high sampling rate

Ariel,

To operate at 25MHz, the PMMCORE value must be set to 3.  If this value is 3, is the supply voltage to the part at least 2.4V?  The ADC requires at least 2.2V for proper operation and a PMMCORE value of 3 requires at least 2.4V to operate properly.

Regards,

Jim

Besides the requirements for running the MSP on 25MHz, there is no need to do so.

For 16KHz audio sampling, you need 32ks/s 12 bit conversion takes 13 clock cycles, so there's plenty of time for the ADC to sample the data when clocked with its internal 5MHz (even 400kHz would be enough for this job).

Also, you have 31µs between two samples, which is, at 16MHz, 496MCLK cycles per sample. This is way enough to do anything you want. Unless you're too stupid to write fairly efficient code (which I won't assume here).

You can go even further and use the DMA controller to transfer groups of samples (e.g. 128 or 256 samples each chunk or even more) from the ADC12MEM reult register to a ram buffer. This will trigger an interrupt every 4ms (for 128 samples) and requires you to switch the DMA over to a second buffer within 31µs, and then continue processing the collected samples in a row. e.g. setting them up for an SD card write, stuffing them into an UART output buffer (well, this could be a bit difficult as it would require 512kBaud minimum transfer rate) or whatever you're sampling the data for.

4ms is an eternity.

I'm sure I could do the job with 4MHz system clock without running into timing problems, Including writing the data as a byte stream to an SD card (no file system)

Thank you mister, for re-planning my project,

Your answer is arrogant and patronizing and better was not writtern at all!

Also, you can obviously see that two weeks have passed since I posted my question, so your answer is not relevant.

Unless you are too stupid to read a date (which I won't assume here)  

ariel said:

Thank you mister, for re-planning my project,

ariel said:

Your answer is arrogant and patronizing and better was not writtern at all!

ariel said:

Also, you can obviously see that two weeks have passed since I posted my question,

Sorry for your inconvenience of having to learn about an aswer that is given not the moment you asked. I fI hadn't been incapacitated for the last two weeks, I had answered you earlier. Still it would have been the same content.

ariel said:

so your answer is not relevant

ariel said:

Unless you are too stupid to read a date (which I won't assume here)

You shouldn't ask if you don't like the answers. And if you'll only accept an answer you want to hear, there's no need to ask too. Or ask a multiple-choice question.

It is very revealing of a person's character when they put so much effort into insulting someone who has just given them excellent advice.  Calling a person stupid, especially a person who by all accounts and purposes is an expert in the subject for which you obviously are clueless about, is a good way of displaying to the world what type of person you are, and what level of competence you possess.

Good response Mr. Gross, and good luck to you Ariel, you have got a lot of learning to do.

One thing has to be made clear here, I have never called anyone stupid! Not anyone that has asked for my help, and especially not anyone who offered me assistance.

These are his words, definitly not mine. ("Unless you're too stupid to write fairly efficient code"), this is the sentence that made me angry.

So if anyones's character was "revealed" here it is his, not mine.

I don't intend to start a long and tidious discussion here, I think I made my point.

I hope next time Mr Gross offers his help, he will do so like the rest of the guys here. With a little sence of patience and respect. Even if the person asking has less knowledge than him.

I will keep my answer short since I can see Mr Gross has a habbit of writing biblical commentaries on what I write :)

Good luck to you too Mr "sparkchaser", and have a good week

Ariel

Point taken.

ariel said:

These are his words, definitly not mine. ("Unless you're too stupid to write fairly efficient code"), this is the sentence that made me angry.

If you quote, please quote correctly and complete:

"Unless you're too stupid to write fairly efficient code (which I won't assume here)."

Which clearly states that I didn't assume nor wanted to express that you are too stupid but rather that this is the only obvious reason to have it not working with the available power, so you should be able to do it. Of course if you want to put these shoes on you, I cannot help you (and this rather shows your estimation of the situation than mine).

Maybe my selection of words wasn't appreciated by you but it was no insult nor was it intended to be one. Sorry if It hit a sensible point in your own estimation of your skills.

ariel said:

I will keep my answer short since I can see Mr Gross has a habbit of writing biblical commentaries on what I write :)