[HN Gopher] The Analog Thing: an open source, educational, low-c... ___________________________________________________________________ The Analog Thing: an open source, educational, low-cost modern analog computer Author : uticus Score : 200 points Date : 2023-06-02 14:25 UTC (8 hours ago) (HTM) web link (the-analog-thing.org) (TXT) w3m dump (the-analog-thing.org) | ardoise wrote: | The value of analogue computation is limited. They are not | universal computers. The problem with analogue computers is that | there's a limit on the number of consecutive operations that they | can perform to produce a useful result. With digital computers, | errors can be corrected after each operation. Whereas with an | analogue computer, evey step introduces noise which cannot be | corrected. It cannot be corrected because in an analogue system | any input value is 'valid'. In a digital system input values that | are slightly higher or slightly lower than a digit can be | corrected to the nearest digit. | oersted wrote: | While it's true that analog computers have limitations in terms | of precision and error correction compared to digital | computers, they can still offer some advantages in certain | applications. For example, analog computers can be faster and | more energy-efficient for specific tasks, such as solving | differential equations or simulating physical systems. | pfdietz wrote: | Also, making analog computer components requires high | precision. With digital components, the individual elements are | driven to saturation, so much less precision is needed. This | means digital components can be made very small. Indeed, this | is why integrated circuits work so well. | tacotacotaco wrote: | This recent article talks about advantages of analog computers | and their possible uses as coprocessors to digital processors | | https://www.wired.com/story/unbelievable-zombie-comeback-ana... | tamaharbor wrote: | I knew digital was just a fad. | shagie wrote: | https://mythic.ai is an analog chip for doing neural nets. | | https://youtu.be/GVsUOuSjvcg?t=898 (this is a time stamp'ed | link for a video mentioned elsewhere in the comments). | depingus wrote: | Saw this a while ago. I don't know enough about math to know | if this works as described...I hope it does! A tiny dedicated | chip for AI inference jobs is probably the next game changer | the industry needs to put AI in everyone's pocket. Too bad | OpenAI is going to kill any chance at something like this | with regulatory capture. | mrguyorama wrote: | If you have an iPhone or a modern Pixel, you already have a | dedicated AI accelerator in your pocket. | depingus wrote: | Actually, I have a Pixel 7 with the Tensor G2. I can't | find the tera operations per second on it, but Google has | said that its [1] 60% more powerful than their Tensor | Coral (4 TOPS at 2W of power). That puts the G2 at about | 6.4 TOPS. | | The Mythic analog chip [2] is pumping 25 TOPS at 3W. For | comparison, modern (digital) GPUs are doing 25-100 TOPS | at 50W-100W...while costing >$1000. So, its a big jump. | | [1] https://www.xda-developers.com/google- | tensor-g2-changes/ | | [2] https://youtu.be/GVsUOuSjvcg?t=1060 | deutschepost wrote: | Very cool! Albeit I don't see the educational value if not paired | with an oscilloscope and/or loudspeaker. | | This screams modular system at me. And I think it is much easier | to learn what all of these functions do when combining multiple | senses. | penguin_booze wrote: | Related: Versatium's video on analogue computing: | https://youtu.be/GVsUOuSjvcg. | jamesgill wrote: | I love the idea as a learning tool, but: | | 1. ~USD $535 isn't exactly 'low-cost' | | 2. I'm confused who the audience is. | | It can't be kids--this is too advanced. It can't be engineers (or | student engineers)--there are better, more practical learning | tools. Maybe people with an extra $500 who just enjoy fiddling | around? | armitron wrote: | Nerds with too much disposable income who will buy this, spend | maybe 20 minutes total and then put it away to collect dust. | hobo_in_library wrote: | My raspberry pi is looking at your post guiltily | mikepurvis wrote: | To be fair, though, RPi's price point is well within the | impulse-purchase threshold of normal people, let alone | wealthy nerds. | mcv wrote: | Same here. I fear we may be the target demographic for this | thing. | carimura wrote: | mine too. at least the box (with pi inside) makes a good | stand for a mesh node. | kleer001 wrote: | I could see it being used in classrooms. What level/grade? No | idea. | mikepurvis wrote: | It definitely has classroom energy, but for that to work out | it would need to come with a whole curriculum, textbook, etc. | And even then, I think a lot of parents would be asking why | this oddball thing vs playing with regular 555 and opamp | circuits on a breadboard. | squokko wrote: | LOL! Maybe in Santa Clara | kleer001 wrote: | > I think a lot of parents would be asking why this oddball | thing vs playing with regular 555 and opamp circuits on a | breadboard. | | A lot? Like more than 50% I am very doubtful. But maybe I'm | running from different demographic intuitions. | | I'm not sure how many parents would know the "proper" | process. | __MatrixMan__ wrote: | I just completed "instrumentation lab", a college physics | class, where we built amplifier circuits (presumably for use | with sensors in experiments, although we just used a signal | generator). Seems like this would fit right in since the | other portion of the class was oscilloscope training. | mk_stjames wrote: | A very popular analog computer patchable with 4mm banana jacks | was the Comdyna GP-6. I went down a rabbit hole of reverse | engineering it from photos and schematics years ago in order to | build a version that would fit in a 3U panel for Eurorack modular | synth interfacing. Never finished it, but the total BOM was... | well, not much. The panel was going to cost more than the | board+opamps+passives. I wanted to buy a real Comdyna but I | remember the cheapest I found one for sale was ~$700 and I | thought that was expensive. Not so much when you compare it to | this unit which is housed in just open PCBs and a much smaller | format. | | If you are a student and want to learn a bit more about how | operational amplifiers, resistors, and capacitors alone can solve | differential equations... you can get an educational license for | Matlab for nothing and Simulink can emulate all the analog | circuitry you want and more. | | Another approach might be using the Eurorack simulation software | VCV Rack - If there isn't an set of modules you can install that | do basic gain, integrators, multipliers, comparators, etc then it | would be very easy for someone to write one. | Archit3ch wrote: | > If there isn't an set of modules you can install that do | basic gain, integrators, multipliers, comparators, etc then it | would be very easy for someone to write one. | | VCV Rack cannot do Zero Delay Feedback because each cable adds | one sample of delay. You can do it inside your module, of | course. | thx-2718 wrote: | Question since you appear familiar with math simulation, could | you do what you're describing with Matlab with Octave instead? | ted_dunning wrote: | Yes. | | Easier with Julia, though, because the ODE and PDE support is | better and you have better / simpler notation. Performance | will be better as well, but for simple problems you can't | tell. | etrautmann wrote: | Yes, but simulink's graphical interface makes simple circuit | simulation a bit easier for rapid iteration, testing, etc. | fsckboy wrote: | I'm not familiar with matlab or octave :) but I do know the | discrete and continuous underlying mathematics involved here, | and from the https://octave.org/ homepage, "the Octave syntax | is largely compatible with Matlab", the answer is yes. | | just to ELI5 for folks, the cool thing about analog computers | (or digital approximations or simulations) is that since they | are actually integrating (storing charge in a capacitor as | the voltage varies) or actually differentiating (current | through a capacitor varies with the voltage differential/rate | of change) they can calculate what would be very complex to | do on paper. | | Or more plainly, if the rate that the water flows out of the | drain of the bathtub depends on the water pressure above | which depends on the depth of the water in the tub, you can | study all the math involved (what you did in calculus) or you | can just put water in the tub and set your stopwatch (analog | computer); and electrons through or in a capacitor is just | like water in a tub | | this is basically all that's involved inside a music | synthesizer. The complexity comes from stacking together a | variety of different concepts once you understand that the | concepts are stackable (like when they taught you about | arithmetic being commutative, associative, distributive, | reflexive, etc) | pkaye wrote: | I'm wondering if Modelica might be useful for this. Its an | open source modeling language though I've never used it. Its | basically writing models with differential equations for each | of the components and then connect them together to form a | system. | | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modelica | felixgallo wrote: | https://github.com/countmodula/VCVRackLunettaModula | ruleforty wrote: | Might I suggest the LMN-3 - soup to nuts the most positive | project I see and gaining traction and affordability: | https://youtu.be/h5UmPTttN1s | evantbyrne wrote: | Asking as someone that is not familiar with general purpose | analog computers: are there benefits over digital? | JKCalhoun wrote: | To me the appeal is that they more closely model "the Real | World". Perhaps like modular synths, they invite | experimentation, learning (maybe a bit like a graphing | program?). | chillbill wrote: | EUR524,16 EUR is not affordable | pugworthy wrote: | Reminds me of the old Science Fair Electronic Computer Kit Model | No. 28-180 from Radio Shack... | | https://www.oldcomputermuseum.com/electronic_computer.html | | I had one as a kid and regret a) that I didn't figure it out | more, and b) threw it away at some point. | JKCalhoun wrote: | Those are a lot simpler (no op-amps, mostly resistances and an | analog meter). | | Here are some links to these I have collected: | | https://hackaday.io/project/177346-simple-analog-computer-el... | | https://computarium.lcd.lu/photos/albums/EDMUND_ANALOG_COMPU... | | https://t-lcarchive.org/american-basic-science-club-analog-c... | aj7 wrote: | Open source? Really? Where's the schematic? | lambda wrote: | Schematics are available https://the-analog- | thing.org/docs/dirhtml/rst/schematics/ though usually Open | Source Hardware refers to releasing the original design files, | including schematic and board layout, rather than just PDFs of | the schematic: https://www.oshwa.org/definition/ | fkyoureadthedoc wrote: | If you are looking for documentation, try clicking the | prominent "read the docs" link. Once you do so, you'll notice | "THAT schematics" is the very first link after the overview. | luqtas wrote: | i wonder why no one commented about Putedata, Csound and | Supercollider as a cheap alternative... | gatane wrote: | A simple analog computer would be a slide rule (or disk). The | advantage is that it doesn't need batteries, but usually has very | low precision (about 1.5-2ish decimal digits). | | Hell, you can even print it and have a calculator with | mul,div,sin,log,[?]... | samtho wrote: | I've been toying with the idea of building a "learn analog | electronics" course by having the student build a musical | synthesizer one stage at a time, starting with dual tone | generators that can be made to deliver frequencies and a | selectable wave pattern, then through to evelope filters, | modulator (which part of it exists as the wave selection from | earlier), and all the controls to make it happen. Not sure if | this has been done or if it's a dumb idea. | pkaye wrote: | Have you checked out Lantertronics on YouTube? He has a course | "Analog Circuits for Music Synthesis" but it might be tough for | beginners to follow. | | https://www.youtube.com/@Lantertronics/videos | TylerE wrote: | The trickest part I see there is you're going to need some sort | of midi input and associated parsing to actually make the thing | playable. | | Or are you thinking of building a keyboard as well. | | I suppose there are probably MIDI to CV modules out there one | could source. | samtho wrote: | I was going to have them build a rudimentary octave (12 note | keyboard segment) but that has been something I've been | trying to sketch out as well. | TylerE wrote: | A theremin input maybe? Could even be part of the build | experience. No mechanical parts, which is nice, and pitch | bends are fun sounds. | cmpalmer52 wrote: | It sounds like a great idea to me. I've been trying to carve | out time to do more electronic tinkering and learning and that | sounds like a neat set of projects. | mikelovenotwar wrote: | Erica Synths and Moritz Klein have released an educational | eurorack synth range of modules with many resources for | learning: | | https://www.youtube.com/@MoritzKlein0 | | https://www.ericasynths.lv/shop/diy-kits-1/mki-x-esedu-diy-s... | Animats wrote: | That's cute. Almost exactly the same capabilities as the tube-era | Heathkit EC-1 educational analog computer [1], but much smaller. | | Analog computers are no fun without an oscilloscope. Once you can | see graphs, you get intuition about how the inputs affect the | outputs. If you only have a meter, you have to write down data | and plot. | | [1] | https://www.analogmuseum.org/library/heathkit_ec1_operation_... | JKCalhoun wrote: | Yeah, wish it at least had an analog meter. | Animats wrote: | They should have built in one of these $20 oscilloscopes[1] | in place of the LCD meter. And a speaker. Their Analog Thing | costs over US$500, after all. Then you'd have a self- | contained unit good for student use. | | [1] https://www.aliexpress.us/item/3256805426720735.html | pwenzel wrote: | According to section 6.1 of the manual, it can be connected to | an oscilloscope. | | https://the-analog-thing.org/THAT_First_Steps.pdf | BSEdlMMldESB wrote: | but what is the 'software' equivalent for this thing? | | the physical state of all them wires? not very portable | jcpst wrote: | Think of it in a streaming/functional way. Programming would be | about signal flow, components that transform, and you get a | continuous output. | jsiva wrote: | You can model passive circuits with RLC ordinary differential | equations (depending on the setup of the equations there's some | algorithms such as Runge Kutta to solve them numerically). | Afaik you can model some active components with ordinary | differential equations, but I wouldn't be surprised if you had | to resort to partial differential equations (More or less a | "complete" electromagnetic simulation at that point). | BSEdlMMldESB wrote: | you're onto something | | I was looking at some of the open documentation[1] and they | show schematics and differential equations alongside each | other. | | I just keep burning out whenever I try to make sense of these | things; | | [1] https://the-analog-thing.org/THAT_First_Steps.pdf | ulv wrote: | polaroids | mxdgkat wrote: | [flagged] | fit2rule wrote: | [dead] | 7thaccount wrote: | Very cool, but it would need to be closer to $200 for me to openu | wallet. | dang wrote: | Related: | | _The Analog Thing: An open source, educational, low-cost modern | analog computer_ - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28614840 | - Sept 2021 (65 comments) | spyremeown wrote: | Is 499 EUR for that BOM fair? Genuinely asking... high end SoM | modules with carrier boards and a metric ton of software can be | obtained by half of that price, and op-amps aren't that costly. | pfdietz wrote: | Mechanical analog computers used in WW2 era warships were quite | interesting. | | https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2020/05/gears... | 908087 wrote: | [dead] | spend_thrift wrote: | I just want to know when someone is going to get around to make a | single board photonic computer... | mcdonje wrote: | That's really neat. Veritasium did a couple of videos on analog | computing a year ago. I'm glad there are people lowering the | barrier to entry. | | https://youtu.be/IgF3OX8nT0w | | https://youtu.be/GVsUOuSjvcg | pradn wrote: | These are fantastic, thank you for sharing! | gigel82 wrote: | Neat, but... this "analog" thing's built with a lot of digital | circuitry | bgribble wrote: | Very familiar-looking to anyone who has been following the | modular synthesizer renaissance. Modular synths are basically | analog computers, just not well-optimized for precision in most | cases. All the basic building blocks of THAT are available as | modules from a number of boutique manufacturers. | DennisP wrote: | And "not well-optimized for precision" is often considered a | feature. | gatane wrote: | It was so cool to realize that NIN used one for making a song. | Caustic had an emulated one with a lot of features, but I dont | know if there are other DAWs with similar ones... | z5h wrote: | I was looking for the modular synth comment(s). That's | immediately what came to mind when I saw this. How can I | integrate this with my synths. | jcpst wrote: | Yeah- as a long time modular synth user I practically drool | over stuff like this. But for the money I can just get more | synth modules. | ftxbro wrote: | i would buy one if it cost ten dollars not five hundred dollars | so-and-so wrote: | Very interesting device. But it costs as much as an office PC, | that can emulate this analog computer and do a lot more. | qubex wrote: | A digital computer cannot emulate an analog computer: it can | only simulate it to an arbitrary level of precision. That's the | whole point. | dmos62 wrote: | The difference between the words emulate and simulate are | difficult to grasp for me. One comes from the latin `aemulus` | and the other from `similis`. One talks about imitation and | the other about similarity. When people discuss the | differences between these terms, they say things like one | aims to be able to replace a thing, while the other aims to | replicate the thing's internal state. Or, that one aims to | replicate the external behaviour, and the other aims to | replicate the internal state. | | I somewhat discard these interpretations. My conclusion, is | that emulation is about making something equal to something | else under some circumstance, while simulation is about | approaching emulation (under some circumstance), but not | aiming or achieving complete emulation (under that | circumstance). Basically, the difference between becoming | equal and becoming similar. This is counter to popular usage | I think, but popular usage is a bit of a mess, in my opinion. | qubex wrote: | The concept of perfectly accurate emulation lies at the | core of formal definitions of computing such as Turing's | seminal "Turing Machine" introduced in "On Computable | Numbers" way back in 1936. | amelius wrote: | The problem with simulation is that it might produce | artifacts that a user might exploit ("hey, this is cool!") | and then finds out that it only exists in the simulation, | not in the real world. | samstave wrote: | What was that application from a long time ago that had | analog wiring sound systems that you had to manually (on | screen) connect a wire between ports... and you could flip | the rack from front to back? | | -- | | One of my best friends growing up built a ton of analog | mixers IRL while working at Melekko Heavy Industries... (I | helped him a tiny bit create the CAD files for the CNC for | the faceplates.) | gpas wrote: | Reason? | samstave wrote: | Yep! | | Thats the one - imagine if you had an UX/UI to | mynoise.net with a REASON frontend? | | We should escalate this as a "bug which is missing as a | _feature_ " that they dont have a UX like this :-) | | Stephane @ mynoise.net | mjhay wrote: | Analog computers don't have infinite precision due to the | presence of noise, so digital computers can emulate that with | high-enough precision arithmetic. | qubex wrote: | 'Emulation' means something very specific. What you are | speaking of is "simulation to an arbitrary degree of | precision", as I mentioned. | bheadmaster wrote: | > 'Emulation' means something very specific | | What exactly? And how does it differ from "simulation"? | qubex wrote: | Simulation is about mimicking another device or system. | Emulation is about setting up a system that is logically | indistinguishable from another irrespective of its | implementation substrate and details thereof. | | A thing is successfully 'emulated' when it is logically | impossible to distinguish the difference between the | system and its emulated counterpart. | SamBam wrote: | Since, as you said in a sister reply, even one analog | computer might be slightly different from another analog | computer, and thus unable to emulate it, if you had the | outputs of two different computers, one analog and one | digital one simulating it to a high precision (higher | than the noise of the analog one) how could you | distinguish which was digital and which was analog? | | If you can't, then this is a meaningless semantic | discussion. The digital computer can emulate the analog | one as well as any other analog computer can. | qubex wrote: | The point is that discrete computers can exactly and | trivially emulate each other. The inability to emulate an | analog computer by a digital or analog computer kind of | is the whole point. | flir wrote: | You know, by that definition one analogue computer can't | emulate another of the same model. | qubex wrote: | Exactly! For analog computers, every single 'run' is | different! | shultays wrote: | Sure you can, you only need to simulate it to near some | orders around the planck constant. And then you can go even | further. Analog does not have infinite precision either | qubex wrote: | As a concept, analog computers rely upon an assumption of | continuity. | shultays wrote: | But due to limitations of physics, nothing will be | continuous. | | Is amount of water in a bucket continuous? No, you can | count each individual atoms. So you can simulate that by | using large enough integers. Same principle applies | everwhere | qubex wrote: | These are assumptions. If you think the assumption of | continuity is ridiculous, note that the definition of | universal Turing machines requires an infinitely long | tape (infinite memory), which of course conflicts with | the finite memory of any actually implementable digital | computer. | shultays wrote: | I am not saying you need a turing machine, a finite one | will do since we are also dealing with a finite analog | system. If analog system is finite and has finite states | that we can measure, then a finite computer will just do | fine | qubex wrote: | I'm saying that these properties are derived from equally | ultimately unrealistic scenarios. | | I'm honestly quite surprised that people are chiming in | with their 'opinions' on proven mathematical facts. | deelowe wrote: | > A digital computer cannot emulate an analog computer: | it can only simulate it to an arbitrary level of | precision. That's the whole point. | | A modern digital computer can simulate this particular | analog computer beyond the noise floor. Practically | speaking, that means a digital computer can perfectly | emulate this system therefore it's simply a toy or | perhaps for aesthetics. | mjhay wrote: | That's much less cool though. | orbital-decay wrote: | It's an educational board. I made a custom educational board | for my kid a few years back (with a 16 bit digital CPU though) | just to have something physical, with the possibility to be | underclocked to extreme values and a bunch of LEDs in key | points to illustrate the principle. I could have used an | emulator, but something like that is 1000x better as it's bare | metal and doesn't have any black magic under the hood. | shagie wrote: | When it was originally released it was a bit less expensive | than the current price on it (glad I got one then). | | https://web.archive.org/web/20220528131517/https://shop.anab... | RobotToaster wrote: | Is it actually open source? I can only find PDF schematics, not | source files. The git link takes me to a closed gitlab instance. | TheRealPomax wrote: | But if folks could also maybe come up with a way to make patch | cables not destroy any sense of understandability, that'd be | great. | | (and maybe solve the whole "good luck 'saving' the thing you just | made" problem at the same time, too. cheers) ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2023-06-02 23:00 UTC)