issue10

EMUSIC-L Digest                                      Volume 59, Issue 10

This issue's topics:
	
	PC Soundcards - Should I be taking them seriously now ? (7 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:         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:         Wed, 1 Dec 1993 01:08:57 -0000
From:         Tony Jewell 
Subject:      Re: PC Soundcards - Should I be taking them seriously now ?

John Rossi III (JROSSI@EAGLE.AAMRL.WPAFB.AF.MIL) wrote:
: I plan on playing with the card.  I have more than enough 'pro' stuff to do
: anything serious I might ever want to do ....

*YOU DO* ? Wow ! I don't think I'll ever have enough kit ... :-)

TJ

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

------------------------------
Date:         Wed, 1 Dec 1993 08:31:38 PST
From:         metlay 
Subject:      Re: PC Soundcards - Should I be taking them seriously now ?

>John Rossi III (JROSSI@EAGLE.AAMRL.WPAFB.AF.MIL) wrote:
>: I plan on playing with the card.  I have more than enough 'pro' stuff to do
>: anything serious I might ever want to do ....
>
>*YOU DO* ? Wow ! I don't think I'll ever have enough kit ... :-)

Heh. I remember the first time I ever saw John's studio; prior to
walking through that door, I didn't think there was such a thing as
"more than enough gear," but now I know better. Of course, now that
John's got the K2000, he'll probably sell almost everything else. 

--
mike metlay * atomic city * box 81175 pgh pa 15217-0675 * metlay@netcom.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I incorporated the sound into my dreams...but I didn't wake up." (suzanne)

------------------------------
Date:         Wed, 1 Dec 1993 19:13:44 GMT
From:         Richard Moore 
Subject:      Re: PC Soundcards - Should I be taking them seriously now ?

IBM Mwave DSP based cards (the Windsurfers, Audiovations, and BEST Data
cards) also use RAM to store sampled sounds for their synthesizers.
But they use the PC's RAM instead of dedicated RAM.  Sharing RAM with
word processors, spreadsheets, wave editors, etc. is cheaper than
dedicated RAM, and it removes the <1 megabyte limitation of other RAM
based cards.

If you have a PC with Windows and 16 megabytes of RAM,  you can sample
your own WAVe files, change the synthesizer's INI file, and use 12
megabytes of RAM for your synthesizer's samples.

The same realtime ISA bus bandwidth that the Mwave synthesizer uses
will be used in the near future for multitrack hard disk recording.

Check Mwave out!

Richard Moore

------------------------------
Date:         Wed, 1 Dec 1993 19:13:44 GMT
From:         Richard Moore 
Subject:      Re: PC Soundcards - Should I be taking them seriously now ?

IBM Mwave DSP based cards (the Windsurfers, Audiovations, and BEST Data
cards) also use RAM to store sampled sounds for their synthesizers.
But they use the PC's RAM instead of dedicated RAM.  Sharing RAM with
word processors, spreadsheets, wave editors, etc. is cheaper than
dedicated RAM, and it removes the <1 megabyte limitation of other RAM
based cards.

If you have a PC with Windows and 16 megabytes of RAM,  you can sample
your own WAVe files, change the synthesizer's INI file, and use 12
megabytes of RAM for your synthesizer's samples.

The same realtime ISA bus bandwidth that the Mwave synthesizer uses
will be used in the near future for multitrack hard disk recording.

Check Mwave out!

Richard Moore

------------------------------
Date:         Fri, 3 Dec 1993 21:57:46 PST
From:         metlay 
Subject:      Re: PC Soundcards - Should I be taking them seriously now ?

>>I didn't think there was such a thing as
>>"more than enough gear," but now I know better.
>
>John buys everything in six-packs: beer, keyboards, effects processors, ...

Er, no. Keyboards and FX by the six-pack. Beer by the case.

>>Of course, now that
>>John's got the K2000,
>
>You mean both K2000's, presumably? (One for each ADAT.)

I think he actually decided to get rid of one of them, because he found
he wasn't using the second one as much as he thought he would be. He always
said the 24-voice polyphony was plenty, with the great voice stealing
algorithms the K2k has... I owe him a phone call, but no one here
really cares so I'll shut up now. Why did I post this? It beats chasing
serial port bugs in my Powerbook, that's why. grrrr.

--
mike metlay * atomic city * box 81175 pgh pa 15217-0675 * metlay@netcom.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I incorporated the sound into my dreams...but I didn't wake up." (suzanne)

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