[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: A2 Music and Sound FAQ v1.2
In article <2nhjer$9f7@news.iastate.edu>, irsman@iastate.edu (Ian Schmidt) writes...
>In article <1APR199408204596@vax2.concordia.ca> spector@vax2.concordia.ca (Mitchell Spector) writes:
>>In article irsman@iastate.edu (Ian Schmidt) writes...
>
>> The Commodore 64 used what was known as the "SID" chip for music
>>and sound synthesis. It was also only capable of 3 independant tones/voices,
>>not 4.
>
>Yeah, the Huang-meister caught me on this one :)
Kind of on a tangent here, but is it at all possible to write a
SID chip emulator for the IIgs? Not emulation of the entire C64 like on
IBM machines, but the ability to take disk images and listen to any music
that might be there. IBM programmers have done this using the SB's DACs
and even through the internal speaker. (SID music is often worse than
FM-synthesis, but it'd still be cool to write something like this.. :)
>> This table is a little misleading the way you use the term "Wavetable
>>voices". I think adding a column for "Digital voices" would be more correct.
>>As you know, those above IBM boards use only FM-synthesis, but have the ability
>>to playback/record/manipulate "real-word" sound -- digital sound/voice/music
>>samples, or plainly put, "digitized sound". The SoundBlaster ASP has an add-on
>>WaveBlaster option for real Wavetable support, though like the GUS, has very
>>little support. I've always been confused about the Amiga and the majority of
>>Macintoshes out there though. I know a handful of Macs have true Wavetable
>>support (ie - Mac IIs), but I've been under the impression many do not (such
>>as the Mac LC, Plus, SE, SE/30, Classic, etc). Wavetable is defined by the
>>ability to use real-world "digital-sound" in waveforms for music synthesis,
>>right? (Amiga MODs kind of make this term confusing, especially when you have
>>non-wavetable systems playing MODs through digital-voices.. :)
>
>I use 'wavetable' to mean 'playing digitized samples via a DAC or equivalent',
>which is pretty much how it's used in computerized music. I realize this
>isn't strictly correct (kinda like 'baud'), but it's the most common usage so
>I use it. All 680x0 Macs are capable of playing thru 4 DACs, just the newer
>ones do it a little better, and the AV ones even more so :)
...But then you have all these IBM and Mac-oids thinking their machines
are just as capable as the IIgs sound-wise, only with fewer voices! ;-)
I see what you mean though, but then you should really rename that column
"Digital voices". What about setting the comparison chart up like this?:
[Proposed sound comparison table -- modified, not original!]
Computer or Card bits (Digital) (FM) (Wavetable) Stereo? Digitize?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Apple IIgs 8 32 None 32* Yes4 Yes (8)
Soundblaster 8 1 11 None No Yes (8)4
Soundblaster Pro 8 2 20* None Yes Yes (8)
Soundblaster ASP 16 8/16* 2 20* Yes4 Yes Yes (16)
Pro Audio Spectrum 16 8/16* 2 20* None Yes Yes (16)
Gravis UltraSound 8/16 32 None2 32 Yes Yes (16)4
Commodore Amiga 8 4 None None? Yes Yes (8)4
Mac (non AV, 0x0) 8 4 None None? Yes3 Yes (8)4
AV Mac 8/16 Infinite1 Infinite1 Infinite1 Yes Yes (16)
PowerPC Mac 16 2 None 2? Yes Yes (16)
* (GS) Normally 15-voices, though maximum number of available voices under
wavetable is 32 when bypassing firmware (unpairing oscillators).
* (IBM) Fixed minor errors: SB16 and PAS16 are capable of 8 and 16 bit digital
sound. Newer version of SB have 20-voices (not 22) because two Yamaha 3812's
replaced with single OPL3 chip; PAS16 always used OPL3, so was always 20.
SB ASP16 comes with FM-synthesis _only_, but Wavetable option available.
* (Mac/Amiga) Many modern 680x0 based Macs have 16-bit digital sound. Some
may use wavetable synthesis, but most do not. Unsure if Amiga qualifies
as "wavetable", but from my past experience with them I think not...
>> Finally, maybe add a brief mention of the history of 8-bit Apple II
>>sound? Such as, all the accomplishments programmers were able to do using
>>the internal speaker (two-voice music, digitized sound, speech-synthesis,
>>or lately..5-bit digital sound). Some of the add-on hardware boards, like
>>the Mockingboard, Phaser, Echo, etc. (Okay, maybe old II sound wasn't much,
>>but it was interesting and I guess I'm kind of nostaligic.. ;-)
>
>Sure, if someone can get me this info. Remember, the first Apple II I owned
>was the GS, so despite reading hundreds of back issues of "Softalk", I'm a bit
>deficient in the 8-bit department :)
If you can, read through some of the chapters in Steve Weyrich's
"Apple II History" files (originally available on GEnie). Some of the chapters
discuss the evolution of sound on the Apple II, including one chapter that's
dedicated on sound only (I think). Back in my Apple II+ days, it was even
possible to do stereo-music using the cassette port in back! (One channel
came through internal speaker, while the other through a speaker connected
to "Data-out"). I still have a BRUN-able file that demonstrates this if
anyone out there is interested! :) Believe it or not, you can get some pretty
decent stereo voice & music synthesis with something like AE's Phasor card
plugged in a ][+ or //e (back when AE actually produced quality products!)
Um, off on another tangent :), but would it be possible for someone to
make the A2 History files available on Internet? I'd like to get the most
up-to-date revisions of certain chapters (noticed they were in GEnie Lamp
but not available on GEnie -- according to someone who checked for me).
>Ian Schmidt / irsman@iastate.edu / irsman@cs.iastate.edu
>"Though we know that time has wings, we're the ones that have to fly" -Peart
Mitchell Spector
sb_spec@pavo.concordia.ca