SCC synthesizer...

Page 3/7
1 | 2 | | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7

By Alex Ganzeveld

Expert (89)

Alex Ganzeveld's picture

27-03-2003, 09:42

Okay...This is quite a lot of text, but please take the time to read it...

Indeed.. I think there are no real benefits on this one... other than the 'hey, look at my MSX producing this amazing sounds!!!'-effect Wink

I'm struck by that remark.

You've just captured the ESSENCE of my story AND of the ESSENCE of using the MSX in ONE SENTENCE! And you managed to make it into a joke!Crying

I'm seriously question your sanity! Wink

If I would like something to sound like an SCC I could just as well load the waves into my Moonsound. But then; why on earth would I use the Moonsound, with it's crappy flat 16/44 sound, when I could be using my Terratec 24/96? I think I gonna sell my 8280. There are enough very nice emulator to do it's job, and PC vs MSX video editing, well...

If there's anybody thats using the MSX for practical rather than nostalgic reasons: concider visiting a shrink! Wink

For me, working with the MSX system is like riding a classic car. It's a car, it takes you from A to B, but don't ask me how! Nostalgia is the keyword. And let me tell you: it's FUN! I prefer Eric and the Floaters over Unreal. Same game: the hunter hunted.

My point:

Indeed.. I think there are no real benefits on this one... other than the 'hey, look at my MSX producing this amazing sounds!!!'-effect Wink

Your damn right!!! Don't you love it? Personally I would be thrilled if I saw a videoclip that featured an NMS 8245 and an SCC instead of a Clavia Nordlead!

Phew...

By msxhans

Expert (77)

msxhans's picture

27-03-2003, 10:10

Alex,

I agree with you about this! MSX is fun, no 'benefit' other than that is required.

By wolf_

Ambassador_ (9688)

wolf_'s picture

27-03-2003, 10:20

Yeah well, if you want to code your own synth, go for it. But I think it's hard to find anyone else to do it.

I dunno for the rest of the current 'active' scene, but imo games are considered nostalgia, but I think no-one would bother using pc's to develop those games.

As for the moonsound, I also think no-one would bother using a pc tracker to make music for the moonsound, as long as the pc can fully emulate the soundquality of the moonsound.

64k intros on the PC or more or less the same story: just because the result is small, it doesn't mean that the creators don't use many big apps to create it.. it would be real nostalgia if the devtools wouldn't exceed 64k, but who cares?

By BiFi

Enlighted (4348)

BiFi's picture

27-03-2003, 10:23

I've read what your intentions are with the SCC synth. It isn't easy to synthesize FM values into a wave form (or even the other way around, setting up FM values from a wave form), especially when you want that to (or from) just the 32 bytes an SCC wave form is made up of.

Would be nice to be able to do something like that though. Would be a nice addition to the SCC tracker I'm planning as well. Any info on both these points are greatly appreciated.

By BiFi

Enlighted (4348)

BiFi's picture

27-03-2003, 10:25

and MSX is and always will be fun, no doubt about that.

By snout

Ascended (15188)

snout's picture

27-03-2003, 13:36

You've just captured the ESSENCE of my story AND of the ESSENCE of using the MSX in ONE SENTENCE! And you managed to make it into a joke!Crying

I agree, one of the coolest things is the 'Hey my MSX can do that too!' effect, and using the MSX is still fun, and will always be.

By anonymous

incognito ergo sum (109)

anonymous's picture

27-03-2003, 16:02

I like how this thread turned from a request to programmers to make a certain program for somebody to a MSX fun without benefits thing. (*cough*)

Clearly having a program that allows the SCC to be manipulated via MIDI is beneficial to a MIDI composer. Also, not having such a program while you really want one is no fun.

The 'benefits' snout was talking about were more general. To the general MSX user it is not beneficial to have a program that allows you to use the SCC as a MIDI device, that's simply a fact. Because of this, it will be very hard to convince a programmer to program your program. He will probably rather work on a game or more generally useful utility.

The thing is, this type of program does not take a lot of skill. Why not learn Z80 assembly (old MCM courses are nice) and start coding? You know, in the 80's music composers were in most cases also programmers, because they had to create their own tools.

It is true SCC has a unique sound, and even SCC 'emulated' on MoonSound or any other more modern device does not result in the same sound.

Call me crazy, but MSX does have practical applications even today. TED is still the best texteditor I've ever seen and surely beats the crap out of EDIT.COM or Notepad. Also using a 8280 (or rather a Video9000) to do video editing is far more powerful than using some PC card with software, because on MSX you can control everything yourself. I could name several other examples...

Nostalgia shmostalgia! MSX NOW!!!

By Alex Ganzeveld

Expert (89)

Alex Ganzeveld's picture

28-03-2003, 15:11

Hmm...Personally, I think that the discussion that this thread has turned into, and which you like so much, is UTTERLY USELESS. It's like arueing with the pope about his belief: you can talk for hours and it gets you NOWERE.

True, a midi SCC synth would be a nice thing for me...And that's why I would like to see it being realised...And therefore I want this thread to be CONSTRUCTIVE. So stop argueing about the WHY's and start discussing about the HOW's.

By snout

Ascended (15188)

snout's picture

28-03-2003, 15:18

So stop argueing about the WHY's and start discussing about the HOW's.

It's not really an arguement. If you find a coder who's got the time to do the job, the first thing he will ask you is 'WHY'. (and then..indeed the 'HOW's come along)

I think GuyveR has given you a head-start to the Big HOW's. You don't need highly optimized assembly for this job, and a lot of information on Z80 assembly and the SCC is available already. Finding someone to code this for you will probably be close to impossible (although it already crossed my mind that large parts of Meridian could be quite suitable, and so do large parts of TeddyWareZ' SCC Blaffer... of both programs the sources are available on the web). You could consider learning a bit of ASM and give a try at it yourself, and join the development forums here and #msxdev on irc.rizon.net every now and then if you need the help of "Pro's"

By anonymous

incognito ergo sum (109)

anonymous's picture

28-03-2003, 18:47

Hmm...Personally, I think that the discussion that this thread has turned into, and which you like so much, is UTTERLY USELESS. It's like arueing with the pope about his belief: you can talk for hours and it gets you NOWERE.

True, a midi SCC synth would be a nice thing for me...And that's why I would like to see it being realised...And therefore I want this thread to be CONSTRUCTIVE. So stop argueing about the WHY's and start discussing about the HOW's.
It's nice you could spot the sarcasm there. It's also nice (*cough*) you noticed I've given you all the help I could and have tried to be as constructive as possible. The HOW's have already come to a conclusion a bit earlier.

Next time you might want to be a little friendlier and show some appreciation.

Page 3/7
1 | 2 | | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7
My MSX profile