ATOM_SPK, no sound output

HappyUser

Dear all,
I am trying this device : https://shop.m5stack.com/products/atomic-speaker-base-ns4168 using the software from this link (https://github.com/m5stack/M5Atom/tree/master/examples/ATOM_BASE/ATOM_SPK/PlayRawPCM)

This is the message i get when resetting the atom lite :
ets Jun 8 2016 00:22:57

rst:0x1 (POWERON_RESET),boot:0x13 (SPI_FAST_FLASH_BOOT)
configsip: 188777542, SPIWP:0xee
clk_drv:0x00,q_drv:0x00,d_drv:0x00,cs0_drv:0x00,hd_drv:0x00,wp_drv:0x00
mode:DIO, clock div:1
load:0x3fff0030,len:1344
load:0x40078000,len:13964
load:0x40080400,len:3600
entry 0x400805f0
E (303) esp_core_dump_<V͡� Incorrect size of core dump image: 0
M5Atom initializing...OK
E (82) I2S: i2s_driver_uninstall(2048): I2S port 0 has not installed
E (83) I2S: i2s_check_set_mclk(253): ESP32 only support to set GPIO0/GPIO1/GPIO3 as mclk signal, error GPIO number:120
E (89) I2S: i2s_set_pin(314): mclk config failed
I2S Write

I know the software is running through some checks in the software i have build in.
But i do not here any sound. No beep at startup and no soumd when i press the button.
This function returns a false : _AtomSPK.begin()
The weird thing is that the definition is : bool ATOMSPK::begin(int __rate) but it is called without __rate defined.
Within the begin function the error occurs in : err += i2s_set_pin(SPAKER_I2S_NUMBER, &tx_pin_config);

Any idea?
Thanks

Genesis17

This post is deleted!

Genesis17

This post is deleted!

konacurrents

I too have the ATOM_SPK and the sample programs run but create no sound, even with the earphone jack.
https://docs.m5stack.com/en/atom/atom_spk
The PlayRawPCM program runs but no sound.

Also the PlayMP3FromSD is missing files, such as AudioFileSourceSD.h.

Has anyone got these to work?

I can get the beep program here to work
https://github.com/PaulskPt/M5Stack_M5Atom_EchoSPKR

But it seems this program makes a constant hum sounds always, and the beep when button pressed. I assume the battery will die faster too.

ps. What's up with tagging posts as being "OLD" - when it's a year ago, but the programs being tried are 4 years old. It sure seems to me that the "thread" of any issue, even decades old, should still be used to keep that context intact. Oh well..