Re: MIDI files on IIgs?

[jefbla@bconnex.net (Jeff Blakeney)]

On Wed, 30 Apr 1997 16:22:33 GMT, mportune@telerama.lm.com (Matt
Portune) wrote:

>I still think the best portable music format is one that includes the sample 
>data (S3M) thereby giving the author TOTAL control.  A lot of people have 
>asked me to post MIDI files of my work, and there's no way I'm going to, 
>because the patches I use don't exsist in the GM spec.  Even if they did, 
>they'd be different on everybody's synth, which blows accurate EQ/mixing out 
>the window.  
>
>Now, I love listening to MODs on the GS.  Simply because the sounds came from 
>the author's mind, not [brand x's] factory pre-sets.  If it has to be a MIDI 
>file, the author should include precise patching/mixing info on each track 
>(that is, if they give a hoot about how their music sounds)

I'm with you on this one Matt.  I'm much happier listening to MODs
than to MIDI files.  I can't believe the difference listening to a
MIDI file on my IBM's AudioWave sound card vs. my friends SoundBlaster
16 vs. my brother's SoundBlaster AWE32.  I might not like the song
listening to it on my machine but after hearing it on my brother's I
might think it was quite decent.  It is just amazing what a difference
it makes.

But MODs sound exactly the same on each of the sound cards I listed
above as well as on the IIgs.  This is the way I prefer to listen to
music files, the way the artist created them.

Which is also related to another of my pet peeves, the World Wide Web.
I'd rather have a way of having pages that I create get displayed
exactly the same way on everyones machine rather than have every
machine and browser display it the way they would like.  But that is a
rant for another day.  :-)