Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!seismo!rochester!pt!speech1.cs.cmu.edu!phd
From: phd@speech1.cs.cmu.edu (Paul Dietz)
Newsgroups: sci.electronics,rec.music.synth
Subject: Re: DCO's revisited - an inquiry into hardware implementation
Message-ID: <1006@speech1.cs.cmu.edu>
Date: Mon, 13-Jul-87 22:54:43 EDT
Article-I.D.: speech1.1006
Posted: Mon Jul 13 22:54:43 1987
Date-Received: Wed, 15-Jul-87 02:12:38 EDT
References: <235@cogent.UUCP> <999@vaxb.calgary.UUCP> <678@elmgate.UUCP> <6641@santra.UUCP>
Organization: Carnegie-Mellon University, CS/RI
Lines: 15
Keywords: now for the real work...
Summary: National DSP...
Xref: mnetor sci.electronics:960 rec.music.synth:1079

In article <6641@santra.UUCP>, news@santra.UUCP (news) writes:
> In article <1948@oliveb.UUCP> prs@oliven.UUCP (Philip Stephens) writes:
> >I'm just speculating from the data sheet; I hope someone else can give
> >more practical feedback on this or any other DSP chip family (including
> >Motorola, hint hint.  And I've sent for OKI info; anyone else already
> 
> Other names are National (32something), NEC, AT&T etc...

The National part WAS the LM32900. Apparently National suddenly realized
that this was not a very profitable undertaking, and killed its entire
DSP effort. (After many years, and MANY millions...) Watch this space 
for futher announcements of other DSP chips falling by the wayside...

Paul H. Dietz
Carnegie Mellon University