Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Ivie IE-33

This is topic Ivie IE-33 in forum Film Handlers' Forum at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=005478

Posted by Matt Zeiner (Member # 1914) on 10-18-2003, 07:18 PM:

Anyone using this analyzer yet? Seems pretty serious and the potential for upgrades via software is enormous.

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 10-18-2003, 10:21 PM:

I have ordered one but they messed up the order so I won`t have it until next week. However, I have promised [Brad Miller]

to write an exclusive review, so it will be a while until I find the time to do that and I am not allowed to disclose any information before that [beer]

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 10-19-2003, 12:31 PM:

Looks like it has got some possibilities. I've always liked my PC-40 and its given me great service for the most part of about 10 years. It does need to be dismantled and things tightened up inside a couple of times a year though.

I going to wait till the new THX analyzer emerges, if it actually does, and also to hear back on reliability of the Ivie...and its software quirks if any. There are also other high end analyzers to explore as well.

Mark @ CLACO

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 10-19-2003, 01:11 PM:

Goldline now has a palm software anaylzer

Posted by Matt Zeiner (Member # 1914) on 10-19-2003, 03:00 PM:

The Goldline product, from what the website shows is not even comparable to the Ivie product - it includes no hardware and is limited to whatever cheapo generic converters are in the PDA. I certainly wouldn't trust them. At least the Ivie comes with high quality 20 bit ADCs and instrumentation grade preamps for the line inputs. One of the best features of the Ivie is that you can store calibration info for several different microphones, and I can keep my good 'ol IE-2p. I had a Goldline RTA and hated it. It just felt like a cheap piece of crap to me.

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 10-19-2003, 03:23 PM:

quote" I had a Goldline RTA and hated it. It just felt like a cheap piece of crap to me."
We have several of the Goldline DSP30's and have had no complaints other than the need toreset the AD register on a chgans sometimes
They are extremely accurate DSP filters and have reasonable balasitics

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 10-19-2003, 04:06 PM:

Gord,
Filters more accurate than what ISO specifies are fine but not necessary for our type of work. However, IVIE products and many others have always typically exceeded the ISO specs for the band pass filters. Thats not a miracle by any means, even the old late 60's Altec/HP Acousta Voicette Analyzer exceeded them.

Aside from IVIE analyzers being really well made, the feature that sets IVIE analyzers apart from others is the really fine implementation of the microphones they sell. They cost as much as many of the entire analyzers that others on this forum are using [Eek!]

!!

Unfortunately IVIE has as of yet to design and market a mic multiplexer. According to an engineer that I met there, it was something they were intending to do years ago till the advent of the R-2. I'm also afraid that their system would have been out of reach price wise of just about everyone here. Lets see....4 mics at 1200.00 each plus a multiplexer plus an analyzer......$$$$$$$$$$$$ !!!!!!
Mark @ CLACO

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 10-19-2003, 05:14 PM:

And it comes from Utah!

Posted by Matt Zeiner (Member # 1914) on 10-19-2003, 06:06 PM:

quote:
feature that sets IVIE analyzers apart from others is the really fine implementation of the microphones they sell

Yep. That's exactly it. The IE-2 is a phenominal preamp, regardless of what capsule you use with it. You get what you pay for. Glad you had good luck with Goldline products, Gordon. Our Goldlines sit in our cabinet unused. You want 'em?
Yeah, Mark I get your point about the lack of multiplexer, but with the new Ivie's calibration features (read about 'em), you should be able to use anyone's mux unit with them. I don't trust any multiplexer or preamp to the extent that I trust my IE-2 w/B&K, and hence I never use just the mux for an alignment. Call me superstitious.

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 10-19-2003, 07:53 PM:

Well I have 4 of the dsp30's and the R2 so I don't thinkl I need any more RTA's right now
The dsp30 with a uslmux has usally mathed the R2 within 2 db every time I have used the two of them in the same room
On the MUX issue if you don't use a MUX then you are not doing your customer a service. You canot Eq a room without one end of argument The audience sits in the far field of the speaker array not in the near field and we don't want a "sweet spot" in one location

Posted by Christopher Seo (Member # 7) on 10-20-2003, 02:46 AM:

Matt,

Out of curiosity... what Brüel & Kjær microphone capsule do you use, and why in place of the Ivie? Have you had the RTA recalibrated to the different mic?

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 10-20-2003, 08:24 AM:

Chris,
I may be wrong, but so far as I know IVIE is using B&K capsules on their mics. At 1200.00 for an IVIE mic thats a pretty good clue. I can certainly call them and find out today. They are not a large enough company to actually be making their own capsules, in fact they are but a shadow of what they once were according to other techs around this area.

Michael,
I go near the IVIE plant at least two or three times a week, perhaps I can stop there and test Michaels new unit before it hits the road [Big Grin]

Matt,
I can't complain about the preamps in the R-2. They're quiet, stable, and very reliabe. Certainly far better than the Countryman mics being used.

Mark @ CLACO

Posted by Demetris Thoupis (Member # 833) on 10-20-2003, 09:01 AM:

From the looks of it, it can work as an analyzer fine for cinema equalisation but it says that it has SINGLE osciloscope trace (although from the pics there are two channel inputs). If anyone has any more information please share them!!
Demetris.

Posted by Matt Zeiner (Member # 1914) on 10-20-2003, 11:16 AM:

Actually Ivie is not supplying B&K as standard equipment - the capsules they are currently using are made in america - can't remember the name of the company... The IE-2 I inherited has a B&K 4942 capsule in it. I don't doubt the quality of the preamps in the R-2, Mark. I wish I could get my hands on one myself, but alas... I am forced to rely on the USL mux for most of my work in the field. I always double-check everything against the IE-2 and usually find no more than 2db of discrepency between the single mic properly placed and the output of my mux. The point I wanted to make was that the new Ivie supplies high-grade conversion and line-level ins whereas the Goldline does not. Ivie says they will upgrade the software to allow a dual trace oscilloscope function, but I don't think that it will compare to a hardware-based unit in any respect. Just think DFP-3000 setup software scope display....forget it!

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 10-20-2003, 02:54 PM:

Mark - Too late, it`s already on the road. UPS says it is in Las Vegas today, I hope it doesn`t get stuck there gambling. But thanks for the offer!

Matt - since Gordon doesn`t need it, I will take one of the Goldlines. I think the IE-33 will cover most or all of my needs, but having another analyzer as backup is never wrong. I will mail your our address. Thanks a lot in advance.

Posted by John Westlund (Member # 913) on 10-20-2003, 03:16 PM:

I would be interested in a Goldline if anyone knows where I could get a good deal on one.

Posted by Matt Zeiner (Member # 1914) on 10-20-2003, 03:42 PM:

I just pulled the Goldline out of our closet - doesn't seem to be working as of yet - I'll open it up and see what I can figure out. It was functional last time I checked... Ill keep you guys posted. I may have a spare audio control kickin' around, too.

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 10-20-2003, 04:27 PM:

Hey Matt, you spoke of several (that means at least 2) before and you said you will give them away since they are sooo awful. Now you gotta stay true to your word!

Posted by Matt Zeiner (Member # 1914) on 10-20-2003, 05:41 PM:

hmmm...I don't recall saying that I would GIVE them away. Technically speaking, all I did was ask Gordon if he wanted them. I did not say that he could necessarily have them...Last I heard, Christmas is in December. [Big Grin]

As for the multiples, I was mistaken. I have been away from the company I work for for three years while I was on tour. The owner must have sold the other Goldline, cause I only found one. it doesn't work. sorry.

....I'll post if I get it working. (it has been sitting idle for a LONG time)

Posted by John Westlund (Member # 913) on 10-20-2003, 05:56 PM:

If you get it working let Michael "take" it if he wants it. He beat me to it fair and square [Smile]

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 10-20-2003, 07:09 PM:

check for corrosion on the battery case area and on the alkaline/nicad selector switch
Now the audio control is not a favorite unit to me

Posted by Matt Zeiner (Member # 1914) on 10-20-2003, 07:26 PM:

Thanks for the tip, Gordon. Audio control - built like a tank...by retards. [Wink]

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 10-21-2003, 12:42 AM:

Christmas isn`t too far away. I can wait until then. Great, thanks a lot in advance!

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 10-22-2003, 09:57 PM:

I have it!!
Now with this and the Goldline Matt promised me for Christmas as backup, I am prepared for all emergencies.

[ 10-22-2003, 11:10 PM: Message edited by: Michael Schaffer ]

Posted by Matt Zeiner (Member # 1914) on 10-23-2003, 08:01 AM:

Sure looks sweet, bro. Wish I could say I wasn't jealous... [Wink]

I see you got the IE-33M...Did you find out how much more the type 1 mic is?

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 10-23-2003, 08:51 AM:

You sure have a high background level in your home.....noisy air conditioning?
Mark @ CLACO

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 10-23-2003, 08:59 AM:

quote:
You sure have a high background level in your home.....noisy air conditioning?

Naw --- probably Michael's stomach rumbling before dinner. [Big Grin]

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 10-23-2003, 04:08 PM:

No, that is me humming behind the kitchen counter so that you could see what it looks like in action.

Posted by Matt Zeiner (Member # 1914) on 10-23-2003, 06:57 PM:

Ordered mine today. I guess if I like it, I'll be selling the IE-30 without the IE-2p, cause the type I microphone option was about $1100 more. I'm still a bit nervous about it - I run Protools in the studio, and it seems like I spend almost as much time tweaking my machines as I do mixing. Don't have that kind of time in the field in between screenings...I'm building a new control room this month - the litmus test for me for this unit will be how much I like the sound of that room when I am through with the acoustic treatments. If it lies, I won't be happy...but I'm dying to get my hands on this unit. RT-60 out in January. Dual trace scope (5hz refresh display, +/- 22kbandwidth) is now implemented, and ships with Pocket PC 2003 OS - according to Ivie this afternoon.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 10-23-2003, 07:45 PM:

I see something that really, really turns me off that I didn't notice before about the whole thing.... The fact that its built around a Compaq unit. Personally I have higher regards for the Epson PC40 that the IE-40 is built around that I ever could for any Compaq device. Sorry guys but my Compaq experience has never ever been a positive experience. I doubt that I would ever consider one.
Mark @ CLACO

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 10-23-2003, 08:27 PM:

That is really childish, Mark. The Compaq is simply the platform on which the analyzer program runs and on which it is displayed. It has nothing to do with the audio components as such - these are in the jacket.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 10-23-2003, 08:46 PM:

Michael,
Its not childish in the least, nor am I criticizing IVIE's software execution that runs on the Compaq. I'm sure it'll run fine as long as the Compaq runs. I can speak from multiple poor experiences with them. I have owned three other Compaqs...my first computer was a Compaq 486/66 and was the most un-upgradable comuter I've owned so far.....Mr Kraus and I had lots-O-Fun keeping this POJ running! A Compaq Laptop which would not work with any external devices I use that need to run off my serial port..... and a Compaq pocket computer which is so power hungry that a recharge only lasts a half hour....normal according to Compaq. So yes, I speak with experience and continue to steer totally clear of them. There are at least several other brands of hand held computers that would have made a much better platform to build on. In fact Palm comes immediately to mind.... To start with there are far more convenience type accessories available for them, as well as other software that probably would run on it had IVIE built around one. Tne Palm that I use daily has given me three years of faultless service so far. Amazing, considering that its fallen out of my belt holder at least a couple of dozen times.
I will admit there is a very, very remote possibility that the Compaq handheld which IVIE decided on may be the best in the world, but its very remote indeed.
Mark

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 10-23-2003, 08:55 PM:

It does not have to be the best in the world. All it has to do is run with enough calc power for this application.
As a Pocket PC, it seems OK to me too, but I don`t have a lot of experience with these. I will use the calender, email, address book etc functions though now that I have it.
Maybe they will make adapters for other handheld PCs as well if this proves to be a success? Do other types also have this jacket concept to upgrade them?

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 10-23-2003, 09:17 PM:

The only pocket PC is the HP 200LX runs reel DOS and talks to an R2 flawlessly
And for everything else it has Sidekick which was and is an excellent day planner

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 10-23-2003, 09:17 PM:

Michael,
I'm sorry if I came across as if I were belittling you for buying the IVIE. That is not the case here though. You certainly would have no knowledge of my experiences with Compaq...Mr Kraus is about the only one here that would know. I'm sure that IVIE's software is great though as is all the software they've written. I doubt they will make it available on another platform though unless the Compaq becomes history to quickly. In the past IVIE has tended to buy enough of something to go for 20 or so years. Even the PC-40 is still available...but probably not for much longer. That computer has got to be 20 years old!
Mark @ CLACO

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 10-23-2003, 09:22 PM:

I didn`t feel belittled at all. Personally, I would never buy a Compaq PC either. I like to build up my own system rather than buying Compaq, Dell etc.
I just think it is completely irrelevant what pocket PC the analyzer uses. What counts is if as an analyzer it is as exact as a traditional unit. I will be able to test it against an Ivie IE-33A owned by a friend in a couple of days.

Posted by Matt Zeiner (Member # 1914) on 10-24-2003, 07:47 AM:

I know what you are saying, Mark. What is interesting, though, is that there is some connection between HP and the ipaq...I think that HP has bought/is buying the ipaq line, or that HP made them to begin with. There are a number of similar "Ipaq" devices that have the HP label on them. They all use the same chipsets and unlike the palm, are capable of running linux. If a dos shell hasn't been written yet for these 400mhz units, it will be. the software availability for these units far surpasses the catalog available for the Palm OS, and given the fact that Acrobat, Word, Excel,Acess, Powerpoint, Outlook ,LAN, WLAN, are directly supported in Pocket PC, I can't see the palm in any other light but as a toy, tho my VIIx has given me four years of solid service and still works fine. The new battery in the ipaq is a Lithium-ion-type with a current capacity of 1400MAH. Given the front - lit screen and more efficient chipset and X-scale processor, should last a long time between charges...I dunno - it REALLY LOOKS SOLID...I'll run the crap out of it when I get it. Theoretically, it should be more than fast enough to run DRAS...gotta find out who is working on that DOS shell...

Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 10-24-2003, 07:53 AM:

Considering that HP and Compaq merged a ways back now, I'd say that there is a bit of a connection.

Posted by Matt Zeiner (Member # 1914) on 10-24-2003, 08:10 AM:

There it is.

Note: The SDK has been out for PocketPC2003 for quite a while so there is also quite a bit of exceptional shareware and freeware available for it. Oh yeah - the unit is also capable of using 1GB memory modules, CD ROMS and Hard drives for storage. So much for that Ipod I wanted to buy. Here it is integrated into my RTA!! Try that with your Clie.

[ 10-24-2003, 09:56 AM: Message edited by: Matt Zeiner ]

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 10-24-2003, 05:44 PM:

Which is a good website to look for shareware/freeware for the ipaq?

Posted by Matt Zeiner (Member # 1914) on 10-24-2003, 07:06 PM:

Check these out........

http://www.mypilotstore.com/mypilotstore/Handheld/default.asp

http://www.ppc4all.com

http://store.yahoo.com/pocketpcfilms/ourhotnewfil.html
.....they even got PORN for your pocket PC!

http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/readerforppc.html

http://www.pdabuyersguide.com/compaq3900.htm

http://www.freewareppc.com/

Some real cool stuff. I found a "rebirth"-type clone somewhere, too...if you are into samplers and such.

Posted by Matt Zeiner (Member # 1914) on 10-30-2003, 07:38 PM:

OK. Got my IE-33 in the mail today. I must say I am really dissapointed with it. I like the Ipaq itself alot, but I must say that the Ivie software leaves much to be desired. Michael - have you been able to get yours to run a 1/3rd octave display with any less than 170ms latency? Mine appears incapable of measuring transients or impluses because of the latency coupled with the polling frequency of the software. Seems to me a 400MHZ processor should be able to run in REAL TIME with 2 channels of 44.1/20bits. A professional device should have no more than 10 ms of latency, and the readout should reflect the refresh rate of the screen. These issues makes the thing useful only for B-chains with a single mic. Depending on what frequency you set your mux at, it is possible that the RTA will miss too many samples to make the analysis precise. Forget A-chains or head alignments. I sincerely hope that I am doing something wrong with mine. I'm gonna try overclocking my Ipaq - Any one out there that has used one have any thoughts?

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 10-30-2003, 08:01 PM:

I am not allowed to disclose any details since I promised Brad to write a review, but I can tell you that I and a friend tested it against the classic IE-30A with a USL multiplexer last night and we found it left nothing at all to be desired.
It takes a little practice to use it properly though.
You have to take your time to explore all the options.
Given that it has all the extra functions, it is still my first choice.
Once you have sent me the Goldline, we will also run a test against it. Please remember that a lot of packages will be on the road around Christmas, so you need to send it a little earlier.

Posted by Matt Zeiner (Member # 1914) on 10-30-2003, 08:25 PM:

yeah, but, did you try an A-chain with it? Maybe it works OK on averaged measurements. B-chain. Fine. Fact is, the 'scope display only exhibits 30 ms of latency. The polarity tester exhibits 2 ms of latency. The RTA? 160-170ms of latency. I dunno. thats a lot of delay. The real issue here is that the software is either buggy, or the Ipaq is underpowered. One sample every 165 ms or so (the polling frequency of the A/D seems to coincide with the latency figure) is not enough data. Still hoping mine is malfunctioning...

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 10-31-2003, 12:11 AM:

If you don`t want it, put it in the box with the Goldline. A friend of mine here will gladly take it.

Posted by Matt Zeiner (Member # 1914) on 10-31-2003, 07:54 AM:

Thats enough from the peanut gallery. I managed to reduce the latency/polling interval to 130 ms+/- by overclocking the CPU to 472. 500mhz was too much for it, and Latency/polling interval increased to 150ms. Still not enough data. Didn't any of this occur to you as being problematic?

Posted by Matt Zeiner (Member # 1914) on 10-31-2003, 11:39 AM:

In case anyone is interested, I spoke with Ivie today about this. They openly admit that the polling frequency is the main drawback to the unit. They have been experimenting with different FFT algorithms that are WAY faster but have somewhat poorer s/n. They don't seem to work on all pocket PC Bios versions, though, and until they can iron that out, they will not implement it. They plan to make this a priority after the release of the RT-60 module, and promised their commitment to the product. I will gamble on them and see what happens. I managed to further increase the polling frequency by overclocking to 500mhz with a different CPU scaler. It is usable for a-chains, but battery consumption is a bit more of an issue now...

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 11-01-2003, 12:09 PM:

With the USL mux it is best to set the scan rate as fast as it can go

Posted by Matt Zeiner (Member # 1914) on 11-01-2003, 12:37 PM:

10hz is about as fast as mine will go. I would want to pick up at least 1 sample per mic pulsed, so the RTA would have to poll at approximately twice the scan rate of the mux to guarantee that each pulse is averaged in. That would require a polling interval of 50 ms. Can't even get close to that. I think you would be better off using a scan rate that more closely matches with the RTA's polling interval of 130 ms. - 2.5 HZ or so...not optimal at all. That's my point.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 11-01-2003, 04:23 PM:

Yet again I think this is a prime example of a piece of digital equipment that will have evolve through many software generations before its a really top notch piece of gear. IVIE should also come out with their own mic multiplexer for this unit and forget the USL unit. I'd love to see a mux with better mics than the Countryman mics used with the USL and R-2. Although there are a few other analyzers the same size as the IE-33 that I'd consider buying today, they cost upwards of 20K. So I'll most likely stick with my PC-40 and R-2 for several years to come.

Mark @ CLACO

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 11-01-2003, 06:14 PM:

I can see the point from the point of view of scanning rate in relation to the sample rate of the analyzer. But what speaks against scanning at a lower rate? You would average over 30 or so seconds anyway.
I don't quite understand why you are so surprised. A certain degree of latency is to be expect from a device such as this anyway. I was "warned" about this before, BTW.
How do did you measure the polling speed of the analyzer?
Mark - you will absolutely love this: There seems to be a problem with the battery of my Compaq pocket PC. Sometimes after I charged it for a couple of hours, it doesn't come on at all, I have to plug it back into the power outlet to switch it on. Of course, I will contact Ivie about this and see if they will exchange the Compaq.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 11-01-2003, 07:33 PM:

Sorry you're having trouble with the charger part. As I said I am skeptical about anything this new thats digitally based. Past experience as both a technician in this industry and past lives in the broadcast industry have bestowed this cautious optimism upon me.

I have no doubt though that eventually it will be a really good product as nothing IVIE sells is bad. My PC-40 and experience with many other IVIE products has been very positive.

Mark

Posted by Matt Zeiner (Member # 1914) on 11-02-2003, 12:19 AM:

quote:
How do did you measure the polling speed of the analyzer?

Go to file>preferences>diagnostics. under the SPL readout window, a number will appear. That is the polling rate in ms. I bet you will get 165-170. X-scale ctrl (available for $5 online) will allow you to overclock your ppc 20 to 472MHZ and improve your results by 30-50 ms. There is a $20 overclock utility that will get you to 500mhz, but its real tricky and unless you are comfortable with running the risk of burning up your processor (I'mm willing to take the chance...) I wouldn't recommend it. Of course latency is going to be an issue with any digital audio device. I have a $30 soundcard that is capable of running at 200 samples (at 44.1khz) of latency,tho, and runs perfectly well on my pentium 166 with Smart Pro. I'm not worried about the latency as much as I am worried about the excessive polling interval. I would have thought that they would be using an external DSP to perform the FFT (since the lit. does espouse the presence of both A/D AND DSP (which it doesn't have). I don't think that the hardware architecture of the PPC can handle the multitasking required to allow true real time analysis without sacrificing S/N. I think that Ivie should implement a "fast mode" whereby the GUI gets stripped to just monochrome, no extra buttons, and utilizes a faster FFT algorithm with a lower S/N ratio - mainly for equalizing low-frequency components and A-chains. When overclocked, the unit seems to perform quite well - 100+/- ms polling interval = 10 hz. (twice the speed that Ivie claims it will do...) Would be nice if Ivie did make a mux that could be synced with the RTA so that you would be guaranteed multiple samples per pulse of the mux... They are paying close attention to what we, the end-user of this gadget, have to say, so the more people that are willing to take the gamble and try it out and critique, the faster this unit will become a replacement for the IE-30. As of now, it is handy and is good enough for most things, but is NOT a replacement. The first software re-write will be available in the next few weeks.

Posted by Matt Zeiner (Member # 1914) on 11-06-2003, 12:21 PM:

Ivie just released the new software update - faster FFT (30-60ms polling interval overclocked), plus a whole bunch of bugs removed. I get 50 ms with a landscaped display (horizontal)! Works like a dream now. BIG improvement. Michael - update available on the Ivie website. Goes to show what flapping at the manufacturer can get done....

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 11-06-2003, 05:28 PM:

I just installed the update. It gives me *80ms, not overclocked. I am a bit hesitant to use X-scale ctrl. I read on the net that it could result in memory loss or other problems. What does landscaped display mean? You don`t need to flap at Ivie - they are very friendly and cooperative. I also talked to them about improvement and small bugs. For instance, when you edit your X-curve, it only edits the 4 lowest bands in pairs of 2 and it doesn`t remember the offset for them after you switch it off. That`s not a big problem since you can offset the levels right then when you need the curve, but they also explained why this happens and promised to improve it.

Posted by Matt Zeiner (Member # 1914) on 11-06-2003, 06:49 PM:

I have not had any problems running any app with X-scale. Extremely solid and the processor is more than robust enough to handle it without issue. I have performed all sorts of memory functions (trying out tons of apps, etc, tons of MP-3's on memory card, etc), and not had any sort of issue. Plus, It is handy to have because you can not only overclock the processor, you can underclock it too - you don't need to run the processor at 472mhz for everything. Most apps run very well at 200mhz - save A LOT of battery power that way. Besides, just BACK the damned thing up and don't worry about it. Very worthwhile increase in speed (you should get about half what you are getting now in terms of polling rate). I am running Nyditot Virtual Display to allow me to orient the Ivie screen horizontally - more real estate between the bands...easier on the eyes. Works for all apps - I have a 256 mb card now that is devoted entirely to .pdfs - schematics, manuals (thanks Film-tech..) they look great horizontally - you can almost read across a whole page. Seems pretty stable. And yes, you really should flap at the manufacturer - those guys aren't out in the field using the stuff - they write code and Design DSPs......and in general (not Ivie per se - they were, as you said, very nice and eager to get feedback), engineers tend to be pretty proud of their babies.....

Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 11-06-2003, 06:57 PM:

Repeatedly overclocking and underclocking (or even just repeatedly adjusting the clock speed and/or voltage, regardless of it being under or over the rated settings) is one of the worst things you could do to a processor.

While solely adjusting clock speed won't affect much, the often related voltage adjustment will weaken the processors transistors and lower their critical voltage.

If you want to overclock a processor that's fine, but choose your settings and leave it alone.

Posted by Phil Hill (Member # 371) on 11-06-2003, 07:11 PM:

I want to overclock Daryl...

>>> Phil

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 11-06-2003, 07:23 PM:

The display tool sounds interesting but wouldn`t you have to pay a penalty in processing speed for using it?
If the mux scans at 10Hz, that`s 300 samples over a 30 second averaged reading. At 80ms, the analyzer polls 375 times. Of course, it might miss the odd sample from one of the microphones, but over a 30 second period that should not fall to much into weight.

Posted by Matt Zeiner (Member # 1914) on 11-06-2003, 07:38 PM:

penalty is about 10 ms. Darryl may have a point - I don't know for sure how repeatedly changing the clock speeds will affect the processor long term. Do you know for a fact that the core voltage is adjusted to overclock in this case?

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 11-06-2003, 07:45 PM:

Of course I had to try it. It is an interesting option, but not really necessary. I don`t think I will pay the $30 for registration once the trial is over.
Where is the program stored on the ipaq? I couldn`t find the program files (I mean for Virtual Display).

Posted by Matt Zeiner (Member # 1914) on 11-06-2003, 07:49 PM:

From Tom's Hardware.com:

"the XScale is designed to operate out of the box at various clock speeds in order to optimize power consumption. "

All ctrl does is hold the throttle open.

Posted by Matt Zeiner (Member # 1914) on 11-07-2003, 06:16 AM:

In the program files directory, you should have a folder called Vdisplay - open that and there are several apps you can fool with - most changes require a soft reset and you have to fiddle with the settings till you find the ones that work best with various apps. You can save your settings for quick recall.

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 11-07-2003, 02:40 PM:

If I go Start>Programs>Virtual Display, then I can see all the subprograms. VD is also available on the opening screen. But I want to know where the actual files are installed and I couldn`t find the VD files anywhere with the file explorer. In Program files, I can only see IE33, Connections and Windows Media Player. In Windows\Programs, there is nothing. The IE33 v.5 is in iPaq File Store. But where is Virtual Display? Is Start>Programs an actual directory or just an overview of programs installed? I can use it, but I just always like to know where the programs are.

Posted by Matt Zeiner (Member # 1914) on 11-07-2003, 03:24 PM:

thats them. there may be some .dll files somewhere else tho

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 11-07-2003, 03:55 PM:

So where in the iPaq file structure is this directory located? Is My Device the root?
Anyway, have you had time to run a test with the USL mux and both versions of IE33? Does it actually give you different readings over 30 seconds?

Posted by Matt Zeiner (Member # 1914) on 11-07-2003, 06:52 PM:

I haven't used it with the mux yet. With my IE-2p both read within 1-3 db in the lower bands (discrepancy increases the lower the frequency being measured of course) and pretty close to even in the HF over 30 secs. The newer software matches VERY closely to the IE-30 measurement, however, in spite of the decreased S/N. I did an A-chain with it today - good, but not great. Still not quite fast enough to keep up with movements of the optic barrel, but fast enough to eventually arrive at a good alignment.

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 11-07-2003, 09:17 PM:

I still haven`t found the time to play with it on an A-chain. Do you use the mic input or the RCA for frequency response? I haven`t gotten a BNC/miniXLR adapter yet, so if I find time over the weekend, I would have to use the RCA inputs. Even though there is no XY yet, did you try the scope for buzz track and L-R alignment?
edit - OK, forget the question, I just tested it and apparently channel 2 isn`t active yet.

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 11-08-2003, 03:02 AM:

In the meantime, I figured out how to speed up the analyzer a little bit without overclocking: Settings>System>Memory>Running Programs brings you to a menu which shows you that Inbox, Tasks and all the other stuff is running in the background. If you deactivate them all, the polling intervals go down to 65ms(!)

Posted by Matt Zeiner (Member # 1914) on 11-08-2003, 06:44 AM:

You should use the line - ins (RCAs). They have a higher impedance and are less likely to load down the processor. I am a bit confused about the scope function - X/Y seems to work, but not 2 discrete ins - Ivie insists that the dual-trace function is active, but I can't get it to work... With no apps running in the background and running at 472mhz, mine will go down to 35-40ms!!

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 11-08-2003, 03:18 PM:

In RTA mode, both inputs can be selected discretely but if ch 1+2 is selected, only input 2 (left) is active. The same goes for the sope function, I can get the X/Y display but not 2 channels at the same time.
Why would the impedance of the input influence the processor?

Posted by Matt Zeiner (Member # 1914) on 11-08-2003, 05:41 PM:

Why wouldn't it?

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 11-08-2003, 05:44 PM:

I don`t understand how it would - wherever the analog signal goes in, it gets converted to digital data and then fed to the pocket pc.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 11-08-2003, 09:43 PM:

Why don't you guys just meet at IVIE on Monday Morning and work with the engineers there on solving the bugs..... [Wink]

. I'll meet ya there at 4PM and well all head to dinner later on.... [beer]

Mark @ CLACO

P.S. Hey Matt, Any relation to the diode brothers of semiconductor fame [Confused]

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 11-08-2003, 10:23 PM:

Sorry, I am already completely booked on Monday!
You are going to be really disappointed by this, Mark: Whatever the problems were I had charging the Compaq unit, they have disappeared. It works fine now, haha! I must have made some mistake there.
The problems we are discussing here are only details which are probably going to be solved soon. It is only several weeks after the introduction of the analyzer, small bugs were to be expected.
But I must say the openness with which the people at Ivie listen to criticism and how they solve those problems quickly is exemplary!

Posted by Matt Zeiner (Member # 1914) on 11-08-2003, 11:21 PM:

quote:
But I must say the openness with which the people at Ivie listen to criticism and how they solve those problems quickly is exemplary!

agreed.

quote:
I'll meet ya there at 4PM and well all head to dinner later on....

You buying, Mark? [Big Grin]

quote:
Hey Matt, Any relation to the diode brothers of semiconductor fame ?

check your spelling, Mark!

Michael- Ohms Law, bro.

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 11-08-2003, 11:34 PM:

quote:
Michael- Ohms Law, bro.

I know Georg Simon Ohm, not personally, but his law. What am I missing here? How would it affect the performance of the iPaq`s CPU which simply processes the data fed to it from the analyzer jacket?
BTW, I have seen many spellings, including zeiner, but I think zehner is correct.

Posted by Matt Zeiner (Member # 1914) on 11-09-2003, 10:58 AM:

it is zener. no other spellings that I have ever seen. It has nothing to do with processing. Until Ivie comes out with a very high impedance probe for it (1 Mohm or better), you should use the line ins to avoid polluting the signal you are measuring.

Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 11-09-2003, 07:28 PM:

I've got a few text books that use the spelling zeiner.
I've also got quite a few diodes that are in packages with the spelling zeiner on them.

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 11-09-2003, 07:47 PM:

Just looked it up. Apparently, they are named after the American physicist C.M. Zener (1905-1993).

Posted by Matt Zeiner (Member # 1914) on 11-09-2003, 11:33 PM:

yep. zener. BTW - my Ivie 1036 probe works nicely with the IE-33 via the adapter cable I made. Im gonna figure out a calibrator setting so that the db scale corresponds to dbv directly. Should be able to easily perform distortion calculations and power output....Darryl - must be the CANADIAN spelling.........(just having fun...)