1

I am designing an audio amplifier circuit which uses an I2S digital MEMS mic (INMP441) for picking up voice signals and an I2S class-D amplifier (MAX98357A) for amplification.

block diagram

I have attached the block diagram of my design. From answers to my previous question, I now know that directly linking these two I2S slave devices as shown won't work, as they require clock signals which would be usually generated by an MCU.

My question is: How can I generate the required I2S clock signals to make those two slaves communicate, without using a microcontroller?.

SamGibson
  • 17,231
  • 5
  • 37
  • 58
Sri
  • 87
  • 3
  • 1
    Back to the drawing board: One of the devices needs to be the I²S master generating both word and bit clocks. – Turbo J Jan 31 '22 at 10:25
  • 2
    This appears to be an exact duplicate of your question from two weeks ago: https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/604152/i2s-communication – TypeIA Jan 31 '22 at 11:18
  • 2
    @TypeIA - Hi, I can see why you made that comment (and this question should link to the previous one for context - I'll edit this one to add that link). However this question is subtly different *and* it was recommended that the OP asks *this* question, by [a comment](/posts/comments/1596296) on an answer in that *previous* question. So *this* question is asking: Given that directly linking those I2S slave devices *won't* work (as answered in the previous question), what can the OP add (without using an MCU) to generate the required clock signals & allow those two I2S slaves to communicate? – SamGibson Jan 31 '22 at 12:34
  • [continued] So basically the OP is trying to find a concrete implementation of the oscillators that you and others kindly mentioned in answers on that previous question. – SamGibson Jan 31 '22 at 12:42
  • 1
    @SamGibson After suggesting OP to ask another question, I started being afraid it might be considered as a dupe, depending on the way it would be formulated. Thank you for understanding the whole train of events, and for your edit here who will hopefully clarify any misunderstanding. – dim Jan 31 '22 at 13:20
  • 1
    @SamGibson I see the subtle difference. On the other hand, some concrete non-MCU suggestions were made in the original answers, and as best I can tell the OP has made no additional effort to follow up on those. I don't see that this question adds anything new to the picture. – TypeIA Jan 31 '22 at 14:31
  • 1
    @TypeIA - Hi, Yes concrete suggestions were given but, based on [this comment](/posts/comments/1596283) from the OP, they need more details. So, rather than extend the previous question from it's original "will this work" to also add "and what exactly can be used", they have added the latter as a separate question. As you say, the OP hasn't followed-up in the previous question. But now that answers (including yours) have been given to that original question, expanding/changing it could be problematic. So IMHO, I don't see a problem in a 2nd question, as long as the differences are made clear. – SamGibson Feb 01 '22 at 02:32

0 Answers0