[gblaue]

Originally Posted by tecboy

Sounds more like the plug configuration or pin layout may have changed

The 4th is now gone. More functionality is put into cavity 2 and 3. Outputs 1-10 are the same.

[gblaue]

Originally Posted by RideWithDanger

I thought only the 4cyl and 8cyl had the ANC mics? Is this changed for 2019? And I can handle the mics anyway, shouldn't be an issue. Was just looking at making sure I could still attach an amp this way to power a sub.

Still do, but the mics are now on the main connector.

[gblaue]

Originally Posted by Gunkk

...probably encrypted ethernet due to hacking risks w/ integrated systems (very easy to implement in a closed system like a car). And that means the aftermarket is one hundred percent certifiably bent over and completely screwed.

So, any hi-res digital audio data, excluding SPDIF electrical or optical, is required to be encrypted with DTCP (Digital Transport Copyright Protection). Or at least some type of encryption for 16 bit non-pcm audio. MOST does their own encryption/"encapsulation". MOST will also use DTCP for hi-res. Ethernet AVB uses DTCP, similarly.



What's coming next?


Cyber security to keep everyone out of any bus on the vehicle, and audio will be no different. Everything will be locked down.

[tecboy]

I guess the 2019 and later guys...will have to go the way us early upgraders did....capture , clean up and sum up the speaker outputs using a DSP....

[gblaue]

Originally Posted by tecboy

I guess the 2019 and later guys...will have to go the way us early upgraders did....capture , clean up and sum up the speaker outputs using a DSP....

NAV-TV could probably still do an Ethernet AVB box, but it wouldn't be cheap. There is a lot of expense and legal things to deal with for DTCP and HDCP keys.

[drfeelgood]

Originally Posted by gblaue

NAV-TV could probably still do an Ethernet AVB box, but it wouldn't be cheap. There is a lot of expense and legal things to deal with for DTCP and HDCP keys.

But even to do what they did with the MOST couldn't have been cheap. Many people were complaining about the cost of the M650GM, but I get it. Easier (and cheaper) for Pac to come along and reproduce the hard work that NavTv did.

[gblaue]

Originally Posted by drfeelgood

But even to do what they did with the MOST couldn't have been cheap. Many people were complaining about the cost of the M650GM, but I get it. Easier (and cheaper) for Pac to come along and reproduce the hard work that NavTv did.

The DTCP keys are really expensive to deal with. Fines and legal for violating term or a simple mistake could cost bankrupt a small company. We are a fairly big company, and it is a pain for us. I think the amount of money that you got to layout is way too big, unless you are going sell hundreds of thousands of units. Just my guess. FWIW

[drfeelgood]

Originally Posted by gblaue

The DTCP keys are really expensive to deal with. Fines and legal for violating term or a simple mistake could cost bankrupt a small company. We are a fairly big company, and it is a pain for us. I think the amount of money that you got to layout is way too big, unless you are going sell hundreds of thousands of units. Just my guess. FWIW

Me: you said "we are a fairly big company"... now I will digitally stalk you and find out who you are and where you work

You: ok, I'll just digitally erase you from existence

Me:

[gblaue]

I would have assumed that you had figured it out already. ��

[SilverCamaroVert]

The secrecy made me curious yesterday.

Sorta back to the point of the thread then, looks like I'll be going after an audiocontrol or the JL fix. I recall there being a major issue with chime volume for this method. Was there ever a proper solution (other than the MOST interfaces) to get around that problem? I'm looking to replace front speakers, disconnect rear speakers and add subs. I could be happy using just the center speaker (or adding one under the dash or something) to play chimes only.

I don't suppose there is a way to use something like the ax-dsp to connect to the can bus and get chimes? Sorry, I'm just starting to piece together how all these bits work now that MOST isn't an option.

[17rsvert]

Originally Posted by gblaue

Because there are up to 9 stages of EQ are in the tunings. GM says what they want. The bass and treble control with specific curves. Somebody else make the HMI.

Thanks for the reply. I understand there are multiple EQ's going on behind the scenes, I was referring to adding more to the user controlled 3 band on the HMI. I guess if GM doesn't ask for it, that's the final word, but that's a shame. Correct me I'm wrong, but adding a 10 band EQ on the HMI should be relatively easy during the development stage, and would not result in any additional cost per unit during production.

[gblaue]

Originally Posted by 17rsvert

Thanks for the reply. I understand there are multiple EQ's going on behind the scenes, I was referring to adding more to the user controlled 3 band on the HMI. I guess if GM doesn't ask for it, that's the final word, but that's a shame. Correct me I'm wrong, but adding a 10 band EQ on the HMI should be relatively easy during the development stage, and would not result in any additional cost per unit during production.

That may not necessarily be true. That would require adding more eq stages in the DSP. It may take more MIPS or memory. It adds delay in the system. The computing resources in the amplifiers is not over designed. The car manufacturers don’t want to pay for extra that.

The lines of code for the HMI are written by some software contract house overseas. It takes manhours and validation, but it still costs money.

I’ve been called out for adding an extra 1/2cent adhesive label. That is how tight money is controlled by the car manufacturers.

[17rsvert]

Originally Posted by gblaue

That may not necessarily be true. That would require adding more eq stages in the DSP. It may take more MIPS or memory. It adds delay in the system. The computing resources in the amplifiers is not over designed. The car manufacturers don’t want to pay for extra that.

The lines of code for the HMI are written by some software contract house overseas. It takes manhours and validation, but it still costs money.

I’ve been called out for adding an extra 1/2cent adhesive label. That is how tight money is controlled by the car manufacturers.

Thanks for the insight. I used to work as a tooling design engineer for an automotive hardware supplier. Usually, the money spend up front for development, testing and tooling was no where as critical as the final cost per piece, both to us and the customer. And then of course, the customer wants cost reductions every year! I work now for a medical device parts manufacturer, and realized the medical device industry has been hiring ex automotive guys, so the penny pinching is almost as bad.

I guess I made the assumption that processing hardware has gotten so inexpensive, it could handle a few more tasks without issue. For example, I can download free graphic EQ apps for my phone to adjust my music. I didn't realize the processing power of the hardware in these automotive systems was matched that tightly to the applications.

[gblaue]

Originally Posted by 17rsvert

Thanks for the insight. I used to work as a tooling design engineer for an automotive hardware supplier. Usually, the money spend up front for development, testing and tooling was no where as critical as the final cost per piece, both to us and the customer. And then of course, the customer wants cost reductions every year! I work now for a medical device parts manufacturer, and realized the medical device industry has been hiring ex automotive guys, so the penny pinching is almost as bad.

I guess I made the assumption that processing hardware has gotten so inexpensive, it could handle a few more tasks without issue. For example, I can download free graphic EQ apps for my phone to adjust my music. I didn't realize the processing power of the hardware in these automotive systems was matched that tightly to the applications.

I see your point, but your phone is only eq’ing 2 channels of audio. Your phone is not doing processing for equalization, phase and delay, volume control and taper, dymanic balance and fade, dymanic volume loudness curves, limiters, compressors, listening to 3-4 microphones for noise cancellation, engine harmonic enhancement, speed controlled volume, speaker and microphone diagnostics, generating chime, etc. for 9-10 channels in the the
Camaro.

Imagine trying to do this with the equivalent of a 32 bit 400MHz pentium II processor. Yes, it’s a DSP, so it’s more efficient, but not efficient to equal your 64 bit 3GHz processor in your phone. I think your phone has a slight advantage.