I recently (this week) got my first Speccy +3 and have just started investigating its Hardware. I was hoping to document the differences to see which of my hardware projects would work on it. But I haven't had a chance to take a detailed look yet.
Here's some of what I found so far:
- The expansion port is completely different. So sorry, the MegaFlash wouldn't work without major changes.
- With the correct cable, my S-Video modulator works great.
- The disc-drive is CPC compatible, ie: it will read and write CPC discs without a problem.
- The Drive B port is an exact copy of the UK 6128 - Edge connector with same pinout. I connected my HxC to it and it works fine. (I now have a flat-cable from the HxC with three connectors on the end which allows you to connect to 4 different computers: UK CPC6128, DE CPC6128, 6128 Plus and Speccy +3 :) ) I haven't added an ABBA switch yet, but that will come later.
- Printer port is 8-Bit (and sadly also only usable as outputs).
- The disc controller is a µP765 just like the CPC. It uses an SED9420 Data seperator.
- The AY-3-8912 is used slightly differently. It controls RS232 and Keypad sockets instead of the keyboard. The keyboard is being read directly by the Gate Array.
- It has 2x 256K ROMs (unlike the CPCs).
- The RAM are 64Kx4bit ICs
- CRTC stuff is performed by the Gate Array and the TV output is being driven by a TEA2000 which tends to give a better picture than the MP1/2 1377 did. They also implemented a real delay line, which the MP1/2 skimped on.
- They were nice enough to give it a reset switch, but forgot to give it a power button.
- The PSU supplies +5V, +12V and -12V (which could allow very interesting internal expansions)
Bryce.
Quick question: How many CPCs owners actually own a Spectrum +3 and would like to use their CPC stuff on the Speccy too?
Bryce.
Quote from: Bryce on 12:21, 09 September 11
Quick question: How many CPCs owners actually own a Spectrum +3 and would like to use their CPC stuff on the Speccy too?
I don't have any Speccys and if I got one I'd expect it would be the 48k rubber key one purely for the retro-ness of it :)
Yup, have a 48K too. It was thrashed when I got it, but you can see its "resurrection" here: http://www.cpcwiki.eu/forum/index.php?topic=2450.msg26308#msg26308 (http://www.cpcwiki.eu/forum/index.php?topic=2450.msg26308#msg26308)
The 48K Speccy is a completely different machine (has the same expansion port as the +3 though), so no CPC hardware has a chance of working on it.
Bryce.
Bryce, take a look to the page of Cristian Secara (http://www.secarica.ro/html/plus3_hardware.html), he has a few fixes for the +3 bugs, how the problem with the sound in the first revision of he +3, he has software and another interesting things for the +3. Another interesting pages are Gary Lancaster's +3e (http://www.worldofspectrum.org/zxplus3e/) and Sami Veemah (http://www.vehmaa.se/swezxdiy/Swedish_ZX_Spectrum_DIY_site/Swedish_ZX_Spectrum_DIY_site.html), one of the best "ZX Bryce" clones :P, nothing how the original, of course ;D
I was aware of the AY bug, but I didn't test whether my one has it yet. Mine is an Issue 1, so I assume it probably does need this fix. The ROM fixes I've found, seem to fix a minor bug, but introduce a more significant bug, so I don't think I'll bother making that change.
I'd seen the +3e page, his IDE interface is absolutely brilliant, that's what I call minimalistic hardware! I might make an internal version of this with CF card, but with the HxC working, I don't really need it urgently.
I didn't know Sami Veemahs site, so guess what I'm reading now :)
WorldofSpectrum is also very good. A huge selection of DSKs can be found there too.
Bryce.
Edit: Where are these people getting all those expansion connectors from? I thought they would be even rarer than out precious 50way edge connector?
The Sami's projects are really nice :D
Quote from: Bryce on 13:17, 09 September 11Edit: Where are these people getting all those expansion connectors from? I thought they would be even rarer than out precious 50way edge connector?
I don't have any idea, we'll need to ask them, jejeje.
Quote from: Bryce on 12:21, 09 September 11
Quick question: How many CPCs owners actually own a Spectrum +3 and would like to use their CPC stuff on the Speccy too?
Bryce.
The only one I share between them is an external 3.5" floppy drive.
However with the right adapter, a +3 PSU can easily power an Amstrad CPC6128...
Quote from: Bryce on 13:17, 09 September 11
I was aware of the AY bug, but I didn't test whether my one has it yet. Mine is an Issue 1, so I assume it probably does need this fix.
There are many AY bug fixes, but I haven't found one that does the job properly
Hey, using the PSU for the CPCs is a really good idea! I must make myself an adapter, then my PC PSU can go into storage/retirement :)
Bryce.
Quote from: Bryce on 15:19, 09 September 11
Hey, using the PSU for the CPCs is a really good idea! I must make myself an adapter, then my PC PSU can go into storage/retirement :)
Bryce.
Just goes to show you what you can learn by reading a website called CPCWiki :)
http://www.cpcwiki.eu/index.php/Powering_a_CPC_6128_from_a_Sinclar_Spectrum_%2B3_PSU (http://www.cpcwiki.eu/index.php/Powering_a_CPC_6128_from_a_Sinclar_Spectrum_%2B3_PSU)
I do have a couple of 48k spectrums, a +2 (the gray one) and a +3.
Despite being a Spectrum, the +3 is a nice machine. I haven't tried my external 3.5" drive with the +3, but it should work.
Quote from: Bryce on 12:21, 09 September 11
Quick question: How many CPCs owners actually own a Spectrum +3 and would like to use their CPC stuff on the Speccy too?
Bryce.
Well, I don't have one. But why convert software? Wouldn't it be a "downgrade"?
No idea, I was talking about hardware that would work on both CPC and Speccy.
Bryce.
I buy the zx spectrum ula book,When the book arrive,I see if it speak about the modifications of amstrad to the ula in laters models.
Maybe the book can help you bryce.
An stupidy question.if the amstrad and the spectrum shares de microprocessor.Is posible produce an expasion card that the amstrad can work in spectrum mode?
An interesting idea, I didn't check the ULA compatibility, although I assume they are the same or very similar. Like the later CPCs, the Spectrum + replaced much of the discrete functionality with an ASIC, so it's hard to tell. Let me know what the book says.
CPC Spectrum Mode: I doubt this would be easily achievable. It would need a modified ROM that re-routed all the Spectrum addresses to the CPC equivalent and many many other modifications.
If you really want that Spectrum look and feel on your CPC, just load up Black Tiger, cover the speaker with Tin-foil and smear the monitor with grease (for that subtle blurred effect). Viola, your very own Spectrum Mode :D
Bryce.
mmm.I not sure if all ulas in spectrum are the same.For example when investronica design the spanish spectrum.They use a different ula(texas instruments instead ferranti ula).
And this spectrum has incompatibilities with external peripherals(divIDe for example).
So amstrad might have touched something in ula of later spectrums.(I read spectrum +3 lost several signals in expansion port,but i not know if this signals are controlled by the ula.If they are controlled by ula and eliminated.Amstrad probably modified the ula somehow.)
I think the DivIDE incompatibilities were due to the new RAM addressing, which was implemented to allow CPM to run, but I'm not sure.
Bryce.
Edit: Oops, I meant on the Spectrum +, not on the Investronica.
QuoteCPC Spectrum Mode: I doubt this would be easily achievable. It would need a modified ROM that re-routed all the Spectrum addresses to the CPC equivalent and many many other modifications.
would need a complete additionnal ASIC I guess, the sort of the PLUS Asic but designed to get a Speccy emulation instead of a CPC emulation.
Basically it would be like to get a CPC and a Speccy on the same motherboard, with a possibility to switch between both modes/Roms at some point.
CPC can get a Mode1 256x192 resolution, but it can't get a 1bpp square pixel screen with this and also definitely lacks the Attributes.
but if CPC could get a downgraded Mode2 with Mode1 pixels perhaps...
Yet what would be the point ? beside getting at last accurate speccy ports ?
Thomson 2nd generation 8bit computers were great in that they cumulated the Amstrad PLUS modes (minus the Hardware sprites/Scrools) and a 4th Attributed mode, but this one is more compairable to MSX1 video mode : 320x200xattributes : 16 colours on screen and 8x1 attributes...
While such 1bpp bitmap is quite Speccy like, the attribute grid is 8 time what's on speccy (8x1 instead or 8x8 attributes) and also the 320x200 instead of 256x192 also increase the weight.
perhaps an external stuffyou would plug the Video out on could do the trick... sort of...
Then the CPC would run on... reduced Mode2... (256x192... less than an half screen) and the card would perhaps do the resize/timing stuff, and manage some Attributes managed through the extension port...
Fairly too much work for an actual downgrade of CPC's graphical capabilities.
with at best marginal compatibility...
Hell even "real" Speccys from Amstrad are not entirely "Speccy compatible"...
A modern "1chip computer "Clone could on the other hand offer such crossed compatibilities...
But to be fair, Amstrad PLUS done well would have had 2 ASICs and manage retrocompatibility with both Speccy and CPC, and even with old PCW...
In addition to being an even better PLUS.
Would be quite so Awesome..
Quote from: dragon on 14:30, 15 September 11mmm.I not sure if all ulas in spectrum are the same.For example when investronica design the spanish spectrum.They use a different ula(texas instruments instead ferranti ula).
And this spectrum has incompatibilities with external peripherals(divIDe for example).
Ooooohhhhh, the looovelyyyy Inves+ ;D , that wonderful computer where the sound output is via mic instead of ear (between other great "features" xDDDD) and that you can destroy the ula with a few pokes... shhhh, i didn't said anything xDDDDD
QuoteOoooohhhhh, the looovelyyyy Inves+ (http://www.cpcwiki.eu/forum/Smileys/SoLoSMiLeYS1/grin.gif) , that wonderful computer where the sound output is via mic instead of ear (between other great "features" xDDDD) and that you can destroy the ula with a few pokes... shhhh, i didn't said anything xDDDDD
Oh I can imagine a james bond game in investronica spectrum. "james,This message will self-destruct in 5 seconds".
5 segundos later
poke.Ula is destroyed go to the shop,buy another spectrum and retry the game.(entirely realistic.) 8) .
Macdeath,I thought more in expansion card with asic,with the ula incorporated(and other necessary stuff).So when you plug the spectrum card in the expansion port the z80 uses de alu incorporated in the expansion card to load spectrum software.
The spectrum can accept expansions card with ay chip.The amstrad can't accept expansion cards with other chips?
Yes, the CPC can have any chip you want on the expansion port, but the address range available on the expansion bus (like any 8-Bit) is limited. So connecting an entire ASIC would be difficult, expensive and slow.
Bryce.
And the bandwith is limited too by the CPC hardware design and the bus sharing with the Gate Array/CRTC (CPC's dynamic duo ;D ), that is because is very difficult or impossible to implement peripherals with DMA access in the CPC, don't you think Bryce? (or i'm specially "tonto" today by the Scarlett's pictures ;D )
Medium OT: By the way Bryce, have you seen the cartridge Harmony (http://harmony.atariage.com/) for the Atari 2600? There is a few demos that use the ARM microcontroller inside the cartridge how an ARM coprocessor for the 2600, really interesting project ;)
Quote from: Bryce on 20:08, 14 September 11
No idea, I was talking about hardware that would work on both CPC and Speccy.
Bryce.
OMG! Speccy Software ports are cruel! Please don't make the same mistake in Hardware now.
It would be way better to focus on one system (CPC here) and get the maximum out of this IMHO.
And also unleash the full potential of the Plus range! 8)
@TFM: No, I wouldn't go out of my way to make my Hardware both CPC and Spectrum compatible, but if it coincidentally happened to be compatible, then I would mention this. My PS/2 and USB Mouse project for example will work on a Spectrum +3 if you use a passive Joystick adapter, although it wasn't planned that way. After the MegaFlash was finished, I also took a look at whether it would work on a Spectrum if you used an adapter - Answer = No.
@Robcfg: Although I'm also really interested in making some cool Plus Hardware, the majority of users have Classic CPCs, so the general interest seems to be for Classic CPC Hardware (France being the exception). Of course most hardware will work on both Classic and Plus because the expansion ports are identical. From a hardware point of view, the Plus Printer port (8-Bit instead of 7), the Joystick Port (Analogue inputs) and of course the Cartridge and Lightgun Ports offer new possibilities, but then very few people can use this hardware. And usually it's possible to create the same function from the expansion port, so I choose it, so that everyone can use it.
@SyX: I'm not a big fan of putting large CPUs/ASICs on an expansion, because I feel the original hardware is then only being used as a power supply / data source. Technically I could build a Core i7 and an nVidia chip on a CPC expansion and claim "Hey look at what the CPC can do!", but it's not doing anything except feeding some data. A good example of "external overkill" is the Turbo Chameleon 64 (for C64), which has so much on board processing power, that it even runs without a C64 being attached! When some external intelligence is required, it's ok to use a PIC / AVR to do the job. The USB Mouse adapter for example uses a small PIC processor to run the PS/2 - USB host drivers to make it AMX compatible (ie: no CPC drivers required), but that should really be the limit.
Bryce.
Come on people!!! We are talking of Bryce :D
He never could disappoint us ;) , there is a lot of peripherals that a CPC and zx could share, and it wouldn't compromise the CPC side... and it would be a few advantages, for example, lower prices due to the more than probably increased in orders ;)
At least for one second, think with the minds, not with the hearts!!! :)
PD:It looks that we were writting at the same time, jejeje. Of course, Bryce, your sensible rules of design :) ... it's only, you know, some times my mind fly too high, jejeje but in that case the use of the arm how a coprocessor is a side effect, it wasn't the original intention (and is very limited, too), it's similar to the 32 KBs screens with the CRTC in the CPC... but well, i need to land now :P
Just one thing SyX. The MegaFlash was an exception. My plan is and was to design DIY hardware, ie: I release the plans, schematic and layouts and you build it yourself. The MegaFlash was just too complicated for most to build, so I made some for the community, but I don't intend this to be a regular occurance. It's just too time consuming.
Bryce.
Yes, i know, jejeje, i retouch my previous comment (thinking than you will be more slower in answer :P) to add "your rules of design" ;)
And you don't know how i'm grateful to you for that, sir Bryce :)
One thing I did think of previously (and was reminded of it by SyX's 2600 ARM post) is it could be interesting to have a co-processor for the CPC.
I imagined it being connected to the expansion port, where as you could send some bytes to the port, the co-pro would do the calculation and send the answer back also via the port. It would be in keeping of the spirit of the CPC and not completely over the top pointless like some of the C64 stuff.
My reason for wanting one is that a lot of CPC stuff is programmed using pre-calculated tables (which take up loads of space) and hence a co-pro could be a nice addition to speed things up. Would definitely make demos a lot more interesting.
Or is it a crap idea and I should go back to bed...?
Wouldn't it make more sense to just save the pre-calc table on the MegaFlash and read it from there? A Co-pro would work too, but it would be very limited in it's use and complicated to program.
Bryce.
Quote from: Bryce on 09:49, 16 September 11
Wouldn't it make more sense to just save the pre-calc table on the MegaFlash and read it from there?
Nice idea, but it's still pre-calculated.
Quote from: Bryce on 09:49, 16 September 11
A Co-pro would work too, but it would be very limited in it's use and complicated to program.
I was thinking more along the lines of real-time calculations - then the CPC could concentrate on using it's power to shift stuff to the VRAM etc.
But yeah, if you say it's complicated I'll take your word for it! :)
co-processor?,maybe a other z80 with more speed?.
Quote from: dragon on 10:04, 16 September 11
co-processor?,maybe a other z80 with more speed?.
Yes good thinking, because then code would be the same and could be re-used.
But I guess then it would need some flash memory too as you'd copy the code to the co-pro memory and then bank it in to run it or something like that.
A 25mhz Z80 would do some serious calculations for you :)
Quote from: redbox on 09:43, 16 September 11Or is it a crap idea and I should go back to bed...?
Don't go to sleep ;)
TFM has told me that he remember a review in the Happy Computer (a german magazine... we need to preserve more german CPC history, folks, we lack a lot of german jewels ;) ) from a coprocessor card for the CPC, based in the Hitachi HD64810 (the precursor of the Z180).
It would be nice to know more about it, but it looks the "holy grial" of CPC expansions...
I don't think I'd go for a Z80, even a faster one. If I were to do something like that, I'd prefer a processor which added something more, floating point calculations or whatever. The problem is, would it really be realtime? The Co-pro could calculate realtime, but the Z80 would still have to collect the results when it's read to do so.
Do you know which Happy Computer it was in. Maybe I can find it somewhere and at least check the features it offered.
Bryce.
Neither i would go for a Z80, is so obsolet :P I prefer an ARM, i love it since the GBA :D
But how Bryce said the main problem is for the z80 send/receive datas to the copro using I/O (INs and OUTs instructions are so slow...), Dadman and me made a few tests using an AVR overclocked to 25Mhz how math copro and the most part of time was lost in the communication process. It's more faster use a rom with precalc datas, how Bryce said too.
Well, Stefan doesn't remember the exact number of Happy Computer, i have passed him this kultboy link (http://www.kultboy.com/Happy-Computer-Zeitschrift/22/) (i think that somebody can register to download the scans, but i need to give a pass with google translator before, jejeje), hoping that seeing the covers, it could help him to refresh his memory ;)
The benefit of a second processor comes from running standard software faster then the 3.3mhz z80 can, if you use a different processor then the user must write new software specially for the new processor.
The CPC is an excellent machine but it could benefit from doing things just a little bit faster.
It's possible to do this very cheaply/easily using a "CPU Gearbox". The idea is, that the normal CPU (not an additional one) runs at normal speed while talking to external components, but runs at its highest possible speed when doing internal operations. I built one for an Atari 800XL which worked really well (except for the fact that I was even more crap at playing the games when they ran faster :D ).
Bryce.
Oohh, well, if ideas are being thrown around. How about connecting a SID to the Amstrad? I've no idea how feasible it is, but I think that chip has to be the best there is for sound... Its just a shame that Sids are usually have a C64's or prohibitively expensive catweasle/hardsid cards wrapped around them.
Quote from: redbox on 09:43, 16 September 11
One thing I did think of previously (and was reminded of it by SyX's 2600 ARM post) is it could be interesting to have a co-processor for the CPC.
I imagined it being connected to the expansion port, where as you could send some bytes to the port, the co-pro would do the calculation and send the answer back also via the port. It would be in keeping of the spirit of the CPC and not completely over the top pointless like some of the C64 stuff.
My reason for wanting one is that a lot of CPC stuff is programmed using pre-calculated tables (which take up loads of space) and hence a co-pro could be a nice addition to speed things up. Would definitely make demos a lot more interesting.
Or is it a crap idea and I should go back to bed...?
Take a look at the CPC Booster, there you have your co-processor, and you can even program it from the CPC side. And if the Mega16 is not enought for you, then just replace the cpu with the Mega32. It works :-)
Quote from: dragon on 10:04, 16 September 11
co-processor?,maybe a other z80 with more speed?.
That's nothing new anyway. There is the HD64180 card for the CPC which has a Hitachi 180 cpu (pretty much Z80 compatible, but faster), can be used as second cpu or for debugging purposes.
You see, I answer 3x, but there is a reason:
Now let's come seriously to the topic coprocessor. An expansion card has sense if it really reliefs the CPC's CPU, for example: Imagine an USB or and IDE device, that IS ABLE to DIRECTLY send a data stream to a MP3 processor to play music (for example) WITHOUT bothering the Z80. In such a case the CPC controls what's going on, but it's NOT using up much cpu time for it.
The principle is that the CPC tells the external device WHAT to do, then the expansion just does it.
If I have an IDE device and an MP3 card, then still my CPC's Z80 has to do all the work and uses up all it's time. So I see no gain in that. BUT an expansion which does the job for the CPC would be really an innovation.
That far about my thoughts for now.
Quote from: TFM/FS on 16:27, 16 September 11
Take a look at the CPC Booster, there you have your co-processor, and you can even program it from the CPC side. And if the Mega16 is not enought for you, then just replace the cpu with the Mega32. It works :-)
Ah yes, I see. The CPC Booster does look very nice, but is discontinued I think...?
@Jase: I already suggested a SID Card in another thread and even built a prototype a while back, but I was afraid to mention it again, in case I get banned from the Wiki (As far as I know, there is a clause in the CPCWiki Membership contract, that says "you will reject satan Commodore and all his empty promises", or something similar). Anyway, if anyone really is interested in this hardware, then let me know and I'll finish it and release it (You can send me a PM if you're too embarrased to publicly admit that you are interested in C64 hardware :D )
@TFM: That's exactly where my border is: Using a processor to build an IDE port is fine by me, because the external processor is there to facilitate the Z80's needs, it's just a slave that collects data for the CPC, but an MP3 expansion is wrong. The CPC is only being used as an oversized remote control, the MP3 device would (with minor changes) work fine without the CPC. This degrades the CPC and instead of showing what it can do, actually shows that it's only good to replace a play and stop button! I only do Hardware where the CPC is the real master and does the main processing.
Bryce.
What ports use that SID card??? ;) I have a caprice customized with a SID instead of the AY, and a initial port to CPC of the Sam Coupe sidplayer for its sid expansion card :P
I can't remember which ports I used, it was a quick "out of my head", non-documented prototype, just to see whether it works. If I was to design it fully I would start from scratch and decide sensible ports and control.
Bryce.
Surely by now there must be a better sound chip than either the SID or the AY family, what chips do the cheap PC sound cards use?
Of course there are, but even the simplest such as ad1881 or other "soundblaster compatibles" are so complicated to host and feed, that they would be rather complicated for an 8-bit computer. The next concievable sound chip after the SID would probably be the Amigas "Paula", but that was a custom chip that's even harder to find than a SID (wasn't socketed) and there's not many common sound chips in between the Paula and the quantum leap to SB compatibles.
Bryce.
@Steve: It's not easy how Bryce says, the classic sound chips are very difficult to find, and also Paula is not very recommended in this case because use 8 bits samples (so much memory for the CPC, we would need a ram expansion too ), the most sensible would be to use chips with FM Synteshis, how all the OPL series of Yamaha, the successors of the AY, they were used in MSX expansion cards and consoles with great result, an aceptable ram consumption... for me the last "classic sound chip" was the Yamaha AICA from the Dreamcast :)
@Bryce: Je je je, ok, well if one day you go back to this project, i will try to fix my sidplayer ;)
I have some C64's at home with little use, so if there's a way for my CPC to torture that unholy chip, I'll be glad to test it ;D
Yamaha FM chips and/or pokey expansion cards would be nice too, hehehe :P No, seriously, I'd like to see a port of Konami's Salamander as good as the new R-type and with amazing FM music.
Quote from: steve on 22:50, 16 September 11
Surely by now there must be a better sound chip than either the SID or the AY family, what chips do the cheap PC sound cards use?
I totally agree, the SID has a bunch of disadvantages:
- Not better than the AY IMHO (ok, few will agree, I don't care :P )
- No stereo!
- Really HARD to get in these days
- Too expensive, if possible to get it
- Old, outdated chip, that has no real advantage over the AY IMHO
So, why not using a decent sound chip, that has a lot of functions which makes it easy and quick to play sound / samples / music. Further it would be good to have some kind of generic "Soundtrakker" for it. So software must not be developped from Scratch. I'm thinking about something like the Arkos Trakker :-)
MacDeath would now suggest to get the MP3 option and a port for an USB stick for music, including a function "CPC tells soundcard to play song #97" or so :) ;) ;) ;D And I would agree with him 8) ;D
Sorry, but the SID is superior to the AY, and that's a fact :laugh:
The SID can sound like an AY, the AY can't sound like a SID.
@Bryce. Despite this being an Amstrad forum, I am not ashamed to say I like the Commodore, but REALLY think the sound chip in there is awesome. I really do not want to start a flame war, a battle over which machine is better. The AY-8192 was ok. It was used in a lot of machines, and, especially towards the end of the Amstrad's life, people were getting to know it better. But, reading or watching presentations by some of the old musicians, like David Whittaker and Rob Hubbard, they preferred the Sid, and, well, it does show in the quality of the tune.
Just my opinion, but Glider-rider and Spellbound on the SID just wipe the floor with the AY. (note - no reference to specific computers there). I would love for someone to tell me any games that sounded better on the Sid than the AY. [Update: Just rummaging through high-voltage sid collection; Jack The Nipper sounds MUCH nicer on the AY :)]
But I still love both of these chips, and I do prefer the Amstrad as a machine over the C64 and Speccy. What's wrong with being multi-cultured every now and again!
@TFM/FS: Surely all FM chips can now considered outdated, with wave table synthesis, multi channel mixing abilities of modern PCs? If fact, when Roland released the MT32, or when Gravis released the Ultrasound, surely then FM was "technically outdated"? Yes, there is the memory issue, but if you consider "chip" music, you can get a really good tune out of Paula in minimal bytes. It's not hard to get hold of an Sid - just check out how many C64s are available on ebay, all with a lovely MOS Sid inside. Right, here I am going to get shot down in flames :) ... Stereo on the Amstrad was a joke. :o Yes, one or two games used it, but the rest - it made the music sound odd with half the tune out of one speaker, and the other half the other side!!! On my scart lead, I have shorted left & right to get a better sound.
@McKlain. True - and good you kept Machine specifics out of it.
Anyhoo. I only mentioned the SID really, as it was part of the 8 bit arena. Of the big 3, There was a beeper, the GI-AY and the MOS-SID. Who would want to build a hardware beeper to stick in the back of their Amstrad??? Hmmmm.... maybe even I can design that one! :D
p.s. I really do not think any sound chip is out-dated. I love computer music in all it's forms, especially the synth stuff. I just bought an Atari STe, basically to play the occasional game, but mainly to listen to the game music. If we all considered old hardware obsolete, we would not be lurking in this forum!
Well first of all, I also think the SID was and is better than the AY. The fact that it was also used in synthesisers (the AY wasn't as far as I know) would suggest that many people considered it to be better. But it's not a matter of opinion, compare the data and you'll see that the SID is more advanced. The SID is still relatively easy to get (ebay is full of them).
But my SID card wasn't being made because the SID is better than the AY, rather I thought that it would be good if we could run SID music on a CPC. There is so much SID music out there, which I'd like to play without having a bulky C64 in front of me :)
The Pokey is another matter. I also have a few of them here, but I don't have much documentation, so I'm not sure how easy it would be to interface to it. Besides that, I don't think it's better than the AY and I was never seriously impressed by any music made for it.
Bryce.
The SID was in fact designed by Bob Yannes to be a synthesizer on a chip. The first draft was going to have 32 channels of polyphony, but the time restrictions imposed by Jack Tramiel to get the C64 done made it impossible to achieve that, so they made an only oscilator and replicated it 3 times on the chip surface. Yannes idea was also to sell it to synthesizer companies (as it was a MOS product) but it never was sold to third parties. Nowadays you can find a few synthesizers that use the SID to run, like the elektron sidstation.
Quote from: McKlain on 10:13, 17 September 11
Sorry, but the SID is superior to the AY, and that's a fact :laugh:
The SID can sound like an AY, the AY can't sound like a SID.
Not that PSG war again :o , but the SID isn't even able to produce stereo. That's the worst!
And the bass-heavy sounds of the AY can't be copied by the SID, at least I never heart such songs (and I was looking a long time now in u tube).
The point is (IMHO): If we want to spend the CPC a superior sound output, then we should do exactly that. Which means connect a todays sound-output to it. (If you want to connect a hard-disc to the CPC the you will rather connect an IDE than an RLL. So it shall be the same with sound chips).
Well, the AY on the other platforms is not stereo either. Nor is the Pokey. Having stereo sound on 1981 on a computer that you were going to use mainly on a tv set wasn't a priority, don't you think?
And I like the AY, I make music for it, but you simply can't compare. I can understand that some people may not like the sounds of the SID, but you can't say that it's inferior to the AY.
You can't do things like this on the AY, doing all kind of crazy tricks with the synthesis capabilities of the sid (cause the sid is a synth on a chip, not a PSG):
the third tune is really amazing, the sid can make wonderful flute sounds.
And why oh why didn't we get a version of this for Last Ninja 2 instead of that horrible racket that sounds like the speccy beeper???
Well, already in the 80ies I had a cheap (costfree to be preciese) 20 W Blaupunkt Amplifier (built with tubes) connected to the CPC. And all the neighbourhood was shocked when I played Thundercats really loud. In stereo for sure! That was a lot of fun 8) You just can't do it with a sid that way :P because it has no stereo, and whatever the sid does else, without stereo it's just monotone.
BTW: The AY has right, center and left chanells. So you really can do somthing like surround sound, and at least some games were using it on the CPC.
Don't get me wrong the sid was surely a good soundchip for it's time. But if we create hardware today, then we shall use todays technique. The MegaFlash for example uses Flash and not a bunch of 16 KB Eproms ;)
Yup, lovely tune there, though it lacks a bit in the bass dept.
Thundercats - Amstrad CPC (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r8GtLSvA5BA#)
... And it would not be easier to circuit bent the AY, how all that Casiotones hack in youtube :P ... or even better we can use this sound chip instead ;D
... where is the on-topic??? i'm lost xDDD
I didn't knew that there was an amiga version of Thundercats.
The game looks terrible :laugh:
Only terrible??? ;D
The only good thing is that in the version that i got, the same floppy had Army Moves, Nebulus, Bomb Jack, Vectorball and Robocop.. it looked a CPC floppy instead of Amiga :D
Quote from: Gryzor on 08:40, 18 September 11
Yup, lovely tune there, though it lacks a bit in the bass dept.
Thundercats - Amstrad CPC (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r8GtLSvA5BA#)
Hehehe, you DO need am amplifier and the neighbours will shake in their shoes :-)))
Quote from: SyX on 15:52, 18 September 11
Only terrible??? ;D
Yeah, I really like the CPC soundtrack more. Ok, ingame they're both not that well. But I grew up with the CPC version. Got no idea a about a SID version though.
Found it:
Rob Hubbard - Thundercats [C64] (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gEU8XYBwN78#)
Well, I still like the AY more, this one sounds more like a Vietnam ego shooter game sound. And in a way it sounds just not fully fledged.
Having said this, if I would have heart the c64 or Amiga version first, then I would maybe think exactly in the opposite direction. Taste is something you just can't grab ;-)
Ok, if you really want a SID card, then please let's use two SID's for having stereo and beating up the c64 ;-) Nothing personal, but if it's new, then it must be better ;-)
Tell me how much ports you need and I'll find some unused for you.
Is it possible to have two AY chips in the cpc similar to the way someone installed two CRTC's a while ago?
Maybe using the chip's 8 bit port to select which chip is being addressed.
Yes, 2 AYs would be possible too, but do you know anyone with a spare AY? The reason there are so many SIDs about, is because Commodore put it in a socket. Unfortunately, Amstrad weren't so generous with their sockets.
I checked my "Bucket of ICs" last night. I have at least four SIDs to mess about with, all 6581s. I also have two complete C64s that I haven't opened to check, but they are all original Type A (No C64-C, Aldi C64 or whatever), so I assume they have 6581s aswell.
A quick check of ebay DE shows 19 SIDs for sale at the moment, so they are definitely NOT difficult to find.
Bryce.
Quote from: Bryce on 08:25, 20 September 11
Yes, 2 AYs would be possible too, but do you know anyone with a spare AY? The reason there are so many SIDs about, is because Commodore put it in a socket. Unfortunately, Amstrad weren't so generous with their sockets.
I checked my "Bucket of ICs" last night. I have at least four SIDs to mess about with, all 6581s. I also have two complete C64s that I haven't opened to check, but they are all original Type A (No C64-C, Aldi C64 or whatever), so I assume they have 6581s aswell.
A quick check of ebay DE shows 19 SIDs for sale at the moment, so they are definitely NOT difficult to find.
Bryce.
The problem with ebay sids is not getting one of those defective ones that showed up years ago. I would have loved to buy a hardsid card at the time, but they were expensive and the posting made them even more expensive.
Quote from: Bryce on 08:25, 20 September 11
Yes, 2 AYs would be possible too...
Hehe, this could mean quadrophonica. Great! Then I can listen to Pink Floyd using a CPC with double AY-power ;)
Next project: multiple-AY board with outputs for a surround system. I'd dig that!
Quote from: Gryzor on 18:07, 20 September 11
Next project: multiple-AY board with outputs for a surround system. I'd dig that!
I would be happy with just stereo sids XD
Quote from: McKlain on 18:10, 20 September 11
I would be happy with just stereo sids XD
Well, if you write music for it... then I'll get one of them :-)
I tried to make something with goattracker, but the interface it's so full of text and numbers that it's overwhelming XD
If anyone can get their hands on a box full of AYs, I'll build them whatever they want out of them. Hell I'll even do 8x AY if the parts are available.......
Deafening silence......
I thought so, so it's SID we'll be concentrating on :D
Bryce.
Just put some midi on it and I'll bought it XD
Quote from: Bryce on 19:40, 20 September 11
I thought so, so it's SID we'll be concentrating on :D
I'd be happy with having a SID attached to the CPC[nb]Having said that, I do still love the AY.[/nb].
And when the C64 fanboys start smarting, I would also point out that it's the only part of the breadbin worth worrying about.
CPC with SID attached = ultimate C64 killa. :D
Ok I think this could be a really cool project! Sound synthesis is my thing and the SID looks quite interesting! Apparently it has an audio in pin, so it can be used as an effects processor. So we could go one better than the Commodore gang and have the AY routed through it to get all sorts of circuit bendy sounds! It has also plenty of waveforms and 3 oscillators so it could be possible to have some sort of synth frontend that ties the two chips together, a bit like Reason if anyone has used it, although the number of different configurations would be limited.
I will have a more in depth look but I think it may even be possible to create a basic FM synthesis by combining both the SID and the AY via the audio in pin!
You can see a lot of videos in youtube with people modifying the C64 to add external controls for the sid filters, there are also midi cartridges and sequencers for the c64 and I think that the audio processing have been used in some of the later "reimplementations" of the chip, but I can't remember well.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MOS_Technology_SID#Hardware_reimplementations (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MOS_Technology_SID#Hardware_reimplementations)
As the wiki says: 'Even though Yannes was partly displeased with the result, his colleague Charles Winterble (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Charles_Winterble&action=edit&redlink=1) said: "This thing is already 10 times better than anything out there and 20 times better than it needs to be."'
An outstanding work indeed, he did it in just 6 months from scratch.
By the way, the fact that the sid is not stereo makes sense if you look at the features and synthesis capabilities of the chip, as it doesn't have "channels" but "oscilators" that can even modulate each other or be hard-synced.
If the oscillators can modulate each others frequency at above say 15-20 Hz then we have hardwired FM synthesis built into the SID. What would be fantastic is if it can do the same to the audio in pin signal, the possibilities increase a hell of a lot! With the AY becoming a 4th Oscillator ! Imagine being able to make sampled speech sing for example. If the SID can delay and feedback signals, basic physical modelling synthesis is possible too.
I remember that many of the classic songs from c64 videogames used hard syncing, ring modulation and filter tricks to make "strange" synth sounds.
By the way TFM/FS, you can hear some deep bassdrums on this one ;D
Well, hearing that bassdrum you could say that Rob Hubbard invented the Gabber drum sound on the c64 in 1987 ;D
Quote from: Bryce on 08:25, 20 September 11
Yes, 2 AYs would be possible too, but do you know anyone with a spare AY?
Um. Yes. Me.
I was thinking of piggy-backing it onto another one, but having 1 AY on a clean power, and hopefully getting clean outputs.
But it was a silly idea that never got further than extracting the AY out of a 464 board.
Quote from: Bryce on 19:40, 20 September 11
If anyone can get their hands on a box full of AYs, I'll build them whatever they want out of them. Hell I'll even do 8x AY if the parts are available.......
Deafening silence......
Err, is 128 enough? http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/1-AY-3-8910-8910A-YM2149F-AY38910A-Sound-Generator-IC-/360363014602?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item53e74f39ca (http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/1-AY-3-8910-8910A-YM2149F-AY38910A-Sound-Generator-IC-/360363014602?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item53e74f39ca)
To compare...
Nemesis the Warlock Spectrum Title Music (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2WRDaXwVBkw#)
Quote from: Executioner on 03:00, 21 September 11
Err, is 128 enough? http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/1-AY-3-8910-8910A-YM2149F-AY38910A-Sound-Generator-IC-/360363014602?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item53e74f39ca (http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/1-AY-3-8910-8910A-YM2149F-AY38910A-Sound-Generator-IC-/360363014602?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item53e74f39ca)
Bryce, hope your hat is tasty enough :p
Quote from: TFM/FS on 05:11, 21 September 11
To compare...
Nemesis the Warlock Spectrum Title Music (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2WRDaXwVBkw#)
And still a great song. Last night I saw Rob Hubbard giving a speech on Assembly 2007 I think, and as a programmer he wasn't too fond of the spectrum or the amstrad (he said that the machines were "a dog to program to" XD) In fact he didn't like the Z80 or the AY too much.
For $9.70 (€7.27) I'll leave my hat where it is. (I don't recall claiming I'd eat it anyway though). Also, these are AY-3-8910, ie: the 40pin version with Port B available. I'd prefer to work with the AY-3-8912, due to PCB real-estate, and the fact that I really don't need four extra ports.
Bryce.
Edit: I just checked my own supplier. He can supply the AY-3-8910 for €5.50 including postage.
Ah, you're going into fine-print mode now, ain't ya? :D
Mode 2 :D
Bryce.
I have received the spectrum ula book,Basically is centred in the ula(sinclair) era,and only a pair of annotations is dedicated to amstrad era.
Basically the spectrum ula as a fault design in memory contaiment.(The circuits control the z80 and the ula not access to the ram at the same time).In revisións of spectrum,the spectrum received external patchs to solve it.But in all ula revisions,internally is not complete solved.(in part to compatibility games questions,in part to time necesary to implement the solution)
When amstrad take control of spectrum desing.As they had to rewrite the circuit to implement the new ASIC.They pulled out of the way down the street.And rewrite the cirtuit memory contaiment.And ported the memory map of cpc to spectrum(memory divide in 16k bloks).
Also the book is very interesting,it's help understand how are constructed the microcomputer in generally.So indirectly it can help understand the gate array.Because it's explain how the pixel clock is calculated in base a resolutión and a general tv parameters.And how palette colours is generate.And explain the general methods to memory contaiment in z80.
Sounds like a great read. Any chance that you might throw it onto a nearby scanner and let some more people read it? :D
Bryce.
While I don't have any qualms about copying old 8-bit software and scanning old computer books, the ZX Spectrum ULA book is still on sale (Published August 2010). Scanning is not a good idea.
It is?? I thought he was referring to some old 80's book! Do you have a link to where I can get it?
:)
Bryce.
Edit: Found it already myself :)
Quote from: Bryce on 14:38, 21 September 11
Edit: Found it already myself :)
Argh! Too late. What's even worse, when I wrote the first post, I already had the intention of inserting the link. *grml*
And..... Ordered :)
Bryce.
Ok, I'll wait twenty years, then I'll ask you guys to scan it
(reminder set...)
Interesting note: the book is cheaper in amazon.es (the spanish site) than any other amazon european site.
http://www.amazon.es/ZX-Spectrum-ULA-Design-Microcomputer/dp/0956507107 (http://www.amazon.es/ZX-Spectrum-ULA-Design-Microcomputer/dp/0956507107)
So I the only of amstrad that buy the book?(bryce apart).
Its very interesting how is designed a color palette with a primitive dac.(a bunch of resistances lol).I sure that the gate array uses the same system but with 3 bits,an more more resitances XD.
Basically the diference of gate array and ula is than amstrad enginers uses external chips to make stuff that ula make internally(the keyboard with ay for example).This saving space in amstrad gate array.And amstrad can inftroduce more circuity dedicated to video.Also amstrad use stardad tecniques to pixel generatión.when spectrum use tecniques totally unstandard.I think amstrad limited the 16 colours in mode 0 to maintain a 16k standard memory video and save logic gates.
So,if you like z80 harwdare stuff (even without a spectrum) i recommend the book.
The Amstrad techniques are interesting, because you can see that almost every decision was made to reduce the cost. Right down to the stupid idea of putting both joysticks on one socket. The Spectrum is a very strange design from an electronics point of view. There were already very good standard solutions for many of the issues they had, but they came up with new and sometimes very inventive solutions. Although I suspect (based on the solutions they came up with), that some of the hardware designers came from a radio/analogue background and had no significant microcomputer experience. One of the very creative solutions can be seen in the 16K/48K ZX Spectrum, where they chose a single 9V power supply and then built a cheap but rather complicated circuit to produce 5V, 12V, isolated 12V and -12V. All made from a few standard components.
I doubt there's much for me to learn from a technical point of view in the book, but it's the nostalgic stories of the "whys and hows" that I'm really looking forward to.
Bryce.
The books is repleat of why and how :P .
The principal problem in the design of the spectrum is the capacity of the ula.
The ula is a matrix of 11x11x4(726 gates Nor or and).I'ts very litte space.And many of the decisions is influenced by the space.
I not know the why of voltaje(I no read the entire book XD).
The curiosity is if you counter the number of ttl chips in the pic of cloned ula and the number of ttl in amstrad gate array simulator.is almost the same number of integrated ttl chips.
Quote from: Bryce on 19:15, 21 September 11
Although I suspect (based on the solutions they came up with), that some of the hardware designers came from a radio/analogue background and had no significant microcomputer experience.
If you read on Amstrad's history (Sugar's biographies and autobiography, that is) you'll see that this is true; Sugar used to drag with him old acquaintances and employees and this was a specific problem - business went past his engineers' abilities.
I didn't know that (haven't read any Sugar books). I just think it's really funny, that you you can actually see this in the physical product. There's a huge difference between analogue and digital design. Everything right down to the chosen components, circuit solutions and even the PCB track layout is done differently in analogue. The first time I took a close look at the 16K/48K I thought, oh, radio engineers :D The strange thing is, you can see from version to version how things were "cleaned up" by experienced digital designers. Although certain things remained until the end.
Bryce.
Oh yes. And this trend was not only evident with Amstrad's computers but with earlier products (think stereo towers), too.
I find it quite natural, in a sales-oriented organization. At least they did manage to deliver good, sturdy products in the end.
PS the other day I saw a digital TV tuner bearing the Amstrad logo. Specs were quite nice and it looked good. A pity my TV has a digital tuner in it :D
In the spectrum case the spectrum 16k was designed by Richard Altwasser,He work in a metal company installing industrial robots and designing instrumentacion equipment.Before go to sinclair.Curiosity,after jupiter ace.He work in amstrad 86-92 But it forgot that work in sinclair XD.
http://uk.linkedin.com/in/richardaltwasser (http://uk.linkedin.com/in/richardaltwasser)
In amstrad case,the 6502 is made for a couple of guys who had no idea of computers but had helped to amstrad tvs.But mej electronics exist since 1976.