cub0ne
100+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2012
- Posts
- 446
- Likes
- 23
yah thats what im trying to say, avoid mixed up information like what happened on the main dx50 thread..
I restored ..
ETA, got it working.
he actually did anything.
its easy to RMAA something like this.
Yes. Rockbox uses the Android Kernel level ALSA interface. Of the Wolfson DAC.
#if defined(DX50)
FILE *f = fopen("/dev/codec_volume", "w");
#else /* DX90 */
FILE *f = fopen("/sys/class/codec/es9018_volume", "w");
#endif /* DX50 */
Sorry to burst your bubble but your are exhibiting the perfect example of expectation bias (A.K.A. placebo effect).
You were told a fix was made to improved sound. That is what you wanted to hear. But ignore the fact the change as pointed out could not affect the sound of Rockbox as any of the part being claimed to have change isn't use by Rockbox.
This is easily can be verified as you know rockbox's code is open source and anyone can verify it.
I think it's moot, as medmitry has pulled his version of rockbox, at least from this forum, and edited his posts about it.
As far as I know, and has been reported elsewhere, all the sound unlocked mod does is add a different EQ curve to the signal..
Isn't this just some kind of added built in EQ setting? Why not just include it as an optional EQ setting, instead of a baked in non-linear setup? One of the primary features of rockbox is how it doesn't color the sound with baked in sound coloring, but does offer a very full featured EQ. Just include an EQ preset, but don't shove this arbitrary coloration down our throats. Or add an option to turn it off.
its just that modifying the default sound lib of rockbox doesn't seem right..yes its opensource but its ROCKBOX and it has its own sound lib..
It's not about ... That is exactly what I'm trying to avoid. The main DX50 thread is already littered with too much misinformation and subjective bias. That it's very confusing and mostly misleading for a newbie to read.
Unsubscribed.
OK but.. Are you saying that there are no sound differences between rockbox and stock firmware?
Because in my case the difference was really BIG! (Mango vs rockbox)
No, it's not Mango compared to rockbox. It's the supposed SU mod for rockbox having a difference against the stock rockbox build for DX50.
Could please provide link to Android Kernel level ALSA interface of the Wolfson DAC specification?
You couldn't because there is no this kind of specification.
Which profit we have using ALSA? Do you understand that PCM part implemended by you is DAC-independent?
I can "google" for you. http://www.alsa-project.org/main/index.php/ASoC
oh no, where is DAC-dependent code where you use system shell to talk with device specific codec, for example
Do you understand what if you replace your WM8740 with WM8741 your code(and device) will be work?
You were told a rockbox direct access to DAC. That is what you wanted to hear(natural virgin sound). But ignore the fact a DX50 rockbox is just a music player app hosted on rockchip platform. Yep, it uses own decoders for different audio formats and talks to pcm using tinyalsa driver but that's all. No any direct access to DAC, again.
Really? So I already asked you to provide link to code where rockbox access the DAC. You didn't do it but repeated your claim again and again. How we can verify that rockbox sound is virgin and natural.
http://opensource.wolfsonmicro.com/
http://opensource.wolfsonmicro.com/content/linux-drivers-wolfson-devices
http://opensource.wolfsonmicro.com/node/6
Did you actually read that? The whole point is to be hardware independent above the kernel level.
To achieve all this, ASoC basically splits an embedded audio system into 3 components:
- Codec driver: The codec driver is platform independent and contains audio controls, audio interface capabilities, codec dapm definition and codec IO functions.
- Platform driver: The platform driver contains the audio dma engine and audio interface drivers (e.g. I2S, AC97, PCM) for that platform.
- Machine driver: The machine driver handles any machine specific controls and audio events. i.e. turing on an amp at start of playback.
So you implemented a direct access to the Wolfson DAC for Mango, circumventing the kernel and improving the sound of the player. That's really great.
Would you please share your modifications with us so that we can improve Rockbox for iBasso?
Would you please share your modifications with us so that we can improve Rockbox for iBasso? Please. Pretty, pretty please.
do you really think it's "Android Kernel level ALSA interface of the Wolfson DAC"? Could you point using those links above where is wm8740 related part?
Anyway I have better link for you - https://github.com/omegamoon/Rockchip-GPL-Kernel/tree/dcfcc2e1b4a147c2f8b6bb8cf9dec3188d5d5836/sound/soc/rk29
Do you really think all platform code is hardware independent? How do you use capabilities of specific device?
Did I said anything about direct access? It's just your claim
It's my last comment for you. I cannot waste my time for this kind of conversation
Already answered. See above.
I think nobody tried to build the simulator until now. I would have been surprised if it worked. What do you need it for?
So i've just looked at you firmware modifications (correct me if i am wrong):
- You changed the init scripts disabling unneeded services and replacing Mango Player with your own settings app.
- You introduced new configurations of the Mango playback liberies (libparticle...), switching these configurations with your app. Well actually these are component configurations, enabling/disabling available decoders, like FLAC only mode.
- You adjust cpu frequency and scaling governor through the cpufreq interface.
- You adjust roll off frequencies and iir bandwidth.
1. could be done for Rockbox. Effect on sound is questionable.
2. is not relevant for Rockbox. Rockbox replaces these.
3. is already done in Rockbox. Actually adjustable from the Rockbox settings. Effect on sound is questionable.
4. Was considered but abandoned (http://gerrit.rockbox.org/r/#/c/1048/). IIR bandwith likewise.
Well this would have been much easier if you just pointed us to a documentation/explanation of your modifications and its relevance for Rockbox.
Nope you didn't. Had to reverse engineer your firmware.
I'm sure this has been answered before, but does Rockbox decode audio above 44.1/16 differently than the stock firmware? The only reason I ask is I feel like I notice a difference with a higher bit depth and sample rate with stock, but in Rockbox it sounds the same. I could just be crazy, but that is why I'm asking.