Devialet Chat

As a follow-up to my last question related to DIYing a 250 from a 200 which I never got around to trying I'm now preparing to throw some effort at it. In that post I got several responses from "interesting, worth a shot" to "I dunno" to "you'll likely break something!." Its been many months since I finished my Le200 modifications and the thing I'm struggling with most right now is simply remembering how to do a simple FW upgrade. But once I figure that out again my next step will be an attempt to simply re-name my 200 as a 250, see what happens. Since "supposedly" the electronics are identical or damn nearso what would happen if I simply fill out my configurator as a 250 instead of a 200 in the configurator and raise the power to 250 WPC if it doesn't auto reset. Seems counterintuitive to me that Devialet would allow or let alone "force" a catastrophic electronic failure in such an event whether executed intentionally or accidentally. I can see it not working or not working well but struggle believing some catastrophic failure or anything fatal easily accomplished by the intentional or accidental mis-stroke of nothing more than an errant click in the setup. Sure it might not work but catastrophic/fatal seems a bit much to me without benefit of a safety, reset or failsafe of some kind. I would've thought Devialet might've investigated all the configuration possibilities and programmed a work-around that didn't automatically dictate spontaneous combustion or similar.

As most here know I have no fears of overheating due to a relatively minor 50WPC increase as I'm competent my convection cooled case could likely survive even a 400 WPC thermal increase even if the non D case won't accommodate the internal electronic component dimensions of the larger D units. But since the 200/250 are so close/identical I'm just saying the D250 internal temperatures are likely easily within my perceived Le 200 enclosure existing temp thresholds. I'm positive my case enclosure will run cooler via its internal thermometers as-is than an OEM D250 does since my 200 runs almost 20 C cooler than the average D250 does. Especially when you consider that even a D400 temp-wise runs near the same temp as the D250 in much the same enclosure given that Devialet wouldn't likely opt to run even 45-60 C if they could run 40, 35 or 30 C.

But all this aside, let's start at the beginning. What do ya think happens if I start by simply renaming my 200 a 250? If you know that answer then I'd love to know what you think happens if you raise its WPC to 250 from 200? If I can get that far I think I'll figure the rest out.

Will be eagerly watching this thread! Great stuff Manoet

I would be very surprised if this would work. Devialet must have some IC somewhere on the mainboard that holds the product ID, perhaps even 'fused' so it can't ever be changed. So without hacking the firmware, the part that checks for this id, I don't think you'd be succesful in it even booting up with a 250 config file.

While I'm inclined to agree its likely more complicated than I'm projecting I've still got this gut-level hunch its simpler/easier than some here may think/believe. Its not like Devialet has pumped a lot of cool breezes up my skirt in their approach to many things over the years. Couple that with their own engineers volunteering that the 2 units are identical not withstanding the enclosure which allows me to see at least the possibility of a simple configuration change to do a 200-250 or 250-200 swap via the configurator. More importantly to me is the doubtful nature of Devialet allowing or permitting a major component failure if an incorrect configuration setting were chosen intentionally, accidentally, in error or simple forgetfulness. I'm inclined to take them at their word regarding both setups being identical and upgrading/downgrading being a simpler matter of configuration. Admittedly there "may" be more to the configuration than I've mentioned but I'm inclined to believe its minimal rather than extensive as they've obviously designed the 200/250 to mimic each other with some semblance of ease & simplicity. And I struggle believing Devialet would intentionally load multiple 150, 200, 250, 400, 500 and/or 800 FW on every machine they produce if there was much chance that a different or incorrect configuration risked damaging a greater/lesser platform via an intentional, errant, incorrect or forgotten configuration setting. As I mentioned above I can see it not working or not working well but hard for me to imagine Devialet not considering that outcome and adapting a counter measure. Seems to me they'd make only specific configurations for specific machines if that were the case and damage was a foregone, likely, possible or even plausible conclusion. Especially when mistakes can be so easy due to intent, mistake or forgetfulness.

One thing's for sure, if it works and you post it here, it aint gonna work after the next firmware update!

We should all be on standby just incase!

The firmware package for all Devialet's are equal.

Any Devialet will work without a configuration file and knows it's model number, manufacturing date, serial number without it.

This means that data is not just written in the config file or firmware. It's most likely this is stored in a flash file unaccessible for users, ROM or some write once memory IC. Many Intel or AMD CPU's models start out equal but through the process of "binning" CPU's will receive their final model designation which cannot be changed afterwards.

For what it's worth I'm with Antoine on this one. The information display confirms that each individual unit knows its own serial number, date of manufacture, etc. so it must presumably have some unique factory-programmed, non-volatile memory. It would be very straightforward, and very sensible, for the firmware to query the unit type from that information and (I expect) just refuse to load a configuration file that didn't contain a matching unit type. That would also mean nothing untoward is likely to happen, so no reason not to try it if you're curious.

(19-May-2016, 19:10)thumb5 Wrote: [ -> ]That would also mean nothing untoward is likely to happen, so no reason not to try it if you're curious.

And therein alone lies the simplest answer I was seeking which I've always thought not only possible but the most likely outcome, ie; "nothing happens/nothing breaks." I'm fine with either an "unlucky" or unsuccessful attempt/effort. In fact I'd be a bit gape-jawed if it turned out ANY other way! But sometimes we just get lucky! Stranger things have happened! And given an indemnified/innocuous risk I perceive it as an effort worth carefully attempting. Its the potential for a perceived catastrophic failure that's up till now scared the bejeezus outta me!

So, when do you expect to try this?

BTW, FWIW, and IMHO, I concur with prior posts that this feat is not possible. However, happy to be proven wrong.