cmcmanis%pepper@Sun.COM (Chuck McManis) (05/19/88)
In article <2981@crash.cts.com> (Bill Blanke) writes: >IFF instruments to Sonix. Anyone know how? I believe the Aegis AudioMaster program does this. I have it but haven't been able to use it since my Mimetics sampler bit the big one. Assuming I can figure out what sampler to buy to replace the Mimetics one (suggestions are appreciated) I can let you know... --Chuck --Chuck McManis uucp: {anywhere}!sun!cmcmanis BIX: cmcmanis ARPAnet: cmcmanis@sun.com These opinions are my own and no one elses, but you knew that didn't you.
foy@aero.ARPA (Richard Foy) (05/20/88)
In article <53838@sun.uucp> cmcmanis@sun.UUCP (Chuck McManis) writes: > >I believe the Aegis AudioMaster program does this. I have it but haven't >been able to use it since my Mimetics sampler bit the big one. Assuming >I can figure out what sampler to buy to replace the Mimetics one (suggestions >are appreciated) I can let you know... >--Chuck I have the Perfect Sound sampler and have no trouble using it with Aegis AudioMaster. I have two minor complaints. It uses the parallel port with no pass through, so I have to disconnect my Epson printer to use it. the otehr is that microphone input needs to go through a preamplifier. These do not significantly inconvenience me. Richard Foy These are my own opinions.
mriley@well.UUCP (Mark Riley) (05/22/88)
Err, what was the question? Maybe I can help you. (I wrote Sonix so I hope I can help you... ;-) I'm just learning the net and can't figure out how to go to the top of a thread... Argh. -Mark-
doug-merritt@cup.portal.com (05/25/88)
Mark Riley writes: >Err, what was the question? Maybe I can help you. (I wrote Sonix so >I hope I can help you... ;-) I'm just learning the net and can't >figure out how to go to the top of a thread... Argh. -Mark- Bill Blanke originally asked how to use Perfect Sound and Studio Magic with Sonix...they both create IFF instruments and he couldn't get Sonix to use what they created. Someone else said that Sonix uses RFF ("Riley File Format"), not IFF, and I was asking what that is, whether I can get documentation on its format, and why it was used instead of RFF. Thanks for offering to answer questions. Doug -- Doug Merritt ucbvax!sun.com!cup.portal.com!doug-merritt or ucbvax!eris!doug (doug@eris.berkeley.edu) or ucbvax!unisoft!certes!doug
carolyn@cbmvax.UUCP (Carolyn Scheppner CATS) (05/27/88)
In article <5874@cup.portal.com> doug-merritt@cup.portal.com writes: > >Someone else said that Sonix uses RFF ("Riley File Format"), not IFF, >and I was asking what that is, whether I can get documentation on its >format, and why it was used instead of RFF. 1. Someone stated that if you put the required extensions on the filenames of your IFF instruments, Sonix will load them. 2. I believe RFF contains additional control-panel settings information which allows you to save not only the sample but also the panel settings. Also far as I know it is a private file format. If Sonix doesn't document it, then it probably isn't documented. -- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Carolyn Scheppner -- CATS >>Commodore Amiga Technical Support<< UUCP ...{allegra,ihnp4,rutgers}!cbmvax!carolyn PHONE 215-431-9180 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
ssd@sugar.UUCP (Scott Denham) (06/01/88)
In article <3878@cbmvax.UUCP>, carolyn@cbmvax.UUCP (Carolyn Scheppner CATS) writes: > 2. I believe RFF contains additional control-panel settings information > which allows you to save not only the sample but also the panel > settings. Also far as I know it is a private file format. > If Sonix doesn't document it, then it probably isn't documented. > > Carolyn Scheppner -- CATS >>Commodore Amiga Technical Support<< > =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= The Sonix documentation implies that RFF is an "extension" to IFF. After trying with limited success to decode the file format, I'd have to say that's bunk. There's no resemblence to IFF at all that I can see; at least it's not a well-defined; self-documenting format like IFF. I really found it rather slimy of them to imply that their format is somehow superior to the IFF standard. Given the facilities written into IFF to support new features, surely a new hunk type would have been far superior to the private format. This severly limits the usefulness of Sonix; you can get data in but what comes out is not of a lot of use to anything but Sonix.
ssd@sugar.UUCP (Scott Denham) (06/04/88)
In article <6009@well.UUCP>, mriley@well.UUCP (Mark Riley) writes: > Err, what was the question? Maybe I can help you. (I wrote Sonix so > I hope I can help you... ;-) I'm just learning the net and can't > figure out how to go to the top of a thread... Argh. -Mark- Mark, perhaps it's just as well that you DON'T look back to the top of the thread..... there were some unkind comments about certain aspects of your product. Still, all-in-all it's a great program; any chance of a future improved version ??
ssd@sugar.UUCP (Scott Denham) (06/08/88)
In article <4314@gryphon.CTS.COM>, mriley@pnet02.UUCP writes: > The Sonix RFF format existed *prior* to the IFF format; however, the > term RFF was coined at a later date (by individuals other than myself.) > > In any case, if RFF seems "bunk" or "slimy" to you, then I wish you > all the luck in utilizing DMCS's one sound generation technique to > the max (Sonix has *three* techniques - IFF, RFF, & SYNTHESIS.) > > 'Nuff said? -Mark- > Mark, I didn't mean to flame the format so much as the implication that I got from the manual that RFF was an 'improvement' on IFF. (I don't recall exactly what the wording was; perhaps I was just annoyed by the name :) Knowing that SONIX's file format preceded IFF makes me feel a lot bettter about it; in itself there's nothing *wrong* with it - and clearly it makes possible lots of nice things that current IFF types dont permit. In hind- sight, if the 'standard' doesnt work for you, a true 'derivitive' of the standard (Like EA's DMCS format) is certainly preferrable to a total home-brew one. I do thing Aegis should have included at least a general description of the file format in the Sonix documentation to facilitate add-ons, utilites, etc. Since you (or someone) started pre-IFF, you could not have possibly used IFF, and I certainly can't blame you for using a format that works for the job at hand in preference to defining a whole new global standard. Thanks for your response and your participation in the discussion !! Scott Denham > UUCP: {ihnp4!scgvaxd!cadovax, <backbone>}!gryphon!pnet02!mriley > INET: mriley@pnet02.cts.com
foy@aero.ARPA (Richard Foy) (06/10/88)
In article <4365@gryphon.CTS.COM> mriley@pnet02.cts.com (Mark Riley) writes: >........ >whatever) so I'm kinda hanging loose until the dust settles. I >really *want* to do another version, but I'm sorta stuck with doing >it with Aegis... >..... I hope hope you do. There are many things about Sonix that I like much than its major competitor. However I wish you had had a save .SMUS option. /|\ | The above opinions are all my own. Richard Foy
mriley@pnet02.cts.com (Mark Riley) (06/13/88)
In <comp.sys.amiga> foy@aero.ARPA (Richard Foy) writes: > In article <4365@gryphon.CTS.COM> mriley@pnet02.cts.com (Mark Riley) writes: > >whatever) so I'm kinda hanging loose until the dust settles. I > >really *want* to do another version, but I'm sorta stuck with doing > >it with Aegis... > I hope hope you do. There are many things about Sonix that I like much > than its major competitor. However I wish you had had a save .SMUS option. Sonix _does_ save its scores in the IFF/SMUS format. Earlier versions of Sonix (aka Musicraft) did use a custom format; however, I did switch to the SMUS standard because everyone wanted me to. I'm not sure that Sonix has derived any benefit from using SMUS, but hey, maybe it did... From what I am told, DMCS can read and write SMUS as an option (though it defaults to a quazi-IFF format of its own) but there's not a whole lot of compatibility since DMCS supports more staff notation features than Sonix and Sonix supports some types of instruments that DMCS doesn't. At first sight, the SMUS standard appears to be comprehensive, but it seems to have failed as far as implementation and practicality are concerned. -Mark- UUCP: {ucbvax!ucsd,rutgers}!crash!gryphon!pnet02!mriley INET: mriley@pnet02.cts.com "Hey, I don't _use_ programs, I write them..." ;-)