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