pitch, DJ Pause, Cue, Loop, EQ, Filter, Sound FX, Headphone Jack, Line out jack and a USB 2.0 connector."

To support these features you need a very powerful SoC (i guess even a bit more than the one you've chosen) and a large enough LCD to keep the UI intuitive (for use in rockbox since i doubt anyone wants those buttons and pads (they're even protected by a patent);-)). And i think "Music playback time: 18 hrs • DJ operating time: 5 hrs" is too low.

So i kinda think it's unavoidable that a videoplayer gets thrown on the device with more codecs than "just" mpeg1/2. :-P
So your point

I would like to compare this situation with digital photographic machines and digital video machines. I have and prefer, a specialized photographic machine and a specialized video recording machine. I could buy just one machine to have the both functions, photos and video, however, It will not had nor a good photographic characteristics and a video recording characteristics. What is more attractive? Whats sells better? - probably just one machine with both functions, however, professional prefers specialized machines for each function.

somewhat doesn't count.

[casainho]

So your point

I would like to compare this situation with digital photographic machines and digital video machines. I have and prefer, a specialized photographic machine and a specialized video recording machine. I could buy just one machine to have the both functions, photos and video, however, It will not had nor a good photographic characteristics and a video recording characteristics. What is more attractive? Whats sells better? - probably just one machine with both functions, however, professional prefers specialized machines for each function.

somewhat doesn't count.

Why doesn't count? - can you say why do you think that Pacemaker, don't have video capabilities?

[kugel.]

I am afraid of a descharacterized device, that is nor a good hardware audio player nor a good hardware video player.

Have you heard of the Sansa Fuze? No advertisement, but it's said to have a great sound quality. And it features video playback as well as a low price.

Just because really good audio players with video playback are rare (depends on how you define good audio playback of course) and sometimes rather expensive, it doesn't mean it's impossible.

My point is, that's very much doable to combine video playback (including a decent color screen) with good auto quality.

[Der Papst]

Why doesn't count? - can you say why do you think that Pacemaker, don't have video capabilities?

Sure.

To support these features you need a very powerful SoC (i guess even a bit more than the one you've chosen) and a large enough LCD to keep the UI intuitive (for use in rockbox since i doubt anyone wants those buttons and pads (they're even protected by a patent);-)). [...]
So i kinda think it's unavoidable that a videoplayer gets thrown on the device with more codecs than "just" mpeg1/2. :-P

So you have a large LCD, a powerful SoC and lots of coders wanting to use all the power of the DAP. It is just unavoidable unless you limit the DAP that strong that it would become incapable to do 1/3 of the features the Pacemaker has.

I'm not saying that i want a large display, longer battery runtimes and video support in favour of a high quality audio player. The SoC is cheap, the display to and the battery either. So i really don't understand why that is an issue for you.

My point is, that's very much doable to combine video playback (including a decent color screen) with good auto quality.

Imo it's unavoidable ;-)

[scorche]

Here is the point as simple as I can make it:

Video is not going to hurt audio.

Your example of still images versus video is an incorrect analogy as they typically only have one CCD in the device and the whole device is designed to be a good video, or a good still image recorder - which in this case, yes there is a benefit to one side at the expense of the other side.  This is not the case, however in terms of digital media players if they are designed correctly.

In this case, there is no change required in the DAC, the SoC, or any of the major parts as they already are just fine for both video *and* audio.  There is nothing in the device that will either make it better for video at the expense of audio capabilities or better for audio at the expense of video capabilities.  Putting in a larger, better screen is not going to degrade the audio somehow and neither is using a larger battery.  In fact, using a larger screen could potentially make the audio better as you will have more room on the boards to do what you wish.

To reiterate: none of our suggestions are going to degrade audio in any way and to throw out ideas because they might not be explicitely "for audio" is just silly.

Using price as a reason is also potentially faulty, as if you listen to our suggestions earnestly, you will have more people who will want to purchase the device.  The more people who want to purchase the device, the less the manufacturing/parts cost will be.

[casainho]

The SoC is cheap, the display to and the battery either. So i really don't understand why that is an issue for you.

Well, If that don't compromise the high audio quality hardware, price, size and battery runtimes, why not?

Have you heard of the Sansa Fuze? No advertisement, but it's said to have a great sound quality. And it features video playback as well as a low price.

Just because really good audio players with video playback are rare (depends on how you define good audio playback of course) and sometimes rather expensive, it doesn't mean it's impossible.

My point is, that's very much doable to combine video playback (including a decent color screen) with good auto quality.

Hmmm... It doesn't look like to have digital audio inputs/outputs. And I remember to read a lot about some model of Sansa(maybe E200) with noise, because of a pour hardware. For me, that model looks like more an upgrade, to have larger screen for video.

Putting in a larger, better screen is not going to degrade the audio somehow and neither is using a larger battery.  In fact, using a larger screen could potentially make the audio better as you will have more room on the boards to do what you wish.

So, as you say, using a larger screen means to have a larger player, and thats not what is pretended - It's pretended a small physical size - pocketability.

Also, using price as a reason is also not concrete, as if you do these things, you will have more people who will want to purchase the device.  The more people who want to purchase the device, the less the manufacturing/parts cost will be.

Follow big numbers looks bad to me(not always) :-( as we can see now, one example is that everyone likes to have touchscreen, If you want to sell big numbers you will put a touchscreen, and looks no one desire a touchscreen for audio player, touchscreen just makes sense for video player.

So, I am not so optimistic about video not interfering with audio.

[casainho]

I see that you want a blinking led from a ATMEGA32. I don't have linux running right now, video card problems. I do have dos with a parallel programmer, if i could use linus sysem I would use a usb isp. I could use a attiny 2313, if that would help?

blinking led from a ATMEGA32?? - are you joking? - thats what I do in my day-to-day work, blinking LEDS with AVR 8 bits.

I repeat, did you read the page of the project? http://www.rockbox.org/twiki/bin/view/Main/RockboxPlayerPrototype - where do you see there a mention to ATmega32?

[scorche]

Thanks for ignoring all my other points.

A 220x176 screen with decent color is not going to ruin "pocketability" in any way.  Neither is a 240x320 screen honestly, but it can for some.  I am not saying you have to do anything.  I am just saying that the reasons you have been using do *not* make sense.

Also, I do not see "everyone" wanting a touch screen.  I see someone mentioning that this other company happens to have them too.  Read what people are saying, as to say something like that is proving that you are not even listening to them when this is *not* what they are asking for.

If you don't want to look at manufacturing and parts costs, then stop whining that X component is more expensive.  To say that it will increase the cost of the device without factoring in these variables is false information.

So, I am not so optimistic about video not interfering with audio.

Why not?

And please do not "cherrypick" (this means that you only respond to the parts of my post that may fit your story instead of responding to everything that I say) my posts.  I say things for a reason and to ignore that is not very demonstrative of your willingness to discuss issues.

[Der Papst]

Also, using price as a reason is also not concrete, as if you do these things, you will have more people who will want to purchase the device.  The more people who want to purchase the device, the less the manufacturing/parts cost will be.

Follow big numbers looks bad to me(not always) :-( as we can see now, one example is that everyone likes to have touchscreen, If you want to sell big numbers you will put a touchscreen, and looks no one desire a touchscreen for audio player, touchscreen just makes sense for video player.

Wait, where does it say that?! I don't think that you need a touchscreen at all even for larger resolutions and even IF there is a touchscreen i can't see how it could harm audio quality. If the touchscreen is cheaper than another one in the same resolution i'd vote for the touchscreen.

So, as you say, using a larger screen means to have a larger player, and thats not what is pretended - It's pretended a small physical size - pocketability.

I think the audio quality gets affected a lot more if you try to put too many chips on a too small pcb leading to background noises than a large touchscreen. Also i think the production costs will dramatically increase if you try to keep it as small as possible because you would have to use a multilayer pcb with LOTS of more layers than a slightly larger player with fewer layers.

Yet another thought about your price concerns:
Iirc the irivers are still the daps with the best audio quality supported by rockbox and they're also pretty old by now. However in Berlin at the Alexander Platz in Kaufhof you can still get some (H10 and H300 or H100 iirc) and the "cheapest" one is still above 150EUR (refurbished!).
So if you are really making such a high quality audio player it is going to be pretty expensive anyway. A larger LCD and a better battery won't increase the price by that much then anymore.

[casainho]

A 220x176 screen with decent color is not going to ruin "pocketability" in any way.  Neither is a 240x320 screen honestly, but it can for some.  I am not saying you have to do anything.  I am just saying that the reasons you have been using do *not* make sense.

Also, I do not see "everyone" wanting a touch screen.  I see someone mentioning that this other company happens to have them too.  Read what people are saying, as to say something like that is proving that you are not even listening to them when this is *not* what they are asking for.

A said everyone because I see that tendency on new players and because Christian wrote: "We are selling many touchscreen,because many people want it".

About the screen size, ok, 240x320 can be "pocketability". But if we think in have a display size to permit video, quickly that size will increment, I guess people will demand bigger screens sizes, for a better video visualization.

So, I am not so optimistic about video not interfering with audio.

Why not?

And please do not "cherrypick" (this means that you only respond to the parts of my post that may fit your story instead of responding to everything that I say) my posts.  I say things for a reason and to ignore that is not very demonstrative of your willingness to discuss issues.

Sorry about that "cherrypick", I didn't know that concept. I just didn't answer/comment because I had nothing to say, I generally agree with what you wrote.

And I did not wrote well my idea. I would like to say that I am not so optimistic about seeking hardware for ALSO video not interfering with seeking hardware just for hight quality audio player. And I mean also the disposition of the buttons, size, price.

Another thing, I did ask to developers the minimum size of SDRAM and Flash memory the player should have to run Rockbox, and I get 4MB of each memory - again, for audio player. If we want larger screen and video, I think that this memories should be 4 or 8 times more. Are this change is sizes expressive in price? maybe not...

the irivers are still the daps with the best audio quality supported by rockbox and they're also pretty old by now. However in Berlin at the Alexander Platz in Kaufhof you can still get some (H10 and H300 or H100 iirc) and the "cheapest" one is still above 150EUR (refurbished!).
So if you are really making such a high quality audio player it is going to be pretty expensive anyway. A larger LCD and a better battery won't increase the price by that much then anymore.

Thats what I am afraid, new players not focused in good audio quality, instead going to focus more on video or very low price.

[scorche]

A said everyone because I see that tendency on new players and because Christian wrote: "We are selling many touchscreen,because many people want it".

Yes, but "everyone" is a massive generalization and is far from what people have expressed on these forums.  The main new players that I know of with a touch screen is the D2 and iPod touch (which really shouldn't even count) and that is just one device.  I do not see a large trend of manufacturers rushing towards touch screens.  Making generalizations of "everyone" and entire industries based on a couple of instances is not a good way to go about things.

About the screen size, ok, 240x320 can be "pocketability" but quickly the size will increment, If you are seeking portable video.

I agree.  240x320 is just fine and I don't see any good reason why it should go higher than this for an audio player.  The reason why I mentioned that is because you said you didn't want a larger or better screen because then we would be making the device for video at the expense of our audio functionality.

Sorry about that "cherrypick", I didn't know that concept. I just didn't answer/comment because I had nothing to say, I generally agree with what you wrote.

Then by all means, say so!  If you have an opinion in the past and new evidence or arguments pop up that discredit the past opinion, it is good to say that you understand now so that we can see you have changed your mind.

I would like to say that I am not so optimistic about seeking hardware for ALSO video not interfering with seeking hardware just for hight quality audio player. And I mean also the disposition of the buttons, size, price.

You don't have to.  This is what we have been saying up to this point.  We want a device whose main focus is audio, but to add a better screen is not going to deviate form that purpose and we are still not seeking hardware for video, as if we did, we would of course want an even larger screen!

Another thing, I did ask to developers the minimum size of SDRAM and Flash memory the player should have to run Rockbox, and I get 4MB of each memory - again, for audio player. If we want larger screen and video, I think that this memories should be 4 or 8 times more. Are this change is sizes expressive in price? maybe not...

Like I have said before, this is not just for video.  4MB very well is around the "minimum".  However, memory is cheap these days and if we put a bit more, I think that the cost difference will be very small, and that the increase in battery life from a larger buffer (as well as making things a bit easier on you when porting Rockbox as you have more RAM to work with and won't have to worry about squeezing everything in as much) would certainly be well worth it.

[Der Papst]

About the screen size, ok, 240x320 can be "pocketability" but quickly the size will increment, If you are seeking portable video.

Where does it say that? Look at all the daps that can play video already. Look at the 3G nano. It's tiny but fully capable at playing video at a decent resolution. It has a 320x240 display. Being able to play video doesn't necessarily mean that you have to carry a huge and bulky player with you.

And I did not wrote well my idea. I would like to say that I am not so optimistic about seeking hardware for ALSO video not interfering with seeking hardware just for hight quality audio player. And I mean also the disposition of the buttons, size, price.

Read my other posts. IT IS UNAVOIDABLE! If you want a DAP with lots of cool audio features and high quality you need:
 * a fast enough SoC
 * a display large enough for an intuitive UI to use all these features
You simply CANNOT AVOID IT that this hardware will be used for video playback even if it wasn't intended for it. If you want to avoid video playback you have to make the hardware that crappy that no one on earth except you is going to buy AND produce it. Hell even the 1G iPod with its 2bit "colour depth" display and slow and problematic SoC can playback MPEG full speed and i bet the guys developing it never ever dreamt about being able to do that.
 

Another thing, I did ask to developers the minimum size of SDRAM and Flash memory the player should have to run Rockbox, and I get 4MB of each memory - again, for audio player. If we want larger screen and video, I think that this memories should be 4 or 8 times more. Are this change is sizes expressive in price? maybe not...

YOU have proposed 64MB sdram. That is more than plenty for video audio and games. 32MB would even be enough for all that (see 5G iPods)

Thats what I am afraid, new players not focused in good audio quality, instead going to focus more on video.

THAT was NOT the point i made. The point i made is that the player like you are proposing it IS already expensive! If you add a larger screen and better battery it's not going to make a real difference. What is 300EUR compared to 320EUR? Almost nothing and i would be more then willing to pay these 20EUR for a larger screen and better battery life.

[casainho]

I would like to say that I am not so optimistic about seeking hardware for ALSO video not interfering with seeking hardware just for hight quality audio player. And I mean also the disposition of the buttons, size, price.

You don't have to.  This is what we have been saying up to this point.  We want a device whose main focus is audio, but to add a better screen is not going to deviate form that purpose and we are still not seeking hardware for video, as if we did, we would of course want an even larger screen!

Okok, I agree with you in all what you said in the message.

Ok, I understand now that 240x320 display can be "pocketability" and will not compromise audio in player - and that size display is not good for video.

Like I have said before, this is not just for video.  4MB very well is around the "minimum".  However, memory is cheap these days and if we put a bit more, I think that the cost difference will be very small, and that the increase in battery life from a larger buffer (as well as making things a bit easier on you when porting Rockbox as you have more RAM to work with and won't have to worry about squeezing everything in as much) would certainly be well worth it.

So I choose double the value, 8MB for each memory.

Another thing, I did ask to developers the minimum size of SDRAM and Flash memory the player should have to run Rockbox, and I get 4MB of each memory - again, for audio player. If we want larger screen and video, I think that this memories should be 4 or 8 times more. Are this change is sizes expressive in price? maybe not...

YOU have proposed 64MB sdram. That is more than plenty for video audio and games. 32MB would even be enough for all that (see 5G iPods)

That values you said, are the values in the development board, the final values should be 8MB for each memories as a minimum - for an audio player.

Thats what I am afraid, new players not focused in good audio quality, instead going to focus more on video.

THAT was NOT the point i made. The point i made is that the player like you are proposing it IS already expensive! If you add a larger screen and better battery it's not going to make a real difference. What is 300EUR compared to 320EUR? Almost nothing and i would be more then willing to pay these 20EUR for a larger screen and better battery life.

I think you are mistaken because one objective(which is written on page of the project), is "Total cost less than $125.". Also there was a suggestion from Olimex of "AT91SAM9260 + LCD NOKIA 6610 + 8MB flash + 8/16MB SDRAM + nRF24L01 wireless chip + audio CODEC + Li-ion battery + charger + miniUSB + buttons, price in range of 100 €.".

I was going though the getting started and found that the requirements may need to be used, exspecially the isp and software and didn't find linux operating system. The example in there is to light up 2 leds.

All tools are for Linux and also for M$ Windows. GCC-ARM, text editor and USBprog, they are multi OS - you can see a good example here:
http://sunge.awardspace.com/arm-getting-started/arm-getting-started.html

I want to blink a LED using the same bootloader that will launch Rockbox, blinking a LED will be like a test to know that MCU is running and also the bootloader.

After the blinking LED, write drivers for the LCD, buttons and ATA -- well, thats what I written on  "2st stage bootloader" section on page:
http://www.rockbox.org/twiki/bin/view/Main/RockboxPlayerPrototype

---
I actualized the main project page about the contact of Pasen and delaying the schedule time for the Prototype. Also the minimum size of SDRAM and Flash memories.