M@ and The Dweez'

[Tony Hardie-Bick]

On 10/10/11 15:16, Tony Scharf wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 9:09 AM, Tony Hardie-Bick<tony at entity.net>  wrote:
>>
>> 56K DSP?
>>
>> I think that chip can really sound good. You need 64 bit FP to get close,
>> and the extended 56K accumulator makes even 64 bit FP slightly shy in
>> comparison, for certain calculations (that are relevant to audio).
>
> No idea.  I am sure M@ would know and be willing to tell you.  I could ask.

I'm more interested to know what the sample rate is on the new ones. The details 
of CPU choice... are exhausting. I wish them luck with the 56K... if it's that. 
Beautiful chip, but a bit of a walled garden. Within a commercial context, it 
can give a real edge. To compete you'd currently need a power-hungry FP-chewing 
monster, perhaps doubling the circuit cost. Although this equation is changing 
as CPU power becomes less and less of the restriction on what one is trying to 
achieve.

> Suffice to say, anything that goes into it sounds at least as good
> when it comes out (and sometimes better).  I like using the amp and
> cab models in very subtle ways to  grit things up, and then use the
> rest of the signal path to add space and shimmer.  I have also used it
> going the other way as a sound source by setting up internal feedback
> looks through other FX to build textures.  I have a few soundcloud
> clips of this (I think).
>
> It's the only FX box I have ever really fallen in love with.

I think it's probably the best of its kind, and excellent regardless of how one 
classifies it. And I always enjoy excellence :)

> Tony (Maybe its time I started putting S in parenthesis)

No.... no no no... you were here first. It's my attempt at humility ;)

Tony (HB)