OSSC Wolf Edition - Audio over HDMI

[orange808]

Is there any way you could all team up and bump up the specs a bit?

Native analog RGB output and 240p scan conversion would put this over the top.

[Xyga]

Also VR support and gold-plated casing please.

[orange808]

Also VR support and gold-plated casing please.

Well, yeah...

But... Seriously,

Adding 240p scan conversion and native analog RGB output is feasibile. With those features, most of us would upgrade.

That would also discourage additional competition. Combined with the already announced Wolf features, there wouldn't be enough remaining features to add--short of implementing a full frame buffer.

Someone could add composite and svideo support, but that would wouldn't be enough to convince me to upgrade a third time.

[bobrocks95]

What's 240p scan conversion?

[orange808]

What's 240p scan conversion?

480i and 480p to 240p.

240p downscaling is ridiculously complicated and expensive business right now. There's only capable device available brand new. The other three options all require a trip to eBay.

[BuckoA51]

480i and 480p to 240p.

240p downscaling is ridiculously complicated and expensive business right now. There's only capable device available brand new. The other three options all require a trip to eBay.

that was planned as a separate unit, a replacement for the old Extron Emotias and the like. It's a great idea, definitely something I'd like to see.

[bobrocks95]

480i and 480p to 240p.

240p downscaling is ridiculously complicated and expensive business right now. There's only capable device available brand new. The other three options all require a trip to eBay.

that was planned as a separate unit, a replacement for the old Extron Emotias and the like. It's a great idea, definitely something I'd like to see.

A separate unit makes much more sense to me, but I'm not exactly the target demographic.

orange, is there a scenario where you'd even have the OSSC plugged into the same monitor doing both? Conversion to 240p would be for a 15kHz CRT, while the OSSC would be paired with a digital display or maybe a PC CRT, right? Maybe you've got a setup I haven't thought of, but a separate, hopefully much cheaper product sounds best to me.

[becker]

Whoh. Looks like the thread has been active while I am at work. The Wolf Edition is made from scratch using the open source DIY 1.5 schematic pdf linked earlier. I have not received any privileged files or information.
It's being done in Cadence Capture and Allegro because that's the software I'm familiar with.
The video processing is the same but has audio inputs and connectors are in different places.

[austin532]

So I'm curious as to why you added Composite but not S-video? Just about every major systems that supports composite also supports s-video.

Is not composite. It's just coax audio.

Ahh, that's what I get for not paying attention . Still, why not make it orange if it's coaxial to avoid confusion?

[becker]

2 questions I thought about:

1) What are you doing for IR/remotes? I'm assuming you at least have an IR sensor on the board.

2) Will audio inputs be selectable separate from video inputs? For example, could I use the VGA connector and RCA audio in, or the SCART connector and headphone jack audio in?

1. There is an IR sensor by the LCD. It's a primitive block in the model.
2. That's the plan. The audio processor has 4 inputs and one output. Software controls which channel to output to the HDMI transmitter.

[becker]

So I'm curious as to why you added Composite but not S-video? Just about every major systems that supports composite also supports s-video.

Is not composite. It's just coax audio.

Ahh, that's what I get for not paying attention . Still, why not make it orange if it's coaxial to avoid confusion?

I couldn't find a 6 pack RCA connector with orange. It's an unusual combo of colors.

[leonk]

He was always willing to send the gerbers to anyone who wanted to make their own, but wouldn't send the verilog or kicad files.

I genuinely don't know anything about that, that would be his decision alone. To say it's not open source because not every scrap of design file is available is a bit much I think though, but whatever, I don't want to argue and nit pick semantics.

That's not nitpicking or semantics, that's reality.

I agree with Voultar on this one. "Open Source" in this case is very much misleading; unless you can state which license it's under and stick to the established license rules (GPL v2, GPL v3, BSD, Apache, MIT, Eclipse, etc). More info here: https://opensource.org/licenses

Creating a product in the "spirit" of open source but not following an establish license is just BS. If you really want to open source the product, chose a license, and stick to it. Who knows, if a Chinese copy cat starts distributing your product, you can always engage the Free Software Foundation for legal action (http://www.fsf.org/)

You can start by having an established URL scroll on the LCD at startup + full info at that URL explaining how the product is open source and where to find more info. More copy cats don't bother (or know) how to modify the firmware.

[Unseen]

Then you've not read many open source license agreements :mrgreen: There are plenty of clauses in most open source licenses, some forbid commercial re-use entirely without a prior agreement.

Such a license would not meet the Open Source Definition or the Free Software Definition.

See Retron 5 case for an example, they took an open source emulator and used it in a commercial project. Just because it's open source doesn't mean people can do whatever they damn well please with it.

Correct. If I remember correctly, the issue with the Retron 5 is that they took GPL-licensed code, modified it, distributed it, but refuse to give out the source to their modified version - if they would make that available, they would not be in violation of the license anymore.

Cloanto is another company that took an open-source GPL-licensed emulator (VICE), modified it and distributed it commercially - however, they released the full source code of their modified version. They fulfilled the conditions that the GPL placed on them, so there was no problem and some of their changes were merged back into the original project.

Even Nintendo sells open source software commercially - various open source libraries are used in the firmware of their consoles and the NES Classic Mini even runs Linux. They also fulfilled their end of the bargain, the source code downloads are here.

You can't change a couple of lines in Ubuntu and (legally) resell it as your own OS, for example. That doesn't stop it being open source in the slightest.

Sure you can, but you will probably need to change all occurences of "Ubuntu" to something else to avoid trademark issues. Some licenses may even require this for derived projects to avoid confusing the deriverate with the original.

[Xer Xian]

I'm aware that the integration and mixing of the audio signal is one of the major features of this revision, but would it be possible to retain a separate audio out at least for the scart input? Most of the RGB cables I've got only have a scart connector with no optional stereo out so I found this feature on the original OSSC quite useful.

Edit: If there's no room for more connectors, I would prefer the 3.5 jack to be an outpur rather than an input (again, as it was on the original version). Optional routing of all the audio inputs to this 3.5 out would of course be great for headphones with built-in volume control, but I realize it requires a bit more work.

[db-electronics]

You can start by having an established URL scroll on the LCD at startup + full info at that URL explaining how the product is open source and where to find more info. More copy cats don't bother (or know) how to modify the firmware.

For me, the main reason to know what license this is using is simply to know how to license my own branch should I choose to make one. If the source is deliberately obfuscated then should my branch (hypothetical, I'm not making one) also obfuscate the source, and therefore not be open-source at all?

[RGB0b]

Is there any way you could all team up and bump up the specs a bit?

That's kinda the point of open source.

Native analog RGB output and 240p scan conversion would put this over the top.

Agreed...although I wonder if there's any potential issues with the SCART and HDMI ports acting as both inputs and outputs. Is that even possible?

Whoh. Looks like the thread has been active while I am at work. The Wolf Edition is made from scratch using the open source DIY 1.5 schematic pdf linked earlier. I have not received any privileged files or information.
It's being done in Cadence Capture and Allegro because that's the software I'm familiar with.
The video processing is the same but has audio inputs and connectors are in different places.

Holy shit, really? That's quite a bit of work!

Such a license would not meet the Open Source Definition or the Free Software Definition.

Unseen, thanks for chiming in...if there's anyone that knows a thing or two about releasing an open-source product to the community, it's you!


The bottom line is this: Essentially those of us who are arguing about open source aren't really criticizing anything other then the name. If Markus just called it the "Markus Scan Converter", none of this would even be a discussion...and if anyone suggested he give away the design files for free, I'd personally tell them to fuck off; There's no reason he should just hand over all of his hard work unless he really wants to. The only issue all of us have is calling it open source, but having it be closed source....and then giving a bunch of meaningless examples of how it's kinda open source but not really. That's offensive to people who people who constantly contribute things for free. db Electronics is a good example (sorry to call you out René!), since he does both: The products he sells and supports are closed source. Everything else he releases as open source for anyone to do whatever they'd like with. I'd NEVER ask him to release his design files for any of the closed stuff...but at the same time, if he ever got pissed at someone for selling his open designs, I'd remind him that's the point of open source and to stop bitching


Becker, maybe to avoid any open-source confusion (and to shut people like me up), possibly consider a name change? Maybe call it the "WolfSC"? Then maybe start a new thread about it too...since I completely and totally derailed this one. I'm really sorry about that...this thread should have been to celebrate and track the status of your new product, not debate if it's open source. I genuinely apologize for that.

[db-electronics]

Becker, maybe to avoid any open-source confusion (and to shut people like me up), possibly consider a name change? Maybe call it the "WolfSC"? Then maybe start a new thread about it too...since I completely and totally derailed this one. I'm really sorry about that...this thread should have been to celebrate and track the status of your new product, not debate if it's open source. I genuinely apologize for that.

Well actually, if the original OSSC is in fact open-source then Becker needs to follow the terms of that license. He can't simply close the source off of his branch. This is why it's so important to know what the OSSC license is for the hardware parts else other branches can pop-up which will be under no obligation to re-contribute their modifications.

[kel]

Is there any way you could all team up and bump up the specs a bit?

That's kinda the point of open source.

Native analog RGB output and 240p scan conversion would put this over the top.

Agreed...although I wonder if there's any potential issues with the SCART and HDMI ports acting as both inputs and outputs. Is that even possible?

Whoh. Looks like the thread has been active while I am at work. The Wolf Edition is made from scratch using the open source DIY 1.5 schematic pdf linked earlier. I have not received any privileged files or information.
It's being done in Cadence Capture and Allegro because that's the software I'm familiar with.
The video processing is the same but has audio inputs and connectors are in different places.

Holy shit, really? That's quite a bit of work!

Such a license would not meet the Open Source Definition or the Free Software Definition.

Unseen, thanks for chiming in...if there's anyone that knows a thing or two about releasing an open-source product to the community, it's you!


The bottom line is this: Essentially those of us who are arguing about open source aren't really criticizing anything other then the name. If Markus just called it the "Markus Scan Converter", none of this would even be a discussion...and if anyone suggested he give away the design files for free, I'd personally tell them to fuck off; There's no reason he should just hand over all of his hard work unless he really wants to. The only issue all of us have is calling it open source, but having it be closed source....and then giving a bunch of meaningless examples of how it's kinda open source but not really. That's offensive to people who people who constantly contribute things for free. db Electronics is a good example (sorry to call you out René!), since he does both: The products he sells and supports are closed source. Everything else he releases as open source for anyone to do whatever they'd like with. I'd NEVER ask him to release his design files for any of the closed stuff...but at the same time, if he ever got pissed at someone for selling his open designs, I'd remind him that's the point of open source and to stop bitching


Becker, maybe to avoid any open-source confusion (and to shut people like me up), possibly consider a name change? Maybe call it the "WolfSC"? Then maybe start a new thread about it too...since I completely and totally derailed this one. I'm really sorry about that...this thread should have been to celebrate and track the status of your new product, not debate if it's open source. I genuinely apologize for that.

For god's sake just be happy with what you've got. Why do you feel the need to rock the boat over a few kicad files! I mean I can understand you asking Markus nicely for them and if he refuses then respecting if not accepting his decision but there's nothing gained in complaining about it, it is what it is. If you force him to release them under some open source rules that you haven't even substantiated yet then you might get the design files that you want but risk him not releasing anything in the future. The OSSC has been a great success which surpassed anyone's expectations. Don't let it turn sour at this point.

[orange808]

Is there any way you could all team up and bump up the specs a bit?

That's kinda the point of open source.

Native analog RGB output and 240p scan conversion would put this over the top.

Agreed...although I wonder if there's any potential issues with the SCART and HDMI ports acting as both inputs and outputs. Is that even possible?

Whoh. Looks like the thread has been active while I am at work. The Wolf Edition is made from scratch using the open source DIY 1.5 schematic pdf linked earlier. I have not received any privileged files or information.
It's being done in Cadence Capture and Allegro because that's the software I'm familiar with.
The video processing is the same but has audio inputs and connectors are in different places.

Holy shit, really? That's quite a bit of work!

Such a license would not meet the Open Source Definition or the Free Software Definition.

Unseen, thanks for chiming in...if there's anyone that knows a thing or two about releasing an open-source product to the community, it's you!


The bottom line is this: Essentially those of us who are arguing about open source aren't really criticizing anything other then the name. If Markus just called it the "Markus Scan Converter", none of this would even be a discussion...and if anyone suggested he give away the design files for free, I'd personally tell them to fuck off; There's no reason he should just hand over all of his hard work unless he really wants to. The only issue all of us have is calling it open source, but having it be closed source....and then giving a bunch of meaningless examples of how it's kinda open source but not really. That's offensive to people who people who constantly contribute things for free. db Electronics is a good example (sorry to call you out René!), since he does both: The products he sells and supports are closed source. Everything else he releases as open source for anyone to do whatever they'd like with. I'd NEVER ask him to release his design files for any of the closed stuff...but at the same time, if he ever got pissed at someone for selling his open designs, I'd remind him that's the point of open source and to stop bitching


Becker, maybe to avoid any open-source confusion (and to shut people like me up), possibly consider a name change? Maybe call it the "WolfSC"? Then maybe start a new thread about it too...since I completely and totally derailed this one. I'm really sorry about that...this thread should have been to celebrate and track the status of your new product, not debate if it's open source. I genuinely apologize for that.

For god's sake just be happy with what you've got. Why do you feel the need to rock the boat over a few kicad files! I mean I can understand you asking Markus nicely for them and if he refuses then respecting if not accepting his decision but there's nothing gained in complaining about it, it is what it is. If you force him to release them under some open source rules that you haven't even substantiated yet then you might get the design files that you want but risk him not releasing anything in the future. The OSSC has been a great success which surpassed anyone's expectations. Don't let it turn sour at this point.

Linux has been a great success, too. But, that doesn't mean proprietary blobs are ok.

These debates are natural and productive for open source projects.

[RGB0b]

Why do you feel the need to rock the boat over a few kicad files!

This:

These debates are natural and productive for open source projects.

I mean I can understand you asking Markus nicely for them and if he refuses then respecting if not accepting his decision but there's nothing gained in complaining about it, it is what it is.

I never asked for the files. This debate was never about me, it was about open source.

If you force him to release them under some open source rules that you haven't even substantiated yet then you might get the design files that you want but risk him not releasing anything in the future. The OSSC has been a great success which surpassed anyone's expectations. Don't let it turn sour at this point.

I don't want to "force" him to do anything, other then discuss the open nature of the project. Also, have you completely missed the point that it's not us that sets the rules of the project, it's the creator.

Don't let it turn sour at this point.

You sir, are the one changing this from a discussion to "sour". I'm happy to admit when I'm wrong, but I'm not going to back down to people who post things like this and clearly have no idea what the argument is even about.

[kel]

Well you tell me what the argument is about then, cause it seems to be your argument. My only point is that none of this is necessary. Markus doesn't owe us anything, open source or not IMHO.

[RGB0b]

Well you tell me what the argument is about then, cause it seems to be your argument. My only point is that none of this is necessary. Markus doesn't owe us anything, open source or not IMHO.

Let me break it down for you:

The good:
- Markus has created a great product. He doesn't owe anyone anything. We're all huge fans of his work.
- Becker looks like he created an awesome extension of that product. I'm happy it's out there.
- Matt has done an excellent job getting all of this together and took a giant risk by investing into these. It's many of our opinions that his current distribution model could be more efficient for everyone, including him. Matt seems to agree. I should not have brought that up here, but I felt it was important enough to address. I've praised his website and store for years (and continue to do so) and I expect whatever he chooses to do will be what's best overall.

The debate (the only debate):
The product is called the "open source" scan converter, but is not actually open source: It's a scan converter with open source firmware. It kicks ass and I love it, but the name is confusing, as is Markus' stance on it. It would be nice if Markus posted here and said:

- It's closed-source, it's my design, I'll call it whatever I want and sell it any way I want. Maybe I'll share some files, but it's a closed source project and completely up to me.

or

- It's open source. Here's the licence it's under. Here's the github for everything.

or

- It's closed source now. I'll open source it when I'm done with it. There's no timeframe for that.


Any of those answers is 100% okay by everyone posting here (who knows what they're talking about). Even the huge fans of open source completely respect closed-source projects and totally support people wanting to make a living off selling their products (I really do hope Markus made a good amount of money from this, as he deserves it). The people here are just asking for clarity on what this project actually is: Open or closed.

Is that clear enough?

[marqs]

Greetings folks

I have been quietly working on my own version of the OSSC (Open Source Scanline Converter). I have been inspired by what Marqs has accomplished. He continues to improve and upgrade the software. Marqs' project has come a long way. However, the hardware has remain unchanged for quiet some time. I wanted to contribute to furthering the project in some way. This is based off Marqs work. My day-job is a PCB designer. I do board layout and schematics every day. I have long wanted to make an interesting project board outside of work.

Here is a list of changes. The OSSC Wolf Edition is based off Marqs' OSSC DIY 1.5.
-Added multiple analog audio inputs. These get digitized and output through HDMI. Audio inputs come from SCART, RCA stereo, RCA jack for S/P-DIF, or headphone jack.
-Added a buffer to the VGA input (THS7327). The buffer has a LPF (low pass filter), adjustable schmitt triggers, and ESD (static shock) protection for the VGA port.
-Added dedicated ESD protection to the HDMI connector.
-The HDMI connector faces towards the back instead of the side. This makes the footprint space smaller since HDMI cable no longer has to loop around.
-SCART is the only connector on the side. The SCART cable elbow exits towards the back.
-Board size is 125x75mm (about 5x3 inches).

I have one coworker interested in making a housing. The type of housing depends on interest level and quantities made. Laser cut acrylic will be the low end route (my starting budget is very small and self funded). Machined aluminum will be high end. I also considered extruded aluminum if the full size SCART gets changed to a mini-DIN like the XRGB-mini. Extruded aluminum would only work if all connectors are front and back, no side ones.

OSSC-W is not 100% finalized. Schematic and layout are done. Firmware additions and a housing have not been started. I hope to order parts and pcbs within the next month. This will get the ball rolling so software guys have something to play with. Schematic and firmware will be open source. The firmware will be a branch of in git of the original OSSC.

I hope to get feedback and check interest level.

Nice work! VGA and HDMI connectors are quite close to each other, though - have you verified that cables fit there together?

Matt, I'm not going to let this go, so you might as well just address the "open source" comments. In my opinion, I think it would be completely okay if you and Markus both posted here and said: "It's closed source. We're changing the name to 'MSC' for Markus Scan Converter and people are welcome to the code for the firmware, but that's it". It was you guys' time and money, so you should do whatever you'd like with it...

...but calling it the open source scan converter and then letting one person work on it but not another is NOT open source. I'm genuinely excited about the Wolf edition and I will definitely buy one...but if you're not going to allow other people to open branches and sell their own, it's NOT OPEN SOURCE. Period.

Worried about support? Require an order number before responding to emails. If they can't provide it, send them to the shmups thread and let the open source community support the open source hardware. Worried about Chinese clones? You might lose a bit of sales from that, but most people would rather buy locally and support members of the community. Plus if there's major issues with the clones, you get to post a big ol' "I told you so".

I'm sorry to talk about this here, but I've spent the past year defending you and Markus' decision to not open up the hardware...and now it's open, but only to one person. What gives?

I've never heard of an open source license that allows you to discriminate against who gets to play, and who doesn't.

What license is the OSSC under, specifically? There's a very simple answer to that question.

Firmware: GPL-3
Hardware: no license, everyone can do whatever they want with the schematics which have been publicly available for almost an year now.

About me discouraging others from doing their own variants, I think there is some misunderstanding. Certain people have shown interest in designing their own version, and I've encouraged them to make something that stands out (like Wolf edition here) from the original, given some advice and demanded nothing in return. I understand that some people are upset about me not releasing Kicad sources, but even if they were available it could be still argued that the system is not 100% open-source. The ICs on the board are propiertary, Altera's FPGA bitstream format is a secret, full CAD drawings for connectors are not available etc.

I never guessed that this would generate so much controversy since I expected that most people are happy to have a place to buy PCBs and schematics if they want to design their own model. Now that this seems to be a big deal for many, I have to reconsider about releasing those Kicad sources. After all, ossc is and will be free-time project for me so I'd hate to see people spending lots of time arguing about licenses and such.

[citrus3000psi]

edit

[Xyga]

Customers tired to wait, hardware and firmware talk, offshoots, legal controversy, people fighting ?

This is fame, proof the OSSC is a success, achieved in such a short time too. Congrats!

EDIT: one thing's missing: interviews! We need our heroes to appear on the news (no I don't mean kotaku)

[Lord of Pirates]

Rename the thing to Marqs Scan Converter and all this pointless fussing can come to an end .

[Guspaz]

On the mailing lists: It's definitely better than nothing, but it's stressful as a consumer (What if I miss the e-mail from Matt?), which pre-orders avoid. I'm in favour of the mailing list being used until major demand is satisfied and then moving to a preorder system for smaller batches (unless it hits general availability and then it becomes moot).

On the opensourcing: yes, the name is a bit misleading, but that's a fairly minor quibble. Instead, think of the potential. Marqs has done amazing work, and I love my OSSC, but imagine what could happen with a larger opensource project, what could happen if you had a bunch of the best and the brightest from the community working on improving the thing over time, enhancing, refining, adding new features. The hardware would continue to evolve, and maybe every few years it might be worth upgrading to the latest and greatest hardware revision to get access to those new features. Marqs free time is valuable and limited, but if you had a single project with contributions from not just Marqs but all the other experienced hardware developers, we could see amazing things.

The Linux kernel was a curiosity when it was the sole effort of one person, but what it grew into when many people began contributing to it was something quite special. I'm not suggesting that a retro gaming scaler would ever be on anything like that sort of a scale, but a multi-party effort for a retro scaler could produce great results.

[Thomago]

EDIT: one thing's missing: interviews! We need our heroes to appear on the news (no I don't mean kotaku)

We need biopics, I say!

[DiegoPonga]

Customers tired to wait, hardware and firmware talk, offshoots, legal controversy, people fighting ?

This is fame, proof the OSSC is a success, achieved in such a short time too. Congrats!

EDIT: one thing's missing: interviews! We need our heroes to appear on the news (no I don't mean kotaku)

lol

[BuckoA51]

I never guessed that this would generate so much controversy since I expected that most people are happy to have a place to buy PCBs and schematics if they want to design their own model.

I think the majority of people ARE happy, very happy with everything you've given the community. Please do not be discouraged.

IMO if the firmware alone is open source that's enough to call it the open source scan converter, "open source software and partially open source hardware and some closed source components scan converter" doesn't have much of a ring to it.

btw, took a look at that pre-order system while waiting on the PSUs, it has a Wordpress plugin so we might be in business there, I'll keep people posted.

On the mailing lists: It's definitely better than nothing, but it's stressful as a consumer (What if I miss the e-mail from Matt?)

Everyone that doesn't reply first time I e-mail them gets another chance when new stock comes in. Every time a batch of mails goes out it's announced on:-

Twitter,
Facebook
Tumblr
The OSSC Telegram channel (https://t.me/OSSC_announce)

Short of sending up smoke signals as well, I'm not sure what more I can do, but yes, a pre-order system like Amazon and big retailers have, that charges your card as soon as stock comes in is the answer going forward. I'm not prepared to take peoples money and just sit on it in my bank account.