Re: RT.SYNTH -- anybody tried it?

["sicklittlemonkey" <Nick.Westgate@gmail.com>]

 Linards Ticmanis wrote:
> Or just try a single PRINT PEEK(49200) before booting a game. Chances
> are that it will sound markedly different.

I had wondered about this before, but not tested it. Your Ultima
anecdote is interesting. Have you verified that this always happens?
What audible difference does it make to say, a simple tone, or the
Apple beep?

Michael J. Mahon wrote:
> Actually, it's converting duty cycle (in the sample period) into
> amplitude, which is the equivalent of averaging over all 23 1MHz
> bi-level samples.

Can you define duty cycle in this context? I guess I'm imagining
'degenerate' cases where the same number of "on" cycles is counted in
each sample period, and so the resulting waveform is a flat line. (I.e.
silence.) 'Thought experiments' like that leave me puzzled as to how
directly translating frequency/duty cycle to amplitude results in a
valid waveform. But of course, I'm no Einstein. ;-)

> No, each reference complements the state of the speaker toggle, with
> the initial state undefined.  So each reference causes the level to
> switch from 0 to 255 or from 255 to 0, depending on its current level.

I realise the speaker driver has an on/off state which is toggled (cone
flexed/relaxed) but I didn't express myself very well. What I was
trying to say is that it is the number of transitions ($C03x accesses)
which should be counted, not the number of times the speaker is "on".
Perhaps this is what Linards meant anyway.

Cheers,
Nick.