poirier@ellerbe.rtp.dg.com (Charles Poirier) (10/25/90)
In article <1990Oct23.215703.1586@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Ethan Solomita) writes: > It would be nice to have true CD quality audio from >Paula, but I REALLY think this should be low priority, for two >reasons: first, the Amiga's audio capabilities are already >excellent and compare quite favorably with CD sound with a good >digitizer. I'm not flaming, either the poster or the Amiga sound capability, but the phrase "compares favorably to CD" is definitely not what I would favor. "Is kind of okay, considering the limited CHIP bus bandwidth" is more like it. To say that Amiga's 8-bit audio is comparable to CD sound (it doesn't matter *how* carefully it is digitized into 8 bits) is to say that one has a tin ear. Eight bit sound is audibly noisy (to me). Sound that rolls off at 7 KHz (with the filter on), sounds like it is coming from under a pillow. Sound that rolls off at 14 KHz (with the filter off), is better, but it still sounds like it's coming from under a towel, while simultaneously wind whistles through a crack in a nearby window (aliasing). I may have the numbers wrong, but not the perceptible results. Also: most CDs play more than four simultaneous notes/voices :-) ! Amiga sound is not even close to CD quality. >Second, most people who really need professional >quality sound are using MIDI and get most of their sound from the >MIDI instruments. This statement may well be true, but it begs the question. If Amiga *could* generate its own professional quality sampled sound (as I maintain it does not), more professionals would be using it that way! Most MIDI instruments don't let you record your own sampled sounds. The ones that do are (I'd guess) as much computer as instrument. Sound sampling really belongs on a computer, where you already have lots of flexible resources for storing, processing, and editing the samples. Why not do it in style? Also, not all professional-quality sound need be music. Amiga's fine video capability ought to be accompanied by high fidelity Amiga sound, whether it be music, speech, or birdcalls. HiFi-VHS is wasted on 8-bit sound. > Besides, there are add-on boards you can buy. The issue of whether to build-it-in or rely on add-ons is always an arguable point. Though it would certainly add to the cost, IMHO it would be a great selling point to be able to advertise "Built-in CD-quality sound!" You will not (and wouldn't want to) see "CD quality sound available ... from, mumble, some third party whom we can't name." This applies, of course, to all of the nice third party add-ons, most of which C-A can't ever hope to build themselves. Oh well. This is meant as food for thought, not flamage. Really. >Ethan Solomita: es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu Cheers, Charles Poirier poirier@dg-rtp.dg.com
h112706@assari.tut.fi (Herranen Henrik) (10/25/90)
In article <1990Oct25.003358.24989@dg-rtp.dg.com> poirier@ellerbe.rtp.dg.com (Charles Poirier) writes: >I'm not flaming, either the poster or the Amiga sound capability, but the >phrase "compares favorably to CD" is definitely not what I would favor. "Is >kind of okay, considering the limited CHIP bus bandwidth" is more like it. >To say that Amiga's 8-bit audio is comparable to CD sound (it doesn't matter >*how* carefully it is digitized into 8 bits) is to say that one has a tin >ear. True. >Eight bit sound is audibly noisy (to me). Sound that rolls off at 7 KHz >(with the filter on), sounds like it is coming from under a pillow. Sound >that rolls off at 14 KHz (with the filter off), is better, but it still >sounds like it's coming from under a towel, while simultaneously wind >whistles through a crack in a nearby window (aliasing). I may have the >numbers wrong, but not the perceptible results. Also: most CDs play more >than four simultaneous notes/voices :-) ! Amiga sound is not even close to >CD quality. Here goes... This is also not meant to be a FLAME to anyone, I just want to express my thoughts about the Amiga sound. The limited bandwidth of Amiga is one thing that makes Amiga sound inferior to CD sound (28 kHz max. vs. 44.1 kHz). Professional samplers use to have sample playback rates up to 100 kHz, which makes the sound quality much better becouse if you use the same sample for a whole octave, the lowest playback rate is still 50 kHz (more than enough). The other thing, 8 bit sound, is a problem especially becouse no compression method is used. It is possible to get a 90 dB signal to noise ratio with 8 bits with compression although the sound will not be as good as true 16 bit sound is. And, how about the pitch control (no-one has mentioned it, I think)? When played with high sample rates the resolution of sound pitch control degrades. The difference between nearest two sounds you can create is almost 1%, which is far too much to get a pure tone. If the sample rate was being doubled, it would be a must to get some more bits to sample playback speed control. BTW Charles, you said that "most CDs play more than 4 simultaneous notes/voices"... Actually, CDs have only 2 voice generators/DA convertors as opposed to Amiga's 4. If I would sample an orchestra sound to my Amy, it could play all the 40 instruments of the sample simultaneously B-) > Cheers, > Charles Poirier poirier@dg-rtp.dg.com Henrik 'Leopold' Herranen Internet: h112706@lehtori.tut.fi Snail Mail: TTKK/Paarakennuksen neuvonta/PL527/33101 Tampere/Finland -- Henrik 'Leopold' Herranen Internet: h112706@lehtori.tut.fi Snail Mail: TTKK/Paarakennuksen neuvonta/PL527/33101 Tampere/Finland "I don't need no arms around me, I don't need no drugs to calm me" - PF 1979
dpm@palm25.cray.com (Donald P. Maghrak) (10/26/90)
In article <1990Oct25.003358.24989@dg-rtp.dg.com> poirier@ellerbe.rtp.dg.com (Charles Poirier) writes: >In article <1990Oct23.215703.1586@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Ethan Solomita) writes: >> It would be nice to have true CD quality audio from >>Paula, but I REALLY think this should be low priority, for two >>reasons: first, the Amiga's audio capabilities are already >>excellent and compare quite favorably with CD sound with a good >>digitizer. > >Eight bit sound is audibly noisy (to me). Sound that rolls off at 7 KHz >(with the filter on), sounds like it is coming from under a pillow. Sound >that rolls off at 14 KHz (with the filter off), is better, but it still >sounds like it's coming from under a towel, while simultaneously wind >whistles through a crack in a nearby window (aliasing). I may have the > Some of the noise you hear from the Amiga is a function of the sampling rate. Aliasing in the sample comes from low sampling rates. The higher the sample rate the higher the freq response (with a penalty of more memory usage). 8 bit samples have a small dynamic range (6db * 8 bits = 48db). The noise floor is much closer to the max (without software trix). 8 bit audio can provide decent sound if one uses high sample rates (=>44khz) and software companding techniques. You will NOT get CD quality sound with 8 bits. > >>Second, most people who really need professional >>quality sound are using MIDI and get most of their sound from the >>MIDI instruments. > >This statement may well be true, but it begs the question. If Amiga *could* >generate its own professional quality sampled sound (as I maintain it does >not), more professionals would be using it that way! > I really doubt this. Pro samplers already cost as much as an A2000 and can range well into the $100k's. The Ensoniq EPS-16 just released for ~$2500 gives a pro quite a bang for the buck (16 bit audio, 127 samples in use at a time, 24 bit effects proccessing -16 bit out-, a sequencer, 21 voices, etc) The effects that are included are VERY important and would make a nice addition to the amiga. A pro is going to go for a dedicated unit for features like this. > >Most MIDI instruments don't let you record your own sampled sounds. >The ones that do are (I'd guess) as much computer as instrument. Sound >sampling really belongs on a computer, where you already have lots of >flexible resources for storing, processing, and editing the samples. Why >not do it in style? > Yes, most samplers do allow sampling (even the casio sk-1 did). I agree that a computer is best for editing the samples though. BTW, most samplers/synths today are computers dedicated to producing sound. The Amiga is great for proccessing and creating samples but I'd rather play them from a dedicated sampler where there were no corners cut in design (synclavier anyone). > >> Besides, there are add-on boards you can buy. > I like this idea. Why not get an EPS 16 rack mount with 21 voices,fx,.... > >The issue of whether to build-it-in or rely on add-ons is always an >arguable point. Though it would certainly add to the cost, IMHO it would >be a great selling point to be able to advertise "Built-in CD-quality sound!" > I won't argue with this. 16 bit audio would be great,usefull but it wouldn't meet the needs of a serious pro. One point here is that 16 bit samples, sampled at a 44khz rate will use a tremendous amount of memory. Up to the point of limiting other memory hungry programs from running at the same time. If Commodore gives us 16 bit dsps in the future, that would be great, but I'm not too concerned if they don't. > >This is meant as food for thought, not flamage. Really. ditto, Really. > I speak for myself, not my employer - so there! Don Maghrak
S36666WB%ETSUACAD.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu (Brian Wright) (10/26/90)
Hello,
All I have to say to this subject is that if Amiga DOES come out with a
16 or 24 bit sound chip then we also need a way to input 16 or 24 bit sound
into the Amiga. Not just 8 bit as the parallel port has to offer.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
=======================================================================
||NeXT- (nekst) N. The only PC to have sold less than 10,000 units and ||
|| not be considered a flop. ||
||------------------------------------------/ /------------------------||
||---Brian Wright | / / ||
||---s36666wb@etsuacad.etsu.edu | \ \/ / Only Amiga ||
||---Commercial Artist and Amigaphile| \/\/ Makes It Possible!! ||
=======================================================================phil@eos.arc.nasa.gov (Phil Stone) (10/30/90)
The desirability of quality sound for the Amiga (and no, eight-bit sound does *not* march under this banner) never seems to get much respect here, but I'd like to offer an alternative viewpoint, if possible. First, let me state that I bought a 1000 soon after they were available, upgraded to a 2000, and am now saving my pennies for the luscious 3000. I have been performing live music (electronic/experimental/new whatever you want to call it) with the Amiga for over four years. Nothing else, until recently, has given me the flexibile (i.e., totally programmable) control over sound production that the Amiga does. Commercial samplers do not allow direct, live access to registers, memory areas, etc. You buy a "slab," and depending on the design philosophy of the manufacturer of that slab, you can tweak only certain high-level aspects of the sound. This is why I use an Amiga, and not a commercial sampler/synthesizer. Over in the M*cintosh world, a company called Digidesign has produced a DSP (56000) board and software system capable of stereo sound sampling/processing/playback at 16 bits/44.1 Khz. They are selling quite well, from what I can tell. Here at NASA Ames, several researchers are using this system, for many of the same flexibility reasons that I cited for the Amiga, above. These researchers (especially the psycho- acousticians I work with) could not seriously consider 8-bit dynamic range for their work, nor are they impressed with the current audio software available for the Amiga (though programs like Audiomaster are an excellent beginning). I drool over the Digidesign system; I would love to be able to use it for my music, instead of just for work. I still consider M*c II's to underdesigned and over-priced, but oh...you should hear these babies sing! If it were possible to increase the Amiga's dynamic range capability to 16 bits, perhaps switchable to 8 bits for downward compatability, I would be a very happy person. Maybe a better idea would be for Commodore to throw some official support behind some of the Amiga DSP-board efforts that have appeared now and again; maybe Digidesign could be talked into an Amiga port of their excellent system (if I'm not mistaken, they have an Atari version as well). The Amiga need not be left behind in the high-end audio game. Believe me, that game exists, and is being played on computers, not just on synthesizers. It is my strong belief that audio is an equal partner in "multimedia." Let's give it as much respect and attention as we do to Amiga graphics. Oh, and please don't mistake me for the Marc Barrett of audio. I won't go on and on about this, I promise. Phil Stone (phil@eos.arc.nasa.gov | ...ames!eos!phil):w
es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Ethan Solomita) (10/30/90)
In article <7521@eos.arc.nasa.gov> phil@eos.arc.nasa.gov (Phil Stone) writes: > >Over in the M*cintosh world, a company called Digidesign has produced >a DSP (56000) board and software system capable of stereo sound >sampling/processing/playback at 16 bits/44.1 Khz. They are selling >quite well, from what I can tell. Here at NASA Ames, several researchers >are using this system, for many of the same flexibility reasons that I I remember hearing about two products. One was the Bonzai board from Active Circuits. The other was AudioLink from Beta Unlimited. Their phone number (718) 852-8646. The Active Circuits board supposedly can take TWO digital processors, I believe 56001s. The AudioLink was advertised in the October AmigaWorld, and has been advertised for quite a while. > Phil Stone (phil@eos.arc.nasa.gov | ...ames!eos!phil):w -- Ethan Ethan Solomita: es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu GorbachevAwards++; free (SovietUnion); IndependentRepublics += 15;
barrett@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU (Dan Barrett) (10/31/90)
In article <7521@eos.arc.nasa.gov> phil@eos.arc.nasa.gov (Phil Stone) writes: >If it were possible to increase the Amiga's dynamic range capability >to 16 bits, perhaps switchable to 8 bits for downward compatability, >I would be a very happy person. Me too. Like you, I "drool over" the Digidesign cards for the Mac, and wish that something comparable were available for the Amiga. Even something simpler like realtime hard-disk audio recording isn't available (to my knowledge), even though similar systems for the Atari ST (ADAP) have been available for years. I want this for Amiga too! I don't care if 16-bit sound comes from Commodore or a 3rd party company. Given the choice, I'd rather have Commodore concentrating its efforts on graphics and the OS than on sound, so maybe I'd prefer a 3rd-party card. A company called "Vision Quest" was designing an Amiga card around the Motorola 56001 (same as in Digidesign and NeXT), but I have not heard from them in a long time. They used to post to this newsgroup. Hello? Anyone there? >...maybe Digidesign could be talked into an Amiga port of their excellent >system.... Digidesign? For the Amiga? I doubt it will happen. Remember that Digidesign's president is THE person who started the rumors IN PRINT about the Amiga and MIDI (how the multitasking OS made it "unreliable" for MIDI timing). I am not making this up, and I can tell you the issue of KEYBOARD that contained his article. It says, in effect, "Uh, my friend told me that his Amiga sequencer doesn't handle timing well, so we blame the hardware and the OS." Not the software, of course. Respectable journalism, eh? :-( I would absolutely LOVE a powerful 16-bit DSP card for the Amiga. I would pay $$ for it, particularly if the software is excellent (or if it could be used transparently by existing applications like SYNTHIA). Dan //////////////////////////////////////\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ | Dan Barrett, Department of Computer Science Johns Hopkins University | | INTERNET: barrett@cs.jhu.edu | | | COMPUSERVE: >internet:barrett@cs.jhu.edu | UUCP: barrett@jhunix.UUCP | \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/////////////////////////////////////
peterk@cbmger.UUCP (Peter Kittel GERMANY) (10/31/90)
In article <7521@eos.arc.nasa.gov> phil@eos.arc.nasa.gov (Phil Stone) writes: >If it were possible to increase the Amiga's dynamic range capability >to 16 bits, perhaps switchable to 8 bits for downward compatability, >I would be a very happy person. Seems this is another item that should go into proposals for future custom chip revisions, here Paula. The data are there, we have four channels of 8 bits each and in the ECS at a considerable scan rate. I think without increasing (much) the DMA bandwidth of Paula, it should be possible to draw 16-bit samples from memory. The "only" thing that would have to be added to Paula are two 16-bit D/A converters, BESIDES the existing 8-bit ones (you need them still for compatibility reasons). Now, a 16-bit D/A is not sooo trivial, but also not too difficult these days. Perhaps the chip designers should consider this one, too. The other side, sampling with 16 bits a time, is not a design issue for the Amiga itself, it should be left to the 3rd party developers as today (or shouldn't it? Make an out-of-the-box Multimedia Machine out of the Amiga, with built-in audio and video digitizer? Oh well, just a dream, and probably an expensive one.) This way, they probably can be taught to leave alone the poor parallel port that should stay usable for other, more normal purposes. It should become a regular plug-in (or plug-besides) card or device. -- Best regards, Dr. Peter Kittel // E-Mail to \\ Only my personal opinions... Commodore Frankfurt, Germany \X/ {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!cbmger!peterk
dcr3567@isc.rit.edu (D.C. Richardson ) (11/02/90)
>reasons). Now, a 16-bit D/A is not sooo trivial, but also not too >difficult these days. Perhaps the chip designers should consider this >one, too. >The other side, sampling with 16 bits a time, is not a design issue >for the Amiga itself, it should be left to the 3rd party developers What about making an add-on device (Like Ham-E) that would give and take data in the form of 2-8 bit channels? (8+8 bits (2 bytes) = 1 16 bit word) It would probably have to tap into the direct signals (Paula) to intercept the data before it was sent out of the Audio ports (That would sound random), and send it to the device to put it back into 16 bits, two channels. Then again, a standard 16 bit card would probably be easier... -Dan -- Daniel C. Richardson Rochester Institute Of Technology / Mechanical Engineering Dept. "Immaturity Is The Essence Of Humanity. Children Shall Be Our Saviors" -Red's Dream
jimb@faatcrl.UUCP (Jim Burwell) (11/02/90)
peterk@cbmger.UUCP (Peter Kittel GERMANY) writes: >In article <7521@eos.arc.nasa.gov> phil@eos.arc.nasa.gov (Phil Stone) writes: >>If it were possible to increase the Amiga's dynamic range capability >>to 16 bits, perhaps switchable to 8 bits for downward compatability, >>I would be a very happy person. [stuff deleted] >The other side, sampling with 16 bits a time, is not a design issue >for the Amiga itself, it should be left to the 3rd party developers >as today (or shouldn't it? Make an out-of-the-box Multimedia Machine >out of the Amiga, with built-in audio and video digitizer? Oh well, >just a dream, and probably an expensive one.) This way, they probably >can be taught to leave alone the poor parallel port that should stay >usable for other, more normal purposes. It should become a regular >plug-in (or plug-besides) card or device. I think the Amiga should have at least built in audio-sampling capability. Some Unix workstations I've worked with, namely, Sun Sparcstations, SGI Irises (PI), and NeXTs have jacks where you can plug in a microphone or other line-in source. Wouldn't it be nice if the Amiga were the first Personal Computer to have this capability built in ? Is it practical when costs are considered ? Perhaps adding 16 bit sound to the custom chipset is the wrong approach. Maybe a DSP on the motherboard would be a better idea, perhaps appearing as an autoconfig device. Or perhaps that would be better as a "second-step". I imagine CBM or third parties will be selling Multi-media packages consisting of A3000s with various cards and other goodies, including a DSP card. Once one is standardized, perhaps that could move from a card to the motherboard. Owell.. enough 3AM rambling :-). C'ya, Jim -- UUCP: ...!rutgers!faatcrl!jimb Internet: jimb@faatcrl.UUCP Under brooding skys and watchful eyes On convulsive seas of false urgency We walk empty corridors in vain - "No Exit", Fate's Warning
sparks@corpane.UUCP (John Sparks) (11/02/90)
peterk@cbmger.UUCP (Peter Kittel GERMANY) writes: |You can get it to a stage where it is quite understandable |German, IF you take an hour or two to get accustomed to this voice. |But it sure does have an extreme American accent and is not able to |produce some of viably needed sounds. That's pretty funny. We Americans think the Amiga voice has a distinct German or Swedish sounding accent to it. I often think of it as a crazed robotic swedish chef (ala the muppet show). :-| -- John Sparks |D.I.S.K. Public Access Unix System| Multi-User Games, Email sparks@corpane.UUCP |PH: (502) 968-DISK 24Hrs/2400BPS | Usenet, Chatting, =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-|7 line Multi-User system. | Downloads & more. A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of----Ogden Nash
fhwri%CONNCOLL.BITNET@cunyvm.cuny.edu (11/03/90)
Re: autosampling on PCs
I hate to say it, but the Mac LC has a built-in microphone port...
--Rick Wrigley
fhwri@conncoll.bitnetjimb@faatcrl.UUCP (Jim Burwell) (11/04/90)
fhwri%CONNCOLL.BITNET@cunyvm.cuny.edu writes: >Re: autosampling on PCs >I hate to say it, but the Mac LC has a built-in microphone port... > --Rick Wrigley > fhwri@conncoll.bitnet I was thinking more on the lines of CD quality (16 bit x 2 @44.1khz) sound playback/record built into a future Amiga. After reading my message posted at 3AM, it wasn't very apparent :-). Especially after bringing up the SS1 and Personal Iris, which DON'T have CD quality sound. Only the NeXT does. The LC probably has single channel 8 bit sound about the same quality as the Amiga with three less channels. What I wouldn't mind seeing is built in CD quality sound on the Amiga. The easiest way to do that would be a DSP. But that would probably be too expensive to build into the machine, and we already have DSP cards. But who knows. Hardware always comes down in price after a while. Maybe we'll eventually see an out-of-the-box Amiga with a DSP. Then it hopefully WOULD be the first Personal Computer with built in CD quality sound! What I guess we're more likely to see is A3000s bundled with some snazzy DSP cards, and later, a built in DSP in a future Amiga if that package is really popular. C'ya, Jim -- UUCP: ...!rutgers!faatcrl!jimb Internet: jimb@faatcrl.UUCP Under brooding skys and watchful eyes On convulsive seas of false urgency We walk empty corridors in vain - "No Exit", Fate's Warning
etxtomp@eos.ericsson.se (Tommy Petersson) (11/05/90)
In article <3447@corpane.UUCP> sparks@corpane.UUCP (John Sparks) writes: -peterk@cbmger.UUCP (Peter Kittel GERMANY) writes: -|You can get it to a stage where it is quite understandable -|German, IF you take an hour or two to get accustomed to this voice. -|But it sure does have an extreme American accent and is not able to -|produce some of viably needed sounds. - -That's pretty funny. We Americans think the Amiga voice has a distinct -German or Swedish sounding accent to it. I often think of it as a crazed -robotic swedish chef (ala the muppet show). - -:-| - --- -John Sparks |D.I.S.K. Public Access Unix System| Multi-User Games, Email -sparks@corpane.UUCP |PH: (502) 968-DISK 24Hrs/2400BPS | Usenet, Chatting, -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-|7 line Multi-User system. | Downloads & more. -A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of----Ogden Nash As if the Swedish chef in Muppet Show talks with anything like a Swedish accent! For us it sounds something like Dutch with a grave American accent (no offense to the Flying Dutchmen, it's of course mostly because we don't know Dutch as the Americans don't now Swedish). A lot of the words are pronounced similar in Swedish and German, but the melody is very different. Tommy Petersson
dgold@basso.actrix.co.nz (Dale Gold) (11/05/90)
Quoted from - phil@eos.arc.nasa.gov (Phil Stone): > The desirability of quality sound for the Amiga (and no, eight-bit sound > does *not* march under this banner) never seems to get much respect here, > but I'd like to offer an alternative viewpoint, if possible. [...] > I drool over the [Mac] Digidesign system; I would love to be able > to use it for my music, instead of just for work. > If it were possible to increase the Amiga's dynamic range capability > to 16 bits, perhaps switchable to 8 bits for downward compatability, > I would be a very happy person. So would I! I visited a local recording studio a couple of months ago, and watched a friend editing a recording of her string quartet with a Mac. (I'm not sure if it was Digidesign or not). All the takes of the session were stored on a 1 gigabyte disk in the form of one huge sound sample, and she was splicing together the best takes just as you would edit a sound sample with Audiomaster. This would have been a very serious chore for an experienced recording engineer with tape and splicing equipment. The sound quality was fantastic. The most impressive part of this was realising that my friend knows next to nothing about computers or sound engineering. They showed her how to use the mouse to cut & paste, & how to save her work, etc, and after about 20 minutes they just left her to it. This type of software has revolutionised the recording industry, and it's a great shame that the Amiga is unable to participate at a professional level. > It is my strong belief that audio is an equal partner in "multimedia." > Let's give it as much respect and attention as we do to Amiga graphics. I agree 100%. > Oh, and please don't mistake me for the Marc Barrett of audio. Not to worry... :-) -- %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% | | Critics can't even make | | dgold@basso.actrix.co.nz | music by rubbing their back | | | legs together. - Mel Brooks | %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
sokay@kurgen.mitre.org (Steve Okay W43) (11/07/90)
>Re: autosampling on PCs > >I hate to say it, but the Mac LC has a built-in microphone port... I saw the LC up close and personal yesterday at a company demo and wasn't really impressed. The digitizer is a puck shaped device which attaches to the back of the machine or sits atop the monitor. The unit is controlled from the control panel. He digitized a few samples on the spot, and they sounded kind of muddy, even at 22Khz. You have to specifically specify compression when saving the sample(s) , or it/they get written to disk uncompressed. The "quickie" demo samples he did took up about 80-90K uncompressed. It can do mono 8-bit sampling at either 11Khz or 22Khz. When asked about stereo, the salesdroid made some joke about hacking 2 together to get stereo and that stereo sound was a ways off for PCs/Macs/whatever. Being polite, I didn't tell him about my PerfectSound II. When I asked about the sampling rate, he told me about the 11 or 22Khz settings and seemed offended that I'd interrupted his evangelization of the masses. Personally, I'll take my PerfectSound any day. > --Rick Wrigley > fhwri@conncoll.bitnet -------------- Stephen Okay Technical Aide, The MITRE Corporation sokay@mitre.org Disclaimer: I get *MYSELF* into enough trouble with my opinions, why inflict them on MITRE?
awessels@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Allen Wessels) (11/08/90)
In article <125648@linus.mitre.org> sokay@kurgen.mitre.org (Steve Okay W43) writes: >It can do mono 8-bit sampling at either 11Khz or 22Khz. When asked about stereo, >the salesdroid made some joke about hacking 2 together to get stereo >and that stereo sound was a ways off for PCs/Macs/whatever. Being >polite, I didn't tell him about my PerfectSound II. >When I asked about the sampling rate, he told me about the 11 or 22Khz >settings and seemed offended that I'd interrupted his evangelization >of the masses. The salesdroid was wrong (one annoying thing for me is that Mac salespeople seem to know less about the Mac than Amiga salespeople know about the Amiga.) You can do stereo sampling with the SID II from (I think) Cedar technologies. The problem is that there isn't much support for it. 22Khz is the max sampling rate that I am aware of. The reason the sampled sounds may sound muddy is that the Mac speakers are pretty wimpy.