Have you thought of modifying a bluetooth headset unit? It should be
reasonably easy to connect it to your PC. The amplifier may be more of
a challengr unless you run that via the PC also.

RP

On 13 November 2011 21:43, V G <x.solarwind.x@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I want to build a simple wireless audio relay for my guitar, so I don't
> have to use cables to hook it up to the amp/computer. Buying a decent one
> would cost around $200 and there's no way in hell I'm spending $200 for a
> simple short range radio. I figured I'd make my own.
>
> I'm thinking:
>
> GUITAR -> op amp -> ADC -> radio module
>
> radio module -> DAC -> op amp -> output
>
> Specifications:
>
> - Sample rate: I think 96kHz should be good. CD quality is 44.1 kHz, but =
I
> really want to capture much more than that.
> - Resolution: 16 bit sounds about right. I can't find any ADCs with 24 bi=
ts
> at 96kHz anyway (only a quick search)
> - I have some good op amps in mind. Maybe LTC6202
> http://www.linear.com/product/LT6202 - low noise, good slew rate, more th=
an
> enough GBW, low power, good package, cheap
>
> Radio module:
>
> This is the most complicated part for me. I plan to use a parallel CMOS A=
DC
> to keep it simple (unless someone recommends otherwise) and feed it
> directly into the radio module if I can. But if I can't, I don't mind usi=
ng
> a CPLD to interface the ADC to the radio module.
>
> 96kHz * 24 bit =3D 2.3Mbit/s
> 96kHz * 16 bit =3D 1.5Mbit/s
>
> I have no idea which radio chip/module/transceiver to use. Various produc=
ts
> off the top of my head:
>
> - XBee (not enough throughput)
> - TI CC1101 type (not enough throughput)
> - RFM12 type (not enough throughput)
> - Various other ISM transceivers (probably not enough throughput)
>
> - 802.11 wifi modules - these are fast enough, but pretty expensive and
> will probably require more than just a CPLD to interface
> - CC8531 type http://www.ti.com/product/cc8531 - looks like it was design=
ed
> for my purpose. Doesn't look too easy to interface though. This is the be=
st
> solution I could find.
>
> Any other ideas?
>
> The whole thing should be as low latency as possible - undetectable by me
> (I can notice latencies of more than a few milliseconds, more sensitive
> than the average human, and it's very annoying).
> --
> http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
> View/change your membership options at
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
>
--=20
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
.