Post Go back to editing

Using MAX98050 for noise cancelling applications

Thread Summary

The user is planning to use the MAX98050 for both ANC and ENC in a consumer audio product with 2 microphones and a speaker. The MAX98050 is suitable for ANC but has limitations in power consumption and fixed filtering. Alternatives like ADAU1777, ADAU1787, and ADAU1860-1 offer lower power and more flexible ANC, but are outside the budget. The user is seeking cost-effective alternatives with similar attributes and easier PCB manufacturing.
AI Generated Content
Category: Datasheet/Specs
Product Number: MAX98050

Hello everyone,

We are planning to use MAX98050 for both ANC(Active Noise Cancelling) and ENC(Environmental Noise Cancelling) applications. In our case, we will have 2 microphones(first mic close to mouth and second mic close to ear). First mic will be used to get the auido data and the second mic will get the noise data. There will also be a speaker right next to the ear. 

ENC is required to filter the noise from the user voice while transmitting the voice data(received from mic1 and mic2).

ANC is required to filter the noise while transmitting data to the speaker(located right next to the ear)

Can we rely on MAX98050 to achieve these goals? or should we consider a different and perhaps more capable codec alternative? Our aim is to ease the load on our main CPU so that it can focus on other tasks rather than audio processing.

Thanks in advance 

Parents
  • Hello mert0zgur,

    Sorry for the delay. It took a while for the correct person to respond.

    Here are his comments:

    This part is designed for ANC, but only utilizes fixed function processing and requires muting for bank switch at higher sample rates.  The quiescent power is also much higher than ADAU1787 or even ADAU1777. 

    So I would ask if they are OK with the fixed filtering or if they need their own custom ANC processing?  If they can tolerate the higher cost, parts such as ADAU1777/ADAU1787/ADAU1860-1 will yield much lower power, more flexible ANC, dual core processing, etc.  Otherwise, if all they need is ANC we could suggest ADAU1777 to at least try to keep cost down as much as possible.

     

    Dave T

Reply
  • Hello mert0zgur,

    Sorry for the delay. It took a while for the correct person to respond.

    Here are his comments:

    This part is designed for ANC, but only utilizes fixed function processing and requires muting for bank switch at higher sample rates.  The quiescent power is also much higher than ADAU1787 or even ADAU1777. 

    So I would ask if they are OK with the fixed filtering or if they need their own custom ANC processing?  If they can tolerate the higher cost, parts such as ADAU1777/ADAU1787/ADAU1860-1 will yield much lower power, more flexible ANC, dual core processing, etc.  Otherwise, if all they need is ANC we could suggest ADAU1777 to at least try to keep cost down as much as possible.

     

    Dave T

Children
  • Hello Dave,

    Thanks for your time and response.

    We are currently estimating 5000 products annually. The project is for consumer audio.

    The audio part will be a headphone-like structure on which we will have a speaker and 2 microphones.

    Regarding your answer on ADI Forum, the price ranges for ADU1777 and ADU1787 are above the budget for this project. Since the production volume is planned to be high, our aim is to find a cost-effective solution for the audio codec.

    We can handle the ANC processing inside our host processor. Nevertheless, having a dedicated ANC processing on the audio codec is nice to have, but not mandatory.  The aim is to reserve the processing power of the host processor for the remaining tasks as much as possible. That's why we are looking for an embedded ANC solution. 

    We would appreciate if you can provide us with alternatives whose price range are close to MAX98050 and have similar attributes. Furthermore, the PCB land pattern of MAX98050 has small BGA ball pitch distances and that may fall beyond our PCB manufacturers capabilities. While you are working on the alternatives, could you also consider the ones with higher pitch distances?