This thread has been locked.

If you have a related question, please click the "Ask a related question" button in the top right corner. The newly created question will be automatically linked to this question.

PCM6240-Q1: PCM6260-Q1 & TLV320ADCx140

Part Number: PCM6240-Q1
Other Parts Discussed in Thread: PCM6260-Q1, PCM6260Q1EVM-PDK

Hi,

Good Day. I have a customer who has a question related to the E2E Forum Thread (https://e2e.ti.com/support/audio-group/audio/f/audio-forum/974625/pcm6240-q1-automatic-gain-controller-document?tisearch=e2e-sitesearch&keymatch=PCM6240-Q1). Please see below for his query for your reference.

Table 3 was taken from the TLV320ADCx140 referred APP note. The reason I was questioning it is I have 7 of the TI PCM6260Q1EVM-PDK kits and I am setting up a customer demom, we need to change the Attack and Decay rates on the AGC. This is listed in the TLV320ADCx140 App note but the PurePath Console software used to configure the PCM6260Q1EVM eval kit does not support any AGC parameters except ON/OFF, Max Gain and target level. so if these registers are in the PCM6260-Q1 is there a way to configure these registers on the PCM6260Q1EVM Evaluation kits?

Best Regards,

Ray Vincent

  • Hey Ray,

    These additional parameter are located on pages 5,6, and 7 of the register/memory map of the device which I believe are not able to be changed by the console GUI at this time. The only way to be able to change would be to set up and an external interface that would be able to write to the memory of the device to change the AGC registers located on those pages.

    Best,

    Carson

    Low Power Audio Applications

  • Hey Ray,

    Carson is correct that these additional parameters are not included in the GUI. The register locations of the coefficients will be identical to those given in the app note referenced for the TLV320ADCx140 though. You can modify these coefficients with direct I2C writes using the I2C monitor in the GUI as below:

    The only difference is that the address for PCM62xx should be 0x90 instead of 0x98.

    Best,

    Zak