issue02

EMUSIC-L Digest                                      Volume 58, Issue 02

This issue's topics:
	
	PC Soundcards - Should I be taking them seriously now ? (15 messages)

Your EMUSIC-L Digest moderator is Joe McMahon .
You may subscribe to EMUSIC-L by sending mail to listserv@american.edu with 
the line "SUB EMUSIC-L your name" as the text.
 
The EMUSIC-L archive is a service of SunSite (sunsite.unc.edu) at the 
University of North Carolina.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date:         Thu, 25 Nov 1993 23:39:59 -0000
From:         Tony Jewell 
Subject:      PC Soundcards - Should I be taking them seriously now ?

Eventually my Atari gav up the ghost - There's only so much you can do
with sellotape and string. Okay, says I, to the 486 in the corner of my
office, sitting there quietly running Excel, its time for you to do
something more interesting with your life. A PC can now run Cubase, midi
cards are cheap, seems like the ideal answer.

So I pick up 'Computers are Fun in Bed', and look up Midi cards, and I
spy something called a Gravis Ultrasound. For 169 quid, I can have Midi
plus a 16bit sampler plus a Wavetable synth. Now, I've been using
computers to drive synths for a long time now, but I've never taken their
pitiful beepings very seriously - the idea of a computer actaully
producing sound is new to me.. So I listen into comp.ibmpc.soundcards for
a bit, and they seem to take it all very seriously, with a whole new
language of jargon for me to learn.

So, the question is - For 169 pounds, do I get a free synth ? Can send
midi *to* the computer and play samples and this Wavetable synth thingy ?
Should I bother ? How does the quality of synthesis compare to a *real*
keyboard. Is it just a baby Kawai K1 or MT32 in there, or is it anything
useful ? Can Cubase talk to it directly ? Can Cubase Audio talk to it (if
it comes out for the PC). Oh, someone please help me out here !!

Thanks a million

Tony Jewell
--
 __          ___          EMail:   tony@cityscape.co.uk
/            |_           Tel:     (UK) 0223 566950
\__ ityscape |__Mail
                          Tony Jewell

------------------------------
Date:         Fri, 26 Nov 1993 11:21:06 GMT
From:         Ian Donaldson 
Subject:      Re: PC Soundcards - Should I be taking them seriously now ?

tony@ns.cityscape.co.uk (Tony Jewell) writes:

>Eventually my Atari gav up the ghost - There's only so much you can do
>with sellotape and string. Okay, says I, to the 486 in the corner of my
>office, sitting there quietly running Excel, its time for you to do
>something more interesting with your life. A PC can now run Cubase, midi
>cards are cheap, seems like the ideal answer.

Every so often new computers com out with new features. Eventually,
they all make their way to the good old PC. ;)

>So I pick up 'Computers are Fun in Bed', and look up Midi cards, and I
>spy something called a Gravis Ultrasound. For 169 quid, I can have Midi
>plus a 16bit sampler plus a Wavetable synth. Now, I've been using
>computers to drive synths for a long time now, but I've never taken their
>pitiful beepings very seriously - the idea of a computer actaully
>producing sound is new to me.. So I listen into comp.ibmpc.soundcards for
>a bit, and they seem to take it all very seriously, with a whole new
>language of jargon for me to learn.

Indeed. The days of PC speaker bleeping are (thankfully) over.

>So, the question is - For 169 pounds, do I get a free synth ? Can send
>midi *to* the computer and play samples and this Wavetable synth thingy ?
>Should I bother ? How does the quality of synthesis compare to a *real*
>keyboard. Is it just a baby Kawai K1 or MT32 in there, or is it anything
>useful ? Can Cubase talk to it directly ? Can Cubase Audio talk to it (if
>it comes out for the PC). Oh, someone please help me out here !!

169 pounds sounds a tad expensive for a GUS, but yes, you do get a free
synth, more or less. The Gravis Ultrasound is more limited that I would
like. Firstly, as it is a WaveTable board, it needs on board memory to
store its samples, and although it can be upgraded to 1 Mb of memory,
it only comes with 256k. Now, how much MIDI is good enough? If you are
playing 32 notes at once, then all 32 have to fit in this 1 Mb. At
16 bit, 44.1 Khz stereo, that 1 Mb doesn't last too long. Also, as you
go past 14 simultaneous notes, the sample rate drops. You sounds like
a serious MIDI user to me, so I dont think the GUS is for you.

How much cash have you to throw around? I would imagine you like a MPU-401
MIDI port. Why not buy some cheap MPU-401 sound card, and connect it to
a Roland LAPC/1, or Sound Canvas, or even a RAP-10 if you has the money?
If you want to go really cheap, even a humble MT-32 card could serve your
needs. If you work under Windows exclusively (which is very wise, when
dealing with PC MIDI) then a late version Sound Blaster card will provide
full duplex MIDI, with enough left over for a decent synth module?

As far as Cubase goes, I have no idea. I use Cakewalk Pro for Windows, and
I am very very happy with it. The only area I find it lacking is that it
cant print sheet music, but that is not really its province. I am using
the humblest of equipment, only a Sound Blaster Pro, and an DX-7 II, and
an Ensoniq SQ-R+ when I can get my hands on it for a while.

Please, ask for more info if you need it.

Ian

------------------------------
Date:         Fri, 26 Nov 1993 15:43:31 -0000
From:         Tony Jewell 
Subject:      Re: PC Soundcards - Should I be taking them seriously now ?

Ian Donaldson (icd@mame.mu.OZ.AU) wrote:
: 169 pounds sounds a tad expensive for a GUS, but yes, you do get a free
: synth, more or less. The Gravis Ultrasound is more limited that I would
: like. Firstly, as it is a WaveTable board, it needs on board memory to
: store its samples, and although it can be upgraded to 1 Mb of memory,
: it only comes with 256k. Now, how much MIDI is good enough? If you are
: playing 32 notes at once, then all 32 have to fit in this 1 Mb. At
: 16 bit, 44.1 Khz stereo, that 1 Mb doesn't last too long. Also, as you
: go past 14 simultaneous notes, the sample rate drops. You sounds like
: a serious MIDI user to me, so I dont think the GUS is for you.

Oh my. Maybe I haven't quite got my head round how this works. Does the
GUS not use the PC's memory/hard disk for sample storage (say, I just
want to digitise a record, for instance). And why does the number of
simultaneous MIDI notes effect memory ? What is happening inside this
card ?

Cheers,

TJ

--
 __          ___          EMail:   tony@cityscape.co.uk
/            |_           Tel:     (UK) 0223 566950
\__ ityscape |__Mail
                          Tony Jewell

------------------------------
Date:         Fri, 26 Nov 1993 11:57:47 -0500
From:         David Habermehl 
Subject:      Re: PC Soundcards - Should I be taking them seriously now ?

In  icd@mame.mu.OZ.AU (Ian Donaldson) writes:

>tony@ns.cityscape.co.uk (Tony Jewell) writes:

>As far as Cubase goes, I have no idea. I use Cakewalk Pro for Windows, and
>I am very very happy with it. The only area I find it lacking is that it
>cant print sheet music, but that is not really its province. I am using
>the humblest of equipment, only a Sound Blaster Pro, and an DX-7 II, and
>an Ensoniq SQ-R+ when I can get my hands on it for a while.


Actually, the latest version of Cakewalk (v.2.0 I belive) DOES print music.

Dave
zephyr@panix.com

------------------------------
Date:         Fri, 26 Nov 1993 22:30:52 GMT
From:         "Cornel H. Huth" 
Subject:      Re: PC Soundcards - Should I be taking them seriously now ?

In article <2d5873$e6v@ns.cityscape.co.uk> tony@ns.cityscape.co.uk (Tony
Jewell) writes:
>Ian Donaldson (icd@mame.mu.OZ.AU) wrote:
>: playing 32 notes at once, then all 32 have to fit in this 1 Mb. At
>: 16 bit, 44.1 Khz stereo, that 1 Mb doesn't last too long. Also, as you
>: go past 14 simultaneous notes, the sample rate drops. You sounds like
>: a serious MIDI user to me, so I dont think the GUS is for you.

>Oh my. Maybe I haven't quite got my head round how this works. Does the
>GUS not use the PC's memory/hard disk for sample storage (say, I just
>want to digitise a record, for instance). And why does the number of
>simultaneous MIDI notes effect memory ? What is happening inside this
>card ?

First off, the GUS isn't a "MIDI" card, it's a sound card. Any MIDI product
coming out of a GUS is strictly due to software executing on the PC. That
said:

The GUS hardware can play from 14 to 32 voices simulataneously. Due to
timing restrictions, updating 14 voices permits sample rates of 44.1kHz,
but with, say, 24 voices active, updating all those means less available
time for any one voice, so the sample rate max goes down (@24 max=25725Hz;
@32 max=19292Hz).

Yes, the GUS stores its patch data on disk, and the software program (such
as Ruckus, a toolkit by me) loads in whatever patches are required or
requested. The total patch size on disk is about 5.5MB (128 melodic patches
and about 61 drums, included with the GUS). The max addressable GRAM
(GUS onboard RAM) is 1MB. While this is yet another 640K-type limit, most
sequences will not be bothered by this. If it is a problem, the software
can load the patches, or a subset of them, in 8-bit mode (all supplied patches
are 16-bit samples), thereby doubling effective GUS storage. Also, the GUS
hardware makes those 8-bit samples sound "better" than, say, it would sound
on an 8-bit card.

The guy above said that 32 notes simulataneously would bump up against 1MB
fast. True (most likely), but it's not very likely you'll have 32 completey
different _patches_ in use at the same time. It's not terribly likely that
you'll even have 32 different patches in any one sequence at all. The key
difference here is that a patch contains as many as 16 ranges for an
instrument, and this is all contained in a single patch. An average melodic
patch is about 40K in size, with about 4 ranges. An average drum patch is
about 12K, all having a single range (being a drum, you know). In short, the
GUS requires sophisticated software to really max out its capabilities. The
GUS has been out less than a year. The next will make or break it.

As for recording, the standard GUS is limited to 8-bit sampling. A daughter-
card has always been advertised with the GUS and is to allow 16-bit recording.
The GUSMAX, a new card altogether, will have 16-bit recording and a SCSI port
built-in. Neither of these two products is available now.

In the end, I'd say you'd be happier with a true MIDI sound module. The GUS
is really intended for the game player (the music capability puts to shame
any of the non-wavesample cards) or the casual musician. For $130 what do you
expect?
--
chh
 Internet: chuth@lonestar.utsa.edu Fidonet: 1:387/800.8
      BBS: The 40th Floor;V32b@1(210)684-8065;M-F:5pm-9am,WE:1p-9a CT

------------------------------
Date:         Sat, 27 Nov 1993 23:15:24 GMT
From:         Philip Lockwood 
Subject:      Re: PC Soundcards - Should I be taking them seriously now ?

chuth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Cornel H. Huth) wrote:
>
> The guy above said that 32 notes simulataneously would bump up against 1MB
> fast. True (most likely), but it's not very likely you'll have 32 completey
> different _patches_ in use at the same time. It's not terribly likely that
> you'll even have 32 different patches in any one sequence at all. The key
> difference here is that a patch contains as many as 16 ranges for an
> instrument, and this is all contained in a single patch. An average melodic
> patch is about 40K in size, with about 4 ranges. An average drum patch is
> about 12K, all having a single range (being a drum, you know). In short, the
> GUS requires sophisticated software to really max out its capabilities. The
> GUS has been out less than a year. The next will make or break it.
>
> In the end, I'd say you'd be happier with a true MIDI sound module. The GUS
> is really intended for the game player (the music capability puts to shame
> any of the non-wavesample cards) or the casual musician. For $130 what do you
> expect?

Well, in all fairness to the GUS, it's a very good card.  The sound might
not be quite as good as a Sound Canvas, but you have a lot more freedom in
patch selection.  I think it's a great deal for the money, and you are
overlooking some features.  For instance, I am assuming he has some decent
synths to run.  With cakewalk, can't you redirect output, so that some of it
would go out the midi box?  This would greatly increase the number of voices
available.  Also, the meg limit is very seldom a problem, unless you want to
have a 44.1khz 30 second sample playing along with your instruments.  Of
course you can get around that using cakewalk to play the wav...

Also, I wouldn't recommend a SB or any other game card (even with the
waveblaster).  I think if you want to do serious midi, the GUS should work
ok.  It has the (Ensoniq?) GF1 chip inside.  I wouldn't waste any money on
an fm synth card.  Like he said, you should also consider an MPU card, or a
Roland.  I wouldn't suggest a Turtle Beach, because it appears that they
are on the way out.

I have a GUS, though, and am using it to do music.  I have been very happy
with it, especially considering the price.  Some patches are better than
others, it all depends what kind of music you are into.  The guitars (imho)
are pretty sad.  But I just lay real guitars instead...

Another GUS owner to talk to is dionf or fdion ( francois dion) on the
comp.sys.ibm.pc.soundcard newsgroup.  He posts a lot and seems to use the
GUS quite extensively for commercial music production.  He also seems to be
very pleased with it.

Later,

Philip

p.s. if you have any other questions you can email me, and i will do my best
to answer them.

------------------------------
Date:         Sun, 28 Nov 1993 00:28:38 GMT
From:         "Cornel H. Huth" 
Subject:      Re: PC Soundcards - Should I be taking them seriously now ?

In article <2d8n2c$6hr@jaws.cs.hmc.edu> plockwoo@hmc.edu (Philip Lockwood)
writes: >> In the end, I'd say you'd be happier with a true MIDI sound module. The GUS
 >> is really intended for the game player (the music capability puts to shame
 >> any of the non-wavesample cards) or the casual musician. For $130 what do
you

 >Well, in all fairness to the GUS, it's a very good card.  The sound might
 >not be quite as good as a Sound Canvas, but you have a lot more freedom in
 >patch selection.  I think it's a great deal for the money, and you are
 >overlooking some features.  For instance, I am assuming he has some decent

Considering I'm probably only one out of maybe 10 in the entire universe that
has written a MIDI player for the GUS from the ground up, it's not all that
likely that I am "overlooking some features". I spent four months with the
thing and pretty much know what it can and can't do. Anything good coming
out of a GUS is 90% software and 10% hardware, and since there is so little
software for the GUS (now), well, you figure it out.

 >available.  Also, the meg limit is very seldom a problem, unless you want to
 >have a 44.1khz 30 second sample playing along with your instruments.  Of
 >course you can get around that using cakewalk to play the wav...

I could play a 100MB 44.1kHz/16-bit sample on a GUS if I so desired. Playing
samples (VOCs or WAVs and that like) is the least of problems in getting
the GUS to do something (though interleaved stereo (as are all stereo VOC/
WAVs) does mean even more software work).

Getting the GUS to play a MIDI file is 100 times more complex. Sure, if all
you use is an app, like Cake, then none of this really matters. If you
program the thing, or plan to develop an app yourself, it becomes _THE_ thing.
In any case, a serious musician isn't going to go head-over-heels about a GUS
since he's bound to have better already.
--
chh
 Internet: chuth@lonestar.utsa.edu Fidonet: 1:387/800.8
      BBS: The 40th Floor;V32b@1(210)684-8065;M-F:5pm-9am,WE:1p-9a CT

------------------------------
Date:         Sun, 28 Nov 1993 02:03:49 -0500
From:         Phil Somebody-or-another 
Subject:      Re: PC Soundcards - Should I be taking them seriously now ?

Why would you say that  Turtle Beach soundcards are on the way out?  I
was under the impression that the Multisound (emu proteus onboard) was
pretty much the state of the art in pc sound?

Thanks-  Another Phil

sps5251@siena.bitnet

p.s.

sorry to the rest of you....my mailer munged his address and I couldn't reply
via email

------------------------------
Date:         Sun, 28 Nov 1993 13:19:15 -0400
From:         "ANDREW G. YOUNGER" 
Subject:      Re: PC Soundcards - Should I be taking them seriously now ?

Actually "Another Phil",
I am glad you responded via the mailing list, as I too would be interested
know what he feels about the Turtle Beach sound card. I am only running
a Sound Blaster 16 at the moment and I get excellent results with a bit of
fiddling. however this fiddling is only useful on some instruments. It was
cheap so there you go, that was a big part of the decision. Does anybody have
any feelings on which is better - the Roland or the Turtle Beach cards?

Thanks - Andrew
AYOUNGER@ac.dal.ca

------------------------------
Date:         Sun, 28 Nov 1993 18:43:02 +0000
From:         Nick Rothwell 
Subject:      Re: PC Soundcards - Should I be taking them seriously now ?

>So I pick up 'Computers are Fun in Bed', and look up Midi cards, and I
>spy something called a Gravis Ultrasound. For 169 quid, I can have Midi
>plus a 16bit sampler plus a Wavetable synth.

I wish I knew what they meant by "wavetable synth." I mean, it's not a PPG,
is it?

                   Nick Rothwell | "That's the Waldorf set for General MIDI."
CASSIEL Contemporary Music/Dance | "FZZIIIIAAAAOOOOUUUMMMMMM ZUMZUPZUMZUP..."
     cassiel@cassiel.demon.co.uk | "Is that 'STRINGS 1'?"
     cassiel@cix.compulink.co.uk | "Yeah. You got a problem with that?"

------------------------------
Date:         Mon, 29 Nov 1993 04:44:58 GMT
From:         Jim Kresge 
Subject:      Re: PC Soundcards - Should I be taking them seriously now ?

Yes--Cakewalk Professional latest version prints the infor from the
"staff" line.

David Habermehl (zephyr@panix.com) wrote:
: In  icd@mame.mu.OZ.AU (Ian Donaldson) writes:

: >tony@ns.cityscape.co.uk (Tony Jewell) writes:

: >As far as Cubase goes, I have no idea. I use Cakewalk Pro for Windows, and
: >I am very very happy with it. The only area I find it lacking is that it
: >cant print sheet music, but that is not really its province. I am using
: >the humblest of equipment, only a Sound Blaster Pro, and an DX-7 II, and
: >an Ensoniq SQ-R+ when I can get my hands on it for a while.


: Actually, the latest version of Cakewalk (v.2.0 I belive) DOES print music.

: Dave
: zephyr@panix.com

--
Regards,
+--------------------------+-----------------------------------------------+
| Jim Kresge  LOCKHEED ISC | These are my opinions and not legally binding |
| Voice: 408-987-4586x2009 | INTERNET   = kresge@lims.lockheed.com         |
| FAX:   408-987-4625      | COMPUSERVE = 76366.2360                       |
+--------------------------+-----------------------------------------------+

------------------------------
Date:         Mon, 29 Nov 1993 13:17:00 EDT
From:         John Rossi III 
Subject:      Re: PC Soundcards - Should I be taking them seriously now ?

Whether PC Soundcards are to be taken seriously is mostly a matter of what
you are intending to do with them.  As I have previously stated, the Turtle
Beach Multisound card does AD/DA direct to disk work which is in all respects
'CD' quality (in stereo).  When coupled with some decent editing and assembly
software (Wave 2.0, Digital Soup, etc), the Multisound card provides a very
functional stereo direct to disk recording system.  On the MIDI sound
generation side, however, the Multisound sticks you with what amounts to
a Proteus-1 sample playback unit which is showing its age.  It does, however,
allow MIDI bi-directional control so you could easily add an external MIDI
device.  [I have noticed that most people continue to recommend MPU-401
compatible interfaces for MIDI.  While this choice may have been prudent
several years ago, the Windows multiple-driver environment takes care of
any ionterface requirements for any software which is worth a shit, anyway.
Also, most decent DOS software has drivers which support non-401 interfaces.
So, I would think that the 401 compatibly in the MIDI interface is a non-
issue].  Back to boards, yesterday I purchased a Reveal 16-bit sound card
(complete with ton'o'software, microphone, and headphones) for $140 in a
local computer store.  This board apears to be a knockoff of the Sound Blaster
Pro II board complete with audioo mixing.  The board offers only 4-op FM
(this makes this board the 5th MIDI device I have owned which has used
4-op [the list includes an IBM Music Feature, BTW]) for MIDI sound, buit it
does ahve full CD-ROM control capability and the ability to mix audio from
CD, Microphone, FM, and D/A converters minto a 6-watt amp section.  Anyway,
for $140, this board performs quite well.  While it doesn't sound a good
in the A/D-D/A section as the Multisound, it is a hell of a lot better than
any analog cassette system I have heard.  For the purchase price, this thing
seems to be a winner.

John

------------------------------
Date:         Mon, 29 Nov 1993 13:35:00 EDT
From:         John Rossi III 
Subject:      Re: PC Soundcards - Should I be taking them seriously now ?

To the contrary, Turtle Beach soundcards are not on the way out.  Their new
A/D-D/A card suposedly functions as well as the Multisound (sans the Proteus).
I have not heard the new card, but if it is as good as the Multisound, this
will definately end up being the best solution for stereo direct to disk
recording on PCs.

John

------------------------------
Date:         Mon, 29 Nov 1993 22:00:27 -0500
From:         "Lee Bottemiller and I don't like this gobbledy-gook." 
Subject:      Re: PC Soundcards - Should I be taking them seriously now ?

>>{John's $140 Reveal Card}

Yes, I know.  I'm a spand-brankin'-new-to-the-internet-green-in-the-
eyes-listserv-eager-beaver, but may I be so bold as to ask what you
plan on doing with said sound card?  It kinda sounds like that's gonna
be your stereo digital mastering destination...

Lee Bottemiller
Bottemillerl@Belmont.edu

------------------------------
Date:         Tue, 30 Nov 1993 10:23:00 EDT
From:         John Rossi III 
Subject:      Re: PC Soundcards - Should I be taking them seriously now ?

I plan on playing with the card.  I have more than enough 'pro' stuff to do
anything serious I might ever want to do (providing, of course, I ever get the
time to do it).  In playing with the card, I am sure that I will find that
my musical productivity skyrockets because everything can be in one place
(my office at work), and all the base level tools are provided.  I still
have my Multisound (which got moved to my home studio for direct-to-disk
applications) for critical work.  I expect that 'playing' with the Reveal
card will satisfy most of my 'real' requirements.  After all, exceprt for the
noise, there really isn't a lot of difference in 6dB of dynamic range in
the 10-20K range,  at least not for the normal ear.

John

------------------------------
End of the EMUSIC-L Digest
******************************