ARM prototyping / eval board with most g i/o

you need some programming software like micro c or keil arm that you write your program in int then simulate it using proteus by uploading hex file obtained in keil compling tool!

Sure. I was planning to use cloud 9 for the programming side.

However, i see that there are some simulators on the market that may fit the bill

for more than just the electronics / mcu simulation

some also offer an IDEnvironment for you to use in a window next to the simulated electronics

I like the look of the Proteus but too expensive really

if i can find one that will simulate the ARM M3 or M7 that is cheap

then i shall go for that one

even if i have to go separate with the IDE.

I understand that it may not be as much fun for soldering enthusiasts, however, until i know my components off by heart

then i think such a simulation would be really useful for learning and experimenting without getting your hands too dirty.

Cheers

j

Sure. I was planning to use cloud 9 for the programming side.

However, i see that there are some simulators on the market that may fit the bill

for more than just the electronics / mcu simulation

some also offer an IDEnvironment for you to use in a window next to the simulated electronics

I like the look of the Proteus but too expensive really

if i can find one that will simulate the ARM M3 or M7 that is cheap

then i shall go for that one

even if i have to go separate with the IDE.

I understand that it may not be as much fun for soldering enthusiasts, however, until i know my components off by heart

then i think such a simulation would be really useful for learning and experimenting without getting your hands too dirty.

Cheers

j

now, i know the below page is aimed at Arduino enthusiast however some of the apps can still be used with other MCU's and prototyping formats. So perhaps worth a read.

https://www.smashingrobotics.com/arduino-simulators-lineup-start-developing-without-real-board/

If you want to get anywhere with ARM M* micros, especially as a beginner, then use an IDE that the processor manufacturer supports.

Cloud 9 is NOT such an IDE and you will cut yourself off from manufacturer low level hardware support by using it.

ST support Keil IAR and  Atollic. None of these are free for large projects but all offer quite good free version with code size restrictions. I recommend the Keil tools, partly because they are quite good  but also because Keil is part of ARM.

Once you are proficient with the processor and tools you can sensibly consider using an alternative code development environment.

Jan's advice is good - don't bother with a simulator - complete waste of time for your kind of work. To understand the parts you need to mess with them hands on - buy a £9 Nucleo, use free software (Keil or IAR) with it, buy a few parts like slider pots and rotary encoder knobs and get stuck in. If you do have any money to burn them buy a scope.

MK

Hello Michael Kellet,

Thanks for your advice. I will consider this carefully.

Please let me explain a little regarding the reasons why i suggested using cloud 9 and the simulator.

Firstly, the reason why i thought using the cloud 9 IDE would be a good idea was primarily to learn the fundamentals of C/C++.

I believe learning the fundamentals of the language is a good idea before getting stuck in with prototyping boards.

I choose Cloud 9 because it is an IDE that is free but also easy to use especially if you are familiar with the interface.

As for the simulator. The reason why I thought using a simulator like 123 circuits was a good idea, is that for someone who has little experience with electronics (although i have passed a qualification in basic electronics) can learn the fundamentals of electronics by following the tutorials and by experimenting with the components on the virtual breadboard. The simulator looks fairly good and has most the components that i will be using with my first control surface including shift registers. 123 circuits also allows you to convert the circuits that you design on the breadboard into a PCB design and once designed, allows you to order the PCB direct. I think that that's very useful too. It is possible to also possible to add your own bespoke components, although i have to admit i am unsure as to how this works,

I have no problem with using real electronic components or soldering and understand that it is necessary to achieve the end goal, as is using the proper IDE, however i also feel that the simulators do have a use firstly for people at the very beginning of their learning in embedded electronics and for designing PCBs.

Once I am comfortable with the basic electronics and know what components I need to use, I will then order a prototyping board and the components I need. I think that using the simulator just makes the basic circuit design a little easier as it gives the user some room to experiment without blowing any components due to bad circuit design.

The problem is that simulators only tell you a very small part of the story. At best they simulate the circuit you put into them - this is NEVER the circuit that you might actually build. Circuit simulation can be helpful, especially with analogue design but it is not the whole story. To learn electronics you really, absolutely need to play with real parts. You need theory as well, of course, but that hands on stuff really matters.

Several posters on E14 use plug in prototype boards and these can work fine for simple circuits.

BTW, why do you think you want shift registers for your control surface - as a way of extending the inputs on a micro they can be useful but there can be problems too - it's easy to get  a LOT of inputs directly on one chip if you need them.

MK

Hi MK,

thanks again for your posting and spending time helping a newbie such as myself.

Dont get me wrong, i do plan to buy a prototype board soon with the component parts that i want to get to work with the board.

I just need to work out how it's all going to fit together and work.

The objective for my first project is to design and build a hardware controller that can be used to control music software on a computer via MIDI or HID.

The first control surface i hope to be able to use to control a channel strip plug-in. Channel Strips usually incorporate a number of analogue and digital inputs and outputs.

The plug in i have chosen to design a personal control surface for has 22 endless rotary encoders, 16 buttons and many LED's.

I would also like to add LED rings for each of the encoders which will be used to show the present settings.

Now, i understand my first project is likely very ambitious, but i do not mind building it in stages and learning as I go.

I was planning in using shift registers for the LED rings. The LED rings will be used to display the current settings of the plug in (eventually).

Perhaps there is other ways of achieving the same result, however this is the only way i have seen it achieved.

As this is a personal non commercial project, the cost of the prototype board I use isn't really restricted although i do not want to pay over a £100 for the prototype board. I understand that it is possible to build your own board around your chosen MCU but I think that this may also be a bit too ambitious to start with.

If you have any advice or suggestions, i would be really grateful for your help.

Thanks again

Cheers Justin

I'm guessing you mean to make something like this:

Steinberg CC121 Advanced Integration Controller | DV247

or this:

http://www.dv247.com/studio-equipment/avid-pro-tools-|-s3-audio-interface--215189

If so then it really is way too ambitious for a first project.

Why not start off with something simple and useful, like a cut down version of the CC121 with a single motorized fader, a few buttons and a small LCD screen - you could control that with a a reasonable micro dev board and learn all the principles without getting bogged down in the shear numbers issues of dealing with zillions of IOs and LEDs.

Something like the Avid surface will use a main board with hundreds of components on it  - which is the only feasible way to arrange loads of LEDs and drivers and all the other little display like bits. If you try to hand wire such a thing it will take ages, be huge and unless you are very skillful it will be very, very hard to get it to work.

MK

Hi MK.

thanks for your advice and info.

Although the type of controller that i am planning on making will not be so much a universal midi controller or audio interface / controller hybrid

like the ones you have posted.

But a controller specifically designed to work with one particular plug in, and to start with on one particular channel in one particular daw.

I think that the controller that i am planning to make is more like one of the simple midi controllers as found on instructables such as:

Custom Arduino MIDI Controller

but with a few more analogue inputs (rotary encoders) and a few more digital inputs.

If i get the controller working at this stage,

i can then add the LED rings and the other digital outputs for visual feedback,

I am also happy to learn how to get program the device to work and although i am new to embedded electronics and programming in C.

I am not new to sound engineering (I have a BA Degree from a world class Performing Arts college) and have some experience in programming.

I am also willing to do the study and research.

It can be done for people who are into DIY prototyping, as I have seen loads of people do so using the MIDIbox format as well as one or two other platforms which include the software app for free.

However, i believe that in some cases such as in MIDIbox, the software is exclusively non-commercial, so may not be used by anyone developing for business.

Although I am not developing for business to start with, i would like the option open so I would like to develop the app myself.

I also want the experience and knowledge needed to develop this. as such skills are employable skills.

But i agree regarding 1st project, however, i do not see any reason why i cant with a portion of the project and build on it until i eventually get to the finished article.

I see no problem in this.