Audio Patch Released for the Tungsten T

Palm SG has released an audio update patch for the Tungsten T hadheld. The patch has been released to address sound quality issues when playing back certain digital audio files.

The update is now available and can be downloaded from the Palm Inc Support site.

Palm Inc says the patch resolves audio playback issues, associated with playing audio files (such as MP3 or WAV), which affect sound output quality. Enhancements to the Palm Sound Manager included with this update also enable the playback of audio files in the background with some applications.

This patch is intended for the Palm Tungsten T and is not meant for use with any other handheld. It is a 100k standard palm os prc file.

You can test out the difference with audio software such as PocketTunes or Aeroplayer. The RealOne audio player, which was supposed to be released before the end of the year, is still not availible.

Thanks to the many that sent in the word.

Article Comments

 (79 comments)

The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. PalmInfocenter is not responsible for them in any way.
Please Login or register here to add your comments.

Comments Closed Comments Closed
This article is no longer accepting new comments.

Down View Full Comment Thread

Volume?

I.M Anonymous @ 2/6/2003 12:58:58 AM #
Does this patch also lower the volume as much as the beta one?

RE: Volume?
cyberdude @ 2/6/2003 1:08:04 AM #
Finally it works just as it should. I tested it just briefly but not only is the audio much improved, ubut it does not lower the volume. Big bonus IMO is the fact that it will now play audio in the background allowing you to work, play or whatever with many programs and still listen to your music. Thanks guys, good job.
RE: Volume?
asiayeah @ 2/6/2003 1:12:02 AM #
It works perfectly!

Cheers,
Tony Cheung

--
With great power comes great responsiblity.

Another observation
cyberdude @ 2/6/2003 1:22:50 AM #
While playing music in the background, some programs like Bejeweled, for example run noticeably slower. It was not enough to really bother me and best of all; audio quality is not compromised while "multitasking".

Re: Another observation
hotpaw4 @ 2/6/2003 2:10:25 AM #
>While playing music in the background, some programs ... run noticeably slower.

That's what happens when you multitask with only 1 CPU. If the Real player uses the OMAP DSP instead of the ARM9, then the slowdown of the foreground task should be less. (Almost) 2 CPU's is supposed to be the big advantage of the TI OMAP over the XScale or MXL.

How much was the slowdown? In percent.

RE: Volume?
dsm363 @ 2/6/2003 6:45:20 AM #
Works great! This is awesome. There was a problem and Palm addressed it in a timely matter. Now if only Palm or Sandisk would do something about their large SD cards (sync speed issue) my Tungsten T would be perfect.

multitasking
mj6798 @ 2/6/2003 8:15:15 AM #
That's what happens when you multitask with only 1 CPU.

That's not what should happen. Neither an MP3 player nor Bejewelled should take far less than 50% of a 175MHz RISC chip. And that means that if you run them simultaneously, neither of them should experience any slowdown.

If there is a slowdown, it is really a software architecture problem in Palm OS 5: some combination of poor multitasking support, busy waiting, etc. That's not surprising, given the history of Palm OS. Let's hope it gets fixed for good in Palm OS 6.

RE: Volume?
ChipKerchner @ 2/6/2003 12:33:43 PM #
> That's not what should happen. Neither an MP3 player nor Bejewelled should take far less than 50% of a 175MHz RISC chip. And that means that if you run them simultaneously, neither of them should experience any slowdown.

That's not necessarily true. Bejewelled isn't native ARM code so it is dependent on the "emulator". My guess would be more than 50% since Bejeweled was designed for a colored Palm (approx. 33 MHZ - I may be wrong in these assumptions). MP3 is a fairly complicated "application" as well. So a T|T (144 MHZ) could be struggling with two time intensive programs.

RE: Volume?
mj6798 @ 2/6/2003 2:00:33 PM #
MP3 players are barely noticeable on modern CPUs, and Bejewelled should be doing little more than wait for input, blink, and move a bunch of sprites around occasionally. A 144MHz ARM should, in principle, be able to handle all of this with plenty of room to spare; a few years ago, that kind of machine was considered a high-end desktop workstation, used for engineering and CAD work.

There is nothing wrong with wasting CPU cycles when there are CPU cycles to waste. But let's not pretend that something is a CPU limitation when it is pretty clearly due to some combination of emulation, limitations in multitasking, and busy-waiting applications. This is fixable, and software authors and Palm should fix it.

RE: Volume?
sr @ 2/6/2003 8:39:38 PM #
Modern CPUs run at 3 GHz, not 144 MHz. MP3 decoding is *not* a trivial task. Consider that:

a) MP3 decoding is not even possible on CPUs slower than 50 MHz (generally speaking).
b) Bejeweled is running in emulation.

The other person was right - a program utilizing DSP for MP3 decoding would get around this nicely.

RE: Volume?
mj6798 @ 2/7/2003 8:44:11 AM #
"a) MP3 decoding is not even possible on CPUs slower than 50 MHz (generally speaking)."

Good. So, that means that 2/3's of the TT CPU are left for playing Bejewelled. You just made my point for me.

"b) Bejeweled is running in emulation."

Indeed. Which just goes to show that Palm's claims that emulation doesn't impose a lot of overhead are wrong. Because 2/3 of an ARM processor should be plenty for a game that mostly sits around and waits, with some simple sprite animations on a tiny bitmap every now and then.

"The other person was right - a program utilizing DSP for MP3 decoding would get around this nicely."

It would. But that's not the point. The point is that these kinds of applications should not require special hacks: they should just run efficiently, out of the box.

Palm needs to fix Palm OS and come out with a native version quickly. No emulation. Proper multitasking. No ARMlets. Anything else is just rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.

RE: Volume?
orb2069 @ 2/7/2003 7:57:18 PM #
Palm needs to fix Palm OS and come out with a native version quickly. No emulation.

Oh, that's a GREAT idea. Instead of Bejewelled running slow, then it wouldn't run at ALL. It's a 68k application, remember?

The only reason I tuned into this discussion is to find out what people were going to find to complain about NOW since Palm gave them exactly what they were asking for, for free. Thanks for not dissapointing me.

Proper multitasking. No ARMlets. Anything else is just rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.

Better the titanic than the Kursk, thanks. I don't see the point in forcing all those software authors to redo all that software immediately - It hasn't been working too hot for Apple, and their users are a LOT more aggressive/loyal than Palm's.

RE: Volume?
mj6798 @ 2/8/2003 6:22:58 AM #
Better the titanic than the Kursk, thanks. I don't see the point in forcing all those software authors to redo all that software immediately - It hasn't been working too hot for Apple, and their users are a LOT more aggressive/loyal than Palm's.

Huh? Apples 68k to PPC transition worked very well, and OS X does not require people to rewrite software. Apple has lots of problems, but they have managed their platform transitions very well.

Oh, that's a GREAT idea. Instead of Bejewelled running slow, then it wouldn't run at ALL. It's a 68k application, remember?

There is nothing wrong with providing emulation, but there is everything wrong with not providing a fully native API and good multitasking. You may say that this is a tradeoff Palm had to make.

But no matter what the reason, the fact remains that you can't run an MP3 player and Bejewelled simultaneously on hardware that is perfectly capable of doing that with ease (in fact, frankly, it should be able to do that in emulation--the problem must be deeper).

Palm OS 5 just isn't a very good system. Stick with Palm OS 4 until Palm OS 6 comes out. A 68k-based Sony Clie is perfectly capable of running Bejewelled and an MP3 player simultaneously, and it's cheaper and lighter than a TT as well.

RE: Volume?
mj6798 @ 2/8/2003 6:37:00 AM #
A 68k-based Sony Clie is perfectly capable of running Bejewelled and an MP3 player

I should say that this is my impression from the documentation, not first hand experience. The best and cheapest way to get simultaneous MP3 playback is--to buy a separate MP3 player. That's essentially what the Sony Palms seem to do anyway.

RE: Volume?
MP3 @ 2/9/2003 1:52:42 AM #
Excuse me mj, but I would like to set a couple of things straight here:

---"Because 2/3 of an ARM processor should be plenty for a game that mostly sits around and waits, with some simple sprite animations on a tiny bitmap every now and then."---

I hate to break this to you, but Bejeweled is NOT as simple as you make it. It's not just a "a game that mostly sits around and waits, with some simple sprite animations on a tiny bitmap every now and then"; it's much more than that. Remember, Bejeweled's addictiveness stems partially from the fact that it is somewhat hypnotic. Therefore, Astraware couldn't run any risks of having it run slow and jerky (as this would ruin the "hypnosis"), and I, as a beta tester of Bejeweled, can testify that this was no simple matter on Clies - HiRes graphics with a slow Dragonball CPU?! Forget about it!

At first, Howard Tomlinson even refused to make a HiRes version of Bejeweled at all, until they would be able to find a way around this. Fortunately for us, he and David Oakley managed to develop some sort of assembly-level trick for getting the job done, and we now have a HiRes version of Bejeweled.

Thus, you are right about the "waiting around" part - in fact there is so little happening then, that Bejeweled lowers the frame rate to conserve battery life. HOWEVER, the "simple sprite animations", I repeat, are NOT simple - you have 64 gems that have to glitter, roll, slide, sparkle, fall, appear on the board, be taken off the board, and more, and combinations of these actions are happening all the time.

Therefore, naturally you wont notice the lag when sitting and waiting - there's nothing happening then anyway! The "lag" being referred to here refers to when the jewels are moving, right? Well, of course that's when you'll notice the lag - even a powerful ARM chip can't decode MP3's and animate Bejewelled at the same time - after all, both of these require timely processing, (you can't wait for one to finish before working on the other) and the interspersal that is acheived through multitasking is not nearly as good as multiprocessing - thus resulting in "lag", even on a fast processor - remember, this is multitasking, NOT multiprocessing.

If the MP3 player were to use the DSP on the other hand, LIKE IT IS SUPPOSED TO (!), then it would be like multiprocessing, so there would be no problems.


---"'The other person was right - a program utilizing DSP for MP3 decoding would get around this nicely.'

It would. But that's not the point. The point is that these kinds of applications should not require special hacks: they should just run efficiently, out of the box."---

EXCUSE ME, but using the DSP is NOT A SPECIAL HACK - what the heck else did TI implement a "multimedia DSP" into the OMAP for??!! You're not making any sense, buddy! The TI OMAP's DSP is there for a reason - to be used for MP3 decoding!

RE: Volume?
mj6798 @ 2/9/2003 8:42:01 AM #
hate to break this to you, but Bejeweled is NOT as simple as you make it.

If it runs on a 33MHz 68k and if Palm's claims are correct that their 68k compatibility hack is very efficient, it should be using only a small fraction of a 144MHz ARM chip.

even a powerful ARM chip can't decode MP3's and animate Bejewelled at the same time - after all, both of these require timely processing, (you can't wait for one to finish before working on the other) and the interspersal that is acheived through multitasking is not nearly as good as multiprocessing

Any reasonable audio system buffers hundreds of milliseconds of audio in hardware, and process switch latencies for modern multitasking operating systems running on 144MHz chips should be somewhere in the microsecond range.

EXCUSE ME, but using the DSP is NOT A SPECIAL HACK - what the heck else did TI implement a "multimedia DSP" into the OMAP for??!! You're not making any sense, buddy! The TI OMAP's DSP is there for a reason - to be used for MP3 decoding!

At issue is not how to make this work (after all, using a separate MP3 player makes it work), at issue is what this observation tells us about Palm OS 5.

The upshot is: the observation that MP3 and Bejeweled can't smoothly multitask shows that there must be some serious limitations in Palm OS 5, in the areas of audio, multitasking, and/or emulation speed; it simply isn't up to the standars of what we would expect from a native multitasking ARM operating system, and it seems to me you are effecitvely not getting much more than with Palm OS 4.

So, my recommendation would be: save your money and get a Sony SJ-30 instead of a Palm T|T.

Dang

MP3 @ 2/6/2003 1:24:10 AM #
In a word, Sh*t.

It was JUST YESTERDAY that I took the plunge and installed the buggy, volume-reducing beta version of this patch, and now I have to find a way to get rid of it already and install the new one. Oh well, look at the bright side: at least it's finally here! ;-) Now, if only RealOne/RealPlayer would get moving... ;-)

RE: Dang
asiayeah @ 2/6/2003 1:36:58 AM #
No need to say the S word.

The beta version is not supposed to be released for the public.

For the installation instruction, you may refer to another topic in this site, "MP3 on the Palm Tungsten T", someone has posted the instructure there.

Tony

--
With great power comes great responsiblity.

removing OS extensions
hotpaw4 @ 2/6/2003 2:03:17 AM #
HotSync. Backup. Warm (no-notify, up-button) reset, delete, soft reset. Or change the type to '0000' with filez or rsrcedit, soft reset, delete.
RE: Dang
adamrichman @ 2/6/2003 9:17:49 PM #
Do a search on the Brigthand TT forums, there's detailed instructions on removing the beta patch.

http://discussion.brighthand.com/palmhandhelds/forumdisplay.php?s=&forumid=151

Not in OS 5.2?

McMagnus @ 2/6/2003 1:47:18 AM #
I was kind'a dissapointed, not by the quality or volume, but by the fact that it was released separately from an OS update. That makes me suspect I will have to pay for it when it arrives.

I can't in my wildest dreams think that Palm released it just to be nice.

Hello?
Mengoxon @ 2/6/2003 2:19:28 AM #
"That makes me suspect I will have to pay for it when it arrives."

...ahhh.... it has arrived ... and...duuuhhh.... you don't have to pay for it!

Your dreams should become a bit wilder!

Why would anyone (other than Microsoft) charge for a bug fix (cause that's all it is) anyway?

RE: Not in OS 5.2?
asiayeah @ 2/6/2003 2:22:30 AM #
The patch is just released and is free for all Tungsten T users.

The patch is not related to the Palm OS itself, it's only for the Tungsten T. So it won't be part of any OS update.

Tony

--
With great power comes great responsiblity.

RE: Not in OS 5.2?
I.M Anonymous @ 2/6/2003 2:25:12 AM #
The good news is that we don't have to suffer through Graffiti 2.0 in order to get good quality sound.

RE: Not in OS 5.2?
jjsoh @ 2/6/2003 10:18:41 AM #
: I was kind'a dissapointed, not by the quality or
: volume, but by the fact that it was released
: separately from an OS update. That makes me suspect
: I will have to pay for it when it arrives.

What's there to be disappointed about? I don't think there's any need to jump to conclusions so quickly. I don't recall Palm even releasing a 5.2 update yet for Tungsten owners (as it's not offered on the software download page of their site). For all we know, it could already be included in the next update, but they made it available for us now. I, for one, am glad they didn't have us wait longer for an update to enjoy better sound quality today.

And if Palm OS software history is any indication, updates (x.2, x.2.1, etc) are free for download. Upgrades (v6.0, v7.0, etc) are what we might have to pay for.

Jim

RE: Not in OS 5.2?
Bumbleluck @ 2/6/2003 11:45:47 AM #
Ah, but 4.1 was a purchase only update.

History rarely repeats itself, if it is observed! :-)

I'm hopeing Palm will release 5.2 as a free update.

ChriS

RE: Not in OS 5.2?
Clemau @ 2/6/2003 12:40:19 PM #
Think 4.1 is only a purchase upgrade if your Palm didn't come with 4.0. It is free for M505 & M515.

Seeing that the TT has 5.0, 5.2 should be a free update..... but you never know.....

RE: Not in OS 5.2?
rsc1000 @ 2/6/2003 1:02:49 PM #
>>Think 4.1 is only a purchase upgrade if your Palm didn't come with 4.0. It is free for M505 & M515.

Yes - although m505 users had to wait months after everyone else to get the 4.1 upgrade. At first, Palm reps claimed that m505 users didn't need the upgrade, because 4.1 was just a 'version of 4.0, but for non-4.0 Palms' (actual quote from a palm rep). They apparently didn't want to incur the cost of fixing their mistakes. Anyways, i have a TT now and the patch works - so its all 'water under the bridge' as far as i am concerned :)

RE: Not in OS 5.2?
jjsoh @ 2/6/2003 5:53:41 PM #
: Ah, but 4.1 was a purchase only update.
:

Bumbleluck

Please reread my comment, as not to confuse 'upgrades' with 'updates.' When upgrading, the OS is moving up a full version (i.e. v2.0 > v3.0, v.3.2 > v4.1, etc). When you are updating, they're only incremental moves (i.e. v3.1 > v.3.2, v4.0 > v4.1, etc).

: History rarely repeats itself, if it is observed! :-)

Only if observed more carefully. ;)

Jim

RE: Not in OS 5.2?
Bumbleluck @ 2/7/2003 9:34:38 AM #
=) Well said.

I think that it would be a tough sell that 4.1 was a true "upgrade". But I concede your point.

RE: Not in OS 5.2?
nuopus @ 2/7/2003 6:01:49 PM #
4.1 was only pay if you didnt already have 4.0. Most companies charge for major updates. Tell me that more than 80% of companies do NOT charge for major upgrades and ill tell you that you are full of crap.

The first digit is normally a major upgrade while the second is minor. In unix a 3rd is patch update. The jump from 3 to 4 was done because they felt that it was different enough to warrant it. 4.0 to 4.1 is a free patch because they contain minor changes and didnt warant a purchase.

When iSilo went from version 2 to version 3 they made you pay again. When eWallet went from 2 to 3 they made everyone purchase again.


RE: Not in OS 5.2?
nuopus @ 2/7/2003 6:01:49 PM #
4.1 was only pay if you didnt already have 4.0. Most companies charge for major updates. Tell me that more than 80% of companies do NOT charge for major upgrades and ill tell you that you are full of crap.

The first digit is normally a major upgrade while the second is minor. In unix a 3rd is patch update. The jump from 3 to 4 was done because they felt that it was different enough to warrant it. 4.0 to 4.1 is a free patch because they contain minor changes and didnt warant a purchase.

When iSilo went from version 2 to version 3 they made you pay again. When eWallet went from 2 to 3 they made everyone purchase again.


problem with audio patch

jsulmeyer @ 2/6/2003 2:17:36 AM #
Well, I installed the patch and have noticed that the default click sound on my Tungsten sounds different - the best way I can describe it is that it is louder, more tinny, slightly distorted and occasionally it stutters (very fast double or triple clicks). Is there a way to delete it so I can compare the new sound to the old sound? It's really bugging me...



RE: problem with audio patch
Lemon @ 2/6/2003 5:01:14 AM #
Why this patch says it can make background play?

Aeroplayer can do this without the patch!

Lemon

RE: problem with audio patch
palmit @ 2/6/2003 9:16:08 AM #
Turn off the system sound!
More Problems with audio patch...
Amleth @ 2/6/2003 9:37:40 AM #
The patch fixed mp3 playback perfectly for me, but ruined system sounds. It plays a noisy "pop" sound at the start of, and sometimes at the end of each system midi sound. On longer sounds, you only hear it at the beginning or end, but on shorter sounds, like the system click, the pop is almost the same duration as the midi, so you hear them both at once, making it sound distorted, and "tinny". It's really _very_ annoying.

The weird thing is, if you turn system sounds off, you can play midis fine, with no distortion, and when you turn them back on, the initial "click" determining the volume level plays _perfectly_, but every one thereafter is distorted...

At first I thought I had a bad Tungsten (I've had several. 4th one!), but you seem to be experiencing the same issue.

What I'm wondering is, is it only a few users like usaffected, or does everyone have this problem, and it's just that most haven't noticed, like the dust under the screen?

RE: problem with audio patch
pbuckler @ 2/6/2003 10:19:04 AM #
I get a problem with the system sounds after the patch was installed. I guess there will be a PalmAudioUpdate Update soon.

RE: problem with audio patch
dreslism @ 2/6/2003 10:54:16 AM #
I just have to ask after seeing all these posts about the system sounds. Who in their right mind uses system sounds!!!!?????? I mean how annoying is that to next to someone with a Palm and system sounds on? I have been using Palm's since 1997, and have never seen anyone use them, so I am very suprised about all the people saying Oh, my system sounds are affected by this audio patch. I would love to see a poll on who uses system sounds on their Palm's.

RE: problem with audio patch
PFloyd @ 2/6/2003 11:09:57 AM #
You guys crack me up. It shouldn't be a big surprise that the system sounds are different. Supposedly the Tungsten was designed to optimize voice (I imagine from 400 to 4000 Hz). The "patch" is supposed to remove that optimization so that full audio quality is available. You're going to hear sounds differently...

RE: problem with audio patch
Amleth @ 2/6/2003 1:01:09 PM #
PFloyd, it doesn't sound different because of increased dynamic range. It sounds different because of the "pop" sound it makes when it plays a system sound. You know the sound the speakers make when you switch on the amp in some hifi systems? like that, but a much smaller scale. After the fraction-of-a-second pop it sounds normal, but it's still irritating.

And for the guy above, I imagine a lot of people use system sounds (though on low, of course). It's nice to get some additional feedback when you interact with the GUI.

Top View Full Comment Thread
Achtung! Only the first 50 comments are displayed within the article.
    Click here for the full story discussion page...

Account

Register Register | Login Log in
user:
pass: