Search for "soundmax integrated digital audio" to find garbage.

  • Thread starter Thread starter JWL
  • Start date Start date
J

JWL

June 28, 2004 is the last driver for soundmax.
I do not hav thirty dollars in my paypal account, and I am not buying
a visa card to upgrade windows XP.

With a search on "soundmax integrated digital audio", I can find a lot
of software that tries to tell me Micro$oft is no longer supporting
Windows XP. It is all fiction, because all of these programs disagree
on which drivers of mine are out of date.

June 28, 2004 is the last driver for soundmax, unless I want to pay
thirty dollars and six days for garbage.
 
June 28, 2004 is the last driver for soundmax.
I do not hav thirty dollars in my paypal account, and I am not buying
a visa card to upgrade windows XP.

With a search on "soundmax integrated digital audio", I can find a lot
of software that tries to tell me Micro$oft is no longer supporting
Windows XP. It is all fiction, because all of these programs disagree
on which drivers of mine are out of date.

June 28, 2004 is the last driver for soundmax, unless I want to pay
thirty dollars and six days for garbage.
Click to expand...
Is there a question here somewhere?


---
avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
Virus Database (VPS): 110315-0, 03/15/2011
Tested on: 3/15/2011 12:25:29 PM
avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2011 AVAST Software.
http://www.avast.com
 
NOTE: Removed the following newsgroup from my reply. Don't visit there
but it doesn't seem relevant to this OP's post since it does not
appear the OP is deploying one, or more, hosts.

microsoft.public.windowsxp.setup_deployment

June 28, 2004 is the last driver for soundmax.
I do not hav thirty dollars in my paypal account, and I am not buying
a visa card to upgrade windows XP.

With a search on "soundmax integrated digital audio", I can find a lot
of software that tries to tell me Micro$oft is no longer supporting
Windows XP. It is all fiction, because all of these programs disagree
on which drivers of mine are out of date.

June 28, 2004 is the last driver for soundmax, unless I want to pay
thirty dollars and six days for garbage.
Click to expand...

Okie dokie. Maybe someone using an *undentified* model of a SoundMax
daughtercard or a codec chip on a motherboard might find your diary
entry here useful but I don't think so. Whining here won't get IBM now
Lenovo via Soundmax (www.soundmax.com.tw) to make any changes on
unsupported hardware. Their support web page is worthless. You could
call their tech number but you'll first need to find a native Chinese
speaker to converse with them.

I don't know what search criteria you used to find Soundmax drivers but
I noticed there was a v5.12.02.5280 integrated audio driver package
dated February 2005. Nope, it doesn't list anything beyond Windows XP
and 2003 Server as supported. If it's not a Soundmax-produced card then
you'll have to go complain to whomever was the manufacturer that used
the SoundMax AC97 audio codec chip (produced by Analog Devices) on their
card or motherboard. Don't know what you have since you never bothered
to accurately define it.

Bye.
 
JWL said:
June 28, 2004 is the last driver for soundmax.
I do not hav thirty dollars in my paypal account, and I am not buying
a visa card to upgrade windows XP.

With a search on "soundmax integrated digital audio", I can find a lot
of software that tries to tell me Micro$oft is no longer supporting
Windows XP. It is all fiction, because all of these programs disagree
on which drivers of mine are out of date.

June 28, 2004 is the last driver for soundmax, unless I want to pay
thirty dollars and six days for garbage.
Click to expand...

The best place to look for a SoundMax driver, is on the web site
of the computer manufacturer who made your computer. Analog Devices
does not make drivers available for download directly (Analog Devices
is a silicon chip company making SoundMax AC'97 and HDAudio CODEC chips).
SoundMax is only a tiny part of their product portfolio, which is
why they don't give a rat's ass about consumers and their problems.
Companies like RealTek or CMedia, are more dependent on keeping
consumers happy, and they offer fresh drivers for download.

If you built your own computer, using a retail motherboard purchase, then
you'd go to the motherboard manufacturer web site. For example, the computer
I'm typing this on, has an Asus motherboard with a SoundMax HDAudio. If
I wanted an upgraded driver, I'd check there. Generally, new drivers are
only put on such websites, for perhaps a year after the motherboard is
introduced. After that, there is no support relationship between
Analog Devices and the motherboard manufacturer, to be providing drivers
forever and forever. The business relationship lasts for a short time.

http://support.asus.com.tw/download/download.aspx?SLanguage=en-us&model=P5E Deluxe

For my motherboard, they offer one driver

"SoundMAX AD1988B Audio Driver V5.10.01.6310 for Windows XP.(WHQL)"

2008/02/15 update

I may have installed that, the day I purchased the motherboard. And no
update has been offered since then. Since my audio works, it doesn't
really matter to me what year is stamped on the file - it just works.

As for the utility of SoundMax driver updates, I had a previous motherboard
with a SoundMax AC'97 CODEC chip on it. SoundMax drivers for those, not only
have to align with the chip used, but the driver also has to know which
Southbridge chip is being used. For example, my driver in that case,
covered VIA and Intel chipset (my board had an Intel Southbridge), but no others.
That means AC'97 drivers are even more specific to the situation at hand.
Now, with that motherboard, I'd used it for a longer period of time.
I tried a total of four different driver versions, and the "click and pop"
problem was *never* fixed. You have to ask yourself then, why bother getting
new drivers, if they *don't fix* anything ???

Another egregious bug in that AC'97 SoundMax driver, was there was a
"special effects" menu, offering options such as "Cave" or "Concert
Hall". Another option was "Disabled". But "Disabled" didn't work, and
the driver would continue to apply some default special effect I
didn't particularly want. It caused a 30 millisecond echo, which
on some music content, made the music sound "muddy". Again, this
was not fixed.

*******

You'd be better off buying a PCI or PCI Express add-in sound card, making
*sure* before the purchase, that fresh drivers are always available.
If the company making such a card, are no better than SoundMax, there'd
be no point to doing that. I used a $10 sound card in a couple of computers,
because I got a slightly better EAX1 and EAX2 operation from it.

As an example, I can see the latest CMedia drivers are dated Feb 09, 2011.

http://www.cmedia.com.tw/EN/DownloadCenter_Detail2.aspx?pserno=0&dtype=ALL

and a sound card with a crusty old 8738 on it, costs $14. The extra $2
for this one, gives you a Game Port you'll never use :-) Most add-on
gaming devices these days, have USB connectors. Only an old game
port joystick would use that connector.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16829128003

Cards like that, likely don't offer Base and Treble adjustment,
nor a Graphic Equalizer in software. The functionality doesn't
get more basic than that.

So shop around. Do some research on the card first, to see whether
the main chip receives the updates you want. For the 8738, they
had to rewrite the driver for it, because Creative bought the
rights to some technology, that caused them to have to rewrite
the drivers. It took them more than a year, before they could legally
offer drivers again, for download.

To work another example, I see a VIA VT1723 based card for $10.
Is there a driver for it ?

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16829180005

First, the part number can be seen in this table. The chip is
called "Tremor", rather than being an "Envy" chip.

http://www.via.com.tw/en/products/audio/controllers/comparison_controller.jsp

The download page doesn't list VT1723. Hmmm.

"Microsoft Windows" "Windows XP" "Audio" "Select your VIA product"

http://www.via.com.tw/en/support/drivers.jsp

OK. Now I see an entry. It's "VIA Vinyl (or Tremor)". And the
date on that entry is "11-Sep-2007".

And if I go back, and change the OS to Windows 7, there is no
driver for the VT1723 Tremor. So the $10 card wouldn't be a good idea,
if you were going to upgrade to Windows 7 later. It looks like
VIA Envy products are the only ones with fresh driver support
for the long run.

The cheapest card I can see, with a VIA Envy on it, is $100.
Some of these sound chips, don't actually have the ADC portion
on the main chip (analog to digital converter). They have to
buy extra chips, which connect via I2C bus connections, to the
main chip. The $100 card, takes a whole handful of silicon chips,
to make a relatively nice sounding card.

Good luck,
Paul
 
Paul said:
The best place to look for a SoundMax driver, is on the web site
of the computer manufacturer who made your computer. Analog Devices
does not make drivers available for download directly (Analog Devices
is a silicon chip company making SoundMax AC'97 and HDAudio CODEC chips).
SoundMax is only a tiny part of their product portfolio, which is
why they don't give a rat's ass about consumers and their problems.
Companies like RealTek or CMedia, are more dependent on keeping
consumers happy, and they offer fresh drivers for download.

If you built your own computer, using a retail motherboard purchase, then
you'd go to the motherboard manufacturer web site. For example, the
computer
I'm typing this on, has an Asus motherboard with a SoundMax HDAudio. If
I wanted an upgraded driver, I'd check there. Generally, new drivers are
only put on such websites, for perhaps a year after the motherboard is
introduced. After that, there is no support relationship between
Analog Devices and the motherboard manufacturer, to be providing drivers
forever and forever. The business relationship lasts for a short time.

http://support.asus.com.tw/download/download.aspx?SLanguage=en-us&model=P5E Deluxe

For my motherboard, they offer one driver

"SoundMAX AD1988B Audio Driver V5.10.01.6310 for Windows XP.(WHQL)"

2008/02/15 update

I may have installed that, the day I purchased the motherboard. And no
update has been offered since then. Since my audio works, it doesn't
really matter to me what year is stamped on the file - it just works.

As for the utility of SoundMax driver updates, I had a previous
motherboard
with a SoundMax AC'97 CODEC chip on it. SoundMax drivers for those, not
only
have to align with the chip used, but the driver also has to know which
Southbridge chip is being used. For example, my driver in that case,
covered VIA and Intel chipset (my board had an Intel Southbridge), but no
others.
That means AC'97 drivers are even more specific to the situation at hand.
Now, with that motherboard, I'd used it for a longer period of time.
I tried a total of four different driver versions, and the "click and pop"
problem was *never* fixed. You have to ask yourself then, why bother
getting
new drivers, if they *don't fix* anything ???

Another egregious bug in that AC'97 SoundMax driver, was there was a
"special effects" menu, offering options such as "Cave" or "Concert
Hall". Another option was "Disabled". But "Disabled" didn't work, and
the driver would continue to apply some default special effect I
didn't particularly want. It caused a 30 millisecond echo, which
on some music content, made the music sound "muddy". Again, this
was not fixed.

*******

You'd be better off buying a PCI or PCI Express add-in sound card, making
*sure* before the purchase, that fresh drivers are always available.
If the company making such a card, are no better than SoundMax, there'd
be no point to doing that. I used a $10 sound card in a couple of
computers,
because I got a slightly better EAX1 and EAX2 operation from it.

As an example, I can see the latest CMedia drivers are dated Feb 09, 2011.

http://www.cmedia.com.tw/EN/DownloadCenter_Detail2.aspx?pserno=0&dtype=ALL

and a sound card with a crusty old 8738 on it, costs $14. The extra $2
for this one, gives you a Game Port you'll never use :-) Most add-on
gaming devices these days, have USB connectors. Only an old game
port joystick would use that connector.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16829128003

Cards like that, likely don't offer Base and Treble adjustment,
nor a Graphic Equalizer in software. The functionality doesn't
get more basic than that.

So shop around. Do some research on the card first, to see whether
the main chip receives the updates you want. For the 8738, they
had to rewrite the driver for it, because Creative bought the
rights to some technology, that caused them to have to rewrite
the drivers. It took them more than a year, before they could legally
offer drivers again, for download.

To work another example, I see a VIA VT1723 based card for $10.
Is there a driver for it ?

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16829180005

First, the part number can be seen in this table. The chip is
called "Tremor", rather than being an "Envy" chip.

http://www.via.com.tw/en/products/audio/controllers/comparison_controller.jsp

The download page doesn't list VT1723. Hmmm.

"Microsoft Windows" "Windows XP" "Audio" "Select your VIA product"

http://www.via.com.tw/en/support/drivers.jsp

OK. Now I see an entry. It's "VIA Vinyl (or Tremor)". And the
date on that entry is "11-Sep-2007".

And if I go back, and change the OS to Windows 7, there is no
driver for the VT1723 Tremor. So the $10 card wouldn't be a good idea,
if you were going to upgrade to Windows 7 later. It looks like
VIA Envy products are the only ones with fresh driver support
for the long run.

The cheapest card I can see, with a VIA Envy on it, is $100.
Some of these sound chips, don't actually have the ADC portion
on the main chip (analog to digital converter). They have to
buy extra chips, which connect via I2C bus connections, to the
main chip. The $100 card, takes a whole handful of silicon chips,
to make a relatively nice sounding card.

Good luck,
Paul
Click to expand...

I noticed mention of the "click and pop" in the audio on a board with an AC
chipset. I also found drivers specific to board difficult to be certain of
if you had right one etc. I wnet looking because of the "clicks and pops" on
fresh install with provided drivers on motherboard disk. I therefore
disabled the onboard sound and simply plugged in an add-on sound card. Bonus
was could still do 5.1 out off the three output plugs AND also have the
Line-In and Mic input plugs available.
 
I was talking about someone's setup program, not a host, and I will
accept VanguardLH's judgement about where my complaint should go.
 
When I contacted Ahead (Nero) about a bug in Nero Wave Editor,
they told me that my sound card driver was out of date. If they were
correct, then the the Nero Wave Editor (2.0.0.30) for version six
would
not work, and it does, so I am at the prezent time concluding that
bugs
are in (NWE) Nero Wave Editor Five (comes with Nero10).

That's all I can really conclude, too.
NWE for Nero6 six works.
NWE for Nero10 does not.
So, I will use NWE for Nero6.

What you describe, except the clicks and pops, is similar to what I
hav.
I may well hav a SoundMax AC'97, because that is what *one* of the
utilities I tried was trying to tell me. I could not figure out why
MicroSoft
was not up to date with the other, supposedly nineteen, problems with
my drivers. If my drivers are not up to date, then Windows should be
able to figure that out.

Microsoft should know about drivers that are out of date.
If someone tells you different, then they are selling garbage.
You can update drivers from control panel/system/hardware/device
manager.
Select right click on the device, then click on update.
Start/All Programs/Microsoft Update should do it for everything.

I am very sure that MicroSoft automated driver updates. I want them to
crack down on displays of "Microsoft Certified Partner", from software
tries to tell anyone different.

Don't ever wonder why Apple haz much less in the way of hardware
options.
Steve Jobs does not agonize over that, and rest assured that he does
not agonize over building hiz OS on top of Berkley Standard
Distribution, either.
My dad haz a Mac.
I noticed mention of the "click and pop" in the audio on a board
with
an AC chipset. I also found drivers specific to board difficult to
be
certain of if you had right one etc. I wnet looking because of the
"clicks and pops" on fresh install with provided drivers on
motherboard disk. I therefore disabled the onboard sound and simply
plugged in an add-on sound card. Bonus was could still do 5.1 out
off
the three output plugs AND also have the Line-In and Mic input plugs
available.
Click to expand...

I get clicks and pops on some of my normalized recordings if I use an
equalizer on playback. Part of that haz to do with having three volume
adjustments on the output: Wave, Master, and another knob on my
amplifier.

I think one of my audio connectors is bidirectional or something,
because four channels (or more) is an option, at least according to
the utilities. Either that, or the headphone plug can be set for two
channels, while the line out can handle the other two. I would need
the manual to figure out where channel five and the subwoofer jacks
are. I hav read about cards that sense resistance and detect what kind
of device is attached to a jack; dynamic, condenser, output, dynamic
stereo mic. All four of those hav a resistance profile, so a machine
can detect changes and errors; not with my particular onboard
SoundMax, though. I wonder how many wires you need for a condenser
stereo mic.
 
JWL said:
I get clicks and pops on some of my normalized recordings if I use an
equalizer on playback. Part of that haz to do with having three volume
adjustments on the output: Wave, Master, and another knob on my
amplifier.
Click to expand...

I was getting clicks and pops, when there is no content being played
on the audio device. They happen at random, but with a fair period
of time between events. The various versions of drivers, affected
the time between pops a bit, but never removed them entirely.
I think one of my audio connectors is bidirectional or something,
because four channels (or more) is an option, at least according to
the utilities. Either that, or the headphone plug can be set for two
channels, while the line out can handle the other two. I would need
the manual to figure out where channel five and the subwoofer jacks
are. I hav read about cards that sense resistance and detect what kind
of device is attached to a jack; dynamic, condenser, output, dynamic
stereo mic. All four of those hav a resistance profile, so a machine
can detect changes and errors; not with my particular onboard
SoundMax, though. I wonder how many wires you need for a condenser
stereo mic.
Click to expand...

Audio chips support a couple of jack configurations. You're right, that
they sometimes multiplex an input and output, on the same jack. If you
select 4 channel or 5.1 channel for example, your Line In may become
an Output instead. That typically happens when the faceplate of the
audio device, only has three jacks. If they have room, and put the
extra jacks in place (like the six jacks on my motherboard HDAudio),
then the channels don't have to be multiplexed.

When it comes to impedance sensing, SoundMax invented that. They had
impedance sensing, before it became popular. I've never seen a technical
description of how their scheme works. It's more complicated than you think,
because computer audio devices are AC coupled with capacitors, so to sense
impedance, they can't use simple DC means of doing so. And if they apply an
AC signal to do such a test, you wouldn't want that coming through your speakers.
The implication, is if they use an AC signal, it must be much higher in frequency,
so it won't be noticed. That's all I can think of. But it isn't documented.
Maybe some day I'll find it, if the technique is patented.

Paul
 
In
Paul said:
When it comes to impedance sensing, SoundMax invented that. They had
impedance sensing, before it became popular. I've never seen a
technical description of how their scheme works. It's more complicated
than you think, because computer audio devices are AC coupled with
capacitors, so to sense impedance, they can't use simple DC means of
doing so. And if they apply an AC signal to do such a test, you
wouldn't want that coming through your speakers. The implication, is
if they use an AC signal, it must be much higher in frequency, so it
won't be noticed. That's all I can think of. But it isn't documented.
Maybe some day I'll find it, if the technique is patented.
Click to expand...

What makes you think audio devices are AC coupled for starters? As back
in the late 70's, high end audio equipment often used DC coupling. The
idea here was that AC coupled distorted the audio signal (especially in
lower frequencies). I never kept up with audio equipment since then, but
it wouldn't surprise me if DC coupling is even used on the most
inexpensive equipment today.

But let's say they do use AC coupling today. Still no need for a high
frequency either. As when you have an impedance mismatch, you end up
with part of the power reflected back to the source. This is known as
voltage standing wave ratio. So all you have to do is to monitor the
VSWR.
 
BillW50 said:
In

What makes you think audio devices are AC coupled for starters? As back
in the late 70's, high end audio equipment often used DC coupling. The
idea here was that AC coupled distorted the audio signal (especially in
lower frequencies). I never kept up with audio equipment since then, but
it wouldn't surprise me if DC coupling is even used on the most
inexpensive equipment today.

But let's say they do use AC coupling today. Still no need for a high
frequency either. As when you have an impedance mismatch, you end up
with part of the power reflected back to the source. This is known as
voltage standing wave ratio. So all you have to do is to monitor the
VSWR.
Click to expand...

Take a look around the audio chip on the motherboard. What do you see ?
The CODEC is surrounded by coupling capacitors. I can provide
an application note schematic, if you like.

This is *not* the official Realtek site, but this will save me having
to give you complicated instructions to find the datasheet in some
old ZIP file (this is a real datasheet). Look at page 38. On both inputs
and outputs, you'll find 1 microfarad (1u) capacitors used to A.C. couple
the chip to the jack field. On inputs, this helps avoid upsetting any bias
circuits. On outputs, it prevents DC from showing up on the device connected
to the computer.

http://realtek.info/pdf/alc650.pdf

I expect the cheap bastards would use 1uF capacitors at the lowest
working voltage rating they can find, to trim their costs.

*******

There is no VSWR at audio frequencies. Transmission line modeling is
inappropriate for that. There are better rules than the ones here,
but I've forgotten them :-)

http://www.ece.uci.edu/docs/hspice/hspice_2001_2-269.html

"Transmission Line Effects

Transmission line analysis recommended for:"

(See the equations just below that title)

When outside the range of transmission line modeling, the circuit
elements appear as lumped loads. Instead of a 20ns delay through a
75 ohm cable (for a high frequency signal), the wire looks like
an 88 pF capacitor or whatever. When the wire is charged, the
whole wire goes "up and down" at the same time. That's what happens
at low frequencies.

At extremely high frequencies, one end of the line can be "up"
while the other end of the line is "down", and now, those are
transmission line effects (time of flight is becoming important).
And perhaps, there is a standing wave on the cable. Time for some
transmission line modeling.

And if you aren't sure which model is appropriate, there is always
analog simulation (on something other than a pure Spice engine).
It's hard to find analog simulation programs, with good transmission
line models that don't suck. The one I used to use, cost $35K per year
for a license (shared by many employees via a floating license). And
there is one which is significantly more expensive than that, that
I've never used. Any time I wasn't sure how to treat a problem,
a few minutes whipping together a simulation, would put my mind
at ease.

Say you build one of these in your analog simulator, then drive it
with an audio frequency signal. All nodes have the same voltage
at the same time. There is no time of flight effect to be seen.
So you know, to some level of approximation, to just model the
circuit as 5*C of lumped capacitance (assuming the inductors
have negligible effect, and they should in this kind of case).

http://www.ece.uci.edu/docs/hspice/hspice_2001_2-2874.jpg

Now, if you drive the same circuit, with a 500MHz sine wave, then
one end of that network can be "up", while the other end is "down".
It's behaving like a transmission line at high frequencies. A propagation
delay is evident, when you're working in your analog simulator, and
comparing the voltage at each L-C connection node.

Paul
 
Take a look around the audio chip on the motherboard. What do you see ?
The CODEC is surrounded by coupling capacitors. I can provide
an application note schematic, if you like.

This is *not* the official Realtek site, but this will save me having
to give you complicated instructions to find the datasheet in some
old ZIP file (this is a real datasheet). Look at page 38. On both inputs
and outputs, you'll find 1 microfarad (1u) capacitors used to A.C. couple
the chip to the jack field. On inputs, this helps avoid upsetting any bias
circuits. On outputs, it prevents DC from showing up on the device
connected
to the computer.

http://realtek.info/pdf/alc650.pdf

I expect the cheap bastards would use 1uF capacitors at the lowest
working voltage rating they can find, to trim their costs.
Click to expand...

Yes, and I found something similar.

AD1886A Data Sheet
Jack Sense Pins Provide Automatic Output Switching. Software-Enabled
VREFOUT ...
jpkc.szpt.edu.cn/2008/ICbtsj/UploadFiles/xphy/media/3/AD1886.pdf
*******

There is no VSWR at audio frequencies. Transmission line modeling is
inappropriate for that. There are better rules than the ones here,
but I've forgotten them :-)
Click to expand...

Oh I don't know about that. Say you have a 100 watt amp. And you turn it
on and you hear nothing. So you turn it up louder and louder and you
hear nothing and you have the volume all the way up. So you check it out
and some clown didn't hook up a wire to the speaker. This amp now has to
handle 100 watts going out and another 100 watts being reflected back
(VSWR). So this is 200 watts the final has to handle. And some can't
handle it and you can blow the final out without a load (or a high VSWR
mismatch).

Lots of manuals warns about not loading the amps (operating without
speakers). And you can blow the final even if the impedance isn't
correct. Same is true if the impedance of the speaker doesn't match the
amp. I have seen speakers in 4, 8, 16, and 32 ohm impedance. And the
worse the mismatch, the greater the danger to the final amp.

*******

SIDE NOTE: I was curious how in the world do say telephone techs find a
broken line buried underground? Say you have a line buried a whole mile
and you know there is a break somewhere in that mile. And it would be
silly to dig up a mile worth of cable if there was a way to find out
exactly were the break is.

Guess how they do it? They use VSWR with a twist. As the break is a
mismatch of impedance, right? Well they inject a signal at one end and
wait for the signal to be reflected back. The further down the line, the
longer it takes to come back. And the device will tell the tech exactly
were the break has occurred. So they only have to dig were the break is
and nowhere else.

Nowadays I hear tell they have computers running at night (at the
telephone company) testing all of the lines (using this same method). So
they generally know about problems before hopefully any customers finds out.
 
BillW50 said:
SIDE NOTE: I was curious how in the world do say telephone techs find a
broken line buried underground? Say you have a line buried a whole mile
and you know there is a break somewhere in that mile. And it would be
silly to dig up a mile worth of cable if there was a way to find out
exactly were the break is.

Guess how they do it? They use VSWR with a twist. As the break is a
mismatch of impedance, right? Well they inject a signal at one end and
wait for the signal to be reflected back. The further down the line, the
longer it takes to come back. And the device will tell the tech exactly
were the break has occurred. So they only have to dig were the break is
and nowhere else.

Nowadays I hear tell they have computers running at night (at the
telephone company) testing all of the lines (using this same method). So
they generally know about problems before hopefully any customers finds
out.
Click to expand...

That is called Time Domain Reflectometry or TDR. There is single ended
and also differential versions.

Even some computers have that, on their network interface. My current
computer has a Marvell network chip, and it is able to test the
interface for open, short, exactly matched impedance, and it's based on
the same method as TDR. One difference is, a TDR might use a tunnel
diode to create the stimulus, while the network chip generates and
analyses things using clocked circuits. There is likely no tunnel
diode present in my network chip. The method is good to about 1 nanosecond
time resolution, and when there is an open or short, the software will
give a distance estimate.

On one of my previous motherboards, it had that feature too, and the
interface didn't work when I first turned on the computer. The test
indicated I had an open on one pair, and reinserting the connector
a number of times, cleaned off the manufacturing grunge. At the time,
I was pretty impressed by the feature, as it worked like a charm.

Paul
 
In
Paul said:
That is called Time Domain Reflectometry or TDR. There is single ended
and also differential versions.

Even some computers have that, on their network interface. My current
computer has a Marvell network chip, and it is able to test the
interface for open, short, exactly matched impedance, and it's based
on the same method as TDR. One difference is, a TDR might use a tunnel
diode to create the stimulus, while the network chip generates and
analyses things using clocked circuits. There is likely no tunnel
diode present in my network chip. The method is good to about 1
nanosecond time resolution, and when there is an open or short, the
software will give a distance estimate.

On one of my previous motherboards, it had that feature too, and the
interface didn't work when I first turned on the computer. The test
indicated I had an open on one pair, and reinserting the connector
a number of times, cleaned off the manufacturing grunge. At the time,
I was pretty impressed by the feature, as it worked like a charm.
Click to expand...

Very interesting read Paul. Thanks again.
 
Back
Top