Been wanting to learn more about embedded systems and I thought that this was a cool idea. Basically and Ipod classic gen 5 clone with a framework storage expansion for memory to load songs onto.
Made a basic mockup in freecad of how It would look
In my mind one port on the bottom as a usbc charging and audio out would be ideal
(edit, some people have informed me why it might be good to have a 3.5mm jack for audio aswell, will need to look into this more but there are some valid points. I think if it is added it would be best on the bottom near the USBC)
Currently and EE student, any suggestions around what chip I sould use as the brain?
-Rhett
Ps. There’s also a similar project called tangara (cool tech zone) But it’s a bit bulky, and has a reguar audio jack on the top which I don’t really like/ sd card
4 Likes
I love the idea of using the expansion cards for another purpose.
I’m a bit confused about what you mean about the bulkiness of the other project and the 3.5mm audio jack. It already looks pretty small. I guess you might be able to squeeze all the components onto one double-sided PCB and find a slimmer battery. And for the audio jack. Would you want only bluetooth?
if you look up pictures it looks like 3/4 of an inch thick (actually it’s 0.87 inches src), which is a bit too much for me. I’m of the opinion that everything in my life should be USB-C just so I don’t have to deal with other connectors, so just one usb-c port on the bottom for charging and headphones. Apple sells some for like $16? as per amazon
As for bluetooth I’d say not having it is better. Keep it simple, never have to charge headphones
I see, it’s the thickness that bothers you, not the size in the other dimensions.
Why not allow for both? USB-C for charging and audio as well as a 3.5mm jack for those that want that feature. I can’t imagine that designing the circuitry for a jack is more complicated than dealing with USB-C and the hardware is probably less than a dollar. The physical space for the actual port, and the time taken to design the second circuit + logic, would be the only major limiting factors.
I might be biased in that I kinda see 3.5mm as a dying connector, so I don’t wanna use it. You’re right that it wouldn’t be very costly to implement, but I think there’s also something to be said for simplicity of one connector. My plan would be to just open source all the design files so anyone who wants to mod it can.
I’ll admit to curiosity and interest.
With a decent UI, a great DAC and at minimum a 3.5mm jack with decent amplification with ideally a 2.5mm or 4.4mm balanced output option too… yeah i could get behind this.
Wired headphones are absolutely superior to bluetooth, in audio quality and latency. You always get the sound as it comes from your DAC/AMP with no compression and the latency is… well it’s effectively zero.
Bluetooth codecs are…LDAC is alright quality and has okay latency, but it’s really finicky and almost never gets used because both ends of the connection need fancy chips. APTx is complicated, it’s actually three different codecs. the original is… meh. better than the original bluetooth SBC codec, but that’s a pretty low bar. APTx-LL is pretty okay if you need to do video calls and priortize low latency but has noticeably worse quality than APTx-HD which has unacceptably high latency for video calls or consuming visual media with. and lets not get started on AAC… that’s just a right mess.
IMO the only reason that 3.5mm is a “dying” connector is that it’s being murdered in the name of selling you more expensive devices that have finite lifetimes and are unrepairable to force you to buy new ones regularly…
2 Likes
Far from it.
Analog connectors have huge advantages over digital ones, mostly on latency and signal degradation. In professional environments, for example, XLR connectors are still used because they are more reliable… so are 1/4-inch (6.35 mm) plugs. The 3.5mm plugs are the consumer-portability friendly version of those and they can last a lifetime.
Besides, audiophiles would appreciate these 3.5mm connectors since most high-end headphones use them and, believe me, most audiophiles would be looking for devices like the FramePod for lossless audio portable listening.
1 Like
finally, an ipod with an ethernet port!!
5 Likes
This would be great! Please continue to work on it. My idea was always to just bundle a pi zero 2 w with a battery, but then you still have to sort out the DAC, audio jack, display, and control interface, as well as BMS. S not THAT easy, but totally do able.
I think the Tangara is cool, but I’m not sure about the codec support on it.
I wish I had the skills to design and create this, great idea!
I think you make good points on why it should have both. Personally I haven’t delved too deep into listening to music with high end headphones so it makes sense why I might have the skewed perception that it’s just a dying connector. Will need to research more into that whole area, but I understand more now why both would be good.
Will need to look into it more, but people have provided some good reasons why it’s a good idea to have a 3.5mm
If you keep the framework add in module(s) option there’s no reason you can’t offer any headphone output you or your customers would want.
Framework already has a headset module, so using that same case for a high quality 3.5mm output should be possible, and the ethernet module has given a precedence for outsized modules so one could use that for a 2.5mm/4.4mm balanced output or an XLR output just by fitting a usb-c DAC into the module.
higher power amps in the modules to run a pair of HD600s or other heavy headphones would of course draw down the battery quicker than a lower power one driving a pair of Grados or some IEMs, but the simplicity of just having a usb2.0 (or 3.2 if you want to support a sd card module or storage module) and allowing the module to handle the audio stuff should simplify your design requirements a fair bit sicne the FramePod would just have to supply USB audio and voltage
I know that this is probobly showing how little I know, but isn’t the point of having a 3.5mm that it’s like an analog signal, not the digital of a usb-c? and aren’t all framework expansion cards basically interfaced through a usbc? Wouldn’t this destroy the quality we’re trying to preserve? The idea of swapping in multiple different expansion cards is a cool one, might mean that one should have both an internal storage for songs (if say you’re using a different module than the storage expansion).
I know that this is probobly showing how little I know, but isn’t the point of having a 3.5mm that it’s like an analog signal, not the digital of a usb-c?
if you’re gonna put the signal in your ears there’s gonna be a DAC (Digital to Analog Converter) and an Amp.
the USB-c heandphones just hide that in the cable/plug. It’s the same thing the Framework expansion card for 3.5mm audo does.
and aren’t all framework expansion cards basically interfaced through a usbc?
yes! they are! as are all “dongle Dacs” like this one: Amazon.com
I’m suggestion that a variety of those could be built into the framework expansion card format to allow mixing and matching DACs and Amps without adding complications to the FramePod which just sees a USB audio device.
Wouldn’t this destroy the quality we’re trying to preserve?
Not necessarily. a cheap and bad implemetation could. but that might be half the fun.
So, yeah. That’s something to think about. and if implemented it could make for a lot of interesting options for the project
Basic Roadmap to getting this actually made:
- Get a raspberry pi to be able to do the basic things, ie, read from framework memory card, display to screen, take input, play songs. (heard about rock box for firmware, going to check out)
- Start designing dedicated board to do the same things the rpi does
- Work on case, aesthetics, etc
I’m open to suggestions for the final processor that should be used. Requirements are mostly that it be able to run something about as sophisticated as the ipod classic g5 firmware, easy to buy lots of, will be able to buy them for the next 5 years, won’t drain a smallish lipo battery in a full day of use. I’m a bit inexperienced when it comes to selecting chips and there are lots of options.
