s117986@lehtori.tut.fi (Salmij{rvi Janne) (03/16/91)
From article <t22918.669072860@ursa>, by t22918@ursa.calvin.edu (Matt Ranney): > At long last! MED 3.0 has been uploaded to ab20.larc.nasa.gov by some > very cool person. This version looks very, very good. I haven't had > time to really play around with everything yet, but it includes: built > in sampler/editor, built in synth sound editor, and better handling of > NoiseTracker songs. If you plan on doing any music writing on the > Amiga, *THIS* is the program for you. Try this before you dick around > with any of those other non-multitasking monsters. > -- > Matt Ranney mranney@wybbs.mi.org > t22918@ursa.calvin.edu mranney@mole.ai.mit.edu (or any other FSF machine) Here is what I think of this long awaited editor: I got it last thursday and I've been examining it since then. First thing that struck me when I loaded it was the outlook... It was still the same ugly screen except the new menubar. And there was this annoying guy still left to jump (or not to jump) to the pointer (sorry Topi but I think your bitmappersonality is pretty annoying). Although I have to say that the way it looked didn't hide the amount of options there... (when I start creating/composing noise with any editor, the outlook affects the result. I just can't make good tunes with lousy looking editor, when with neat editor it is much more easier. There is this psycholical(?) thing you know) Anyway I just ignored the outlook and went deeper inside... Midi was there (as in 2.13), nice. Although it is quite unnecessary for anything else than just editing, it's no sequencer you have to admit. And sample-editor is great and synthsounds, wow! It includes almost the best syntheticsounds on amiga (I think SidMonII sounds better but I just saw a glimpse of it). 'Programminglanguage' for them sounds great and it is great when I tested it. With it you can create a sound that you wished, almost ;) And yes it multitasks quite well, but but... Do I need a multitasking editor ? Nope (at least not yet), with one Meg (and only 512 kbs of it Chipmem) it isn't very wise to use mem for something else when composing. Besides I'd like to hear what do you all who run after multitasking editors run with those ? Nowadays when the editors have sampler and sample-editors they have everything you need when making music in themselves. And the editing is quite easy too. But it is in every program nowadays... So here is the conclusion: + Synthsounds + MIDI + Lotsa commands and options - Outlook Hmm... Now I can't leave this thing out ;) What does MED3.0 possibly offer you need that is not in Protracker1.1b ? (except then a 'possibly-bug-free' program, PT1.1b still has some bugs left) And what is wrong with PT's multitasking ? I think it works as well as MED. Since I haven't still found NT2.1 I use PT1.1b (med offers nothing except synthsounds that are worth using which are not in PT, and when I want to use synthsounds I use Futurecomposer or something like that) -- Janne Salmij{rvi s117986@cc.tut.fi
zap@lysator.liu.se (Zap Andersson) (03/17/91)
s117986@lehtori.tut.fi (Salmij{rvi Janne) writes: >From article <t22918.669072860@ursa>, by t22918@ursa.calvin.edu (Matt Ranney): >> At long last! MED 3.0 has been uploaded to ab20.larc.nasa.gov by some >> very cool person. This version looks very, very good. I haven't had >> time to really play around with everything yet, but it includes: built >> in sampler/editor, built in synth sound editor, and better handling of >> NoiseTracker songs. If you plan on doing any music writing on the >> Amiga, *THIS* is the program for you. Try this before you dick around >> with any of those other non-multitasking monsters. >> -- >> Matt Ranney mranney@wybbs.mi.org >> t22918@ursa.calvin.edu mranney@mole.ai.mit.edu (or any other FSF machine) > Here is what I think of this long awaited editor: >I got it last thursday and I've been examining it since then. First thing that >struck me when I loaded it was the outlook... It was still the same ugly screen >except the new menubar. And there was this annoying guy still left to jump (or >not to jump) to the pointer (sorry Topi but I think your bitmappersonality >is pretty annoying). Although I have to say that the way it looked didn't hide >the amount of options there... (when I start creating/composing noise with any >editor, the outlook affects the result. I just can't make good tunes with lousy >looking editor, when with neat editor it is much more easier. There is this >psycholical(?) thing you know) > Anyway I just ignored the outlook and went deeper inside... >Midi was there (as in 2.13), nice. Although it is quite unnecessary for >anything else than just editing, it's no sequencer you have to admit. >And sample-editor is great and synthsounds, wow! It includes almost the best >syntheticsounds on amiga (I think SidMonII sounds better but I just saw a >glimpse of it). 'Programminglanguage' for them sounds great and it is great >when I tested it. With it you can create a sound that you wished, almost ;) >And yes it multitasks quite well, but but... Do I need a multitasking editor ? >Nope (at least not yet), with one Meg (and only 512 kbs of it Chipmem) it isn't >very wise to use mem for something else when composing. Besides I'd like to >hear what do you all who run after multitasking editors run with those ? >Nowadays when the editors have sampler and sample-editors they have everything >you need when making music in themselves. >And the editing is quite easy too. But it is in every program nowadays... > So here is the conclusion: > + Synthsounds > + MIDI > + Lotsa commands and options > - Outlook > > Hmm... Now I can't leave this thing out ;) >What does MED3.0 possibly offer you need that is not in Protracker1.1b ? >(except then a 'possibly-bug-free' program, PT1.1b still has some bugs left) >And what is wrong with PT's multitasking ? I think it works as well as MED. First of all, I disagree with the 'ugly' part. Secondly, MED gives you the MOST IMPORTANT FEATURE IN AMIGA SEQUENCERS EVER! (Totall ignoring the 'note' style editors such as sonix and DMCS, of course ;-): Note timing and length! When you learn to use tho HOLD/DECAY feature, you will find that you have NEVER before made MUSIC, just stupid sounds in sequence. I think this, however tiny feature, is the absolutely best one there is. For you who don't know what it is: MED 3.00 allows control over 'note up' and 'note down' for MIDI, and for built in sounds too. You may create long notes, short notes, stacatto and other VERY interesting effecs. This gives an artistic tool that is umatched in other editors in the same range. In all other similar editors, you are forced to increase temp to do the same thing as MED does so elegantly. I personally simply love it, and have thereby deleted all oither MIDI sequencers in my machine, replacing them with MED. ( Note that these opinions are quite personal, since the feature in question is so utterly perfect for the type of music I do. Others may not find it as useful, but I love it! Others are entitled to their own opinions, of course! > Since I haven't still found NT2.1 I use PT1.1b (med offers nothing >except synthsounds that are worth using which are not in PT, and when I want >to use synthsounds I use Futurecomposer or something like that) >-- > Janne Salmij{rvi > s117986@cc.tut.fi -- * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * (This rent for space) * My signature is smaller than * Be warned! The letter 'Z' is Copyright 1991 * yours! - zap@lysator.liu.se * by Zap Inc. So are the colors Red, Green and * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Greenish-yellow (Blue was taken by IBM) -- * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * (This rent for space) * My signature is smaller than * Be warned! The letter 'Z' is Copyright 1991 * yours! - zap@lysator.liu.se * by Zap Inc. So are the colors Red, Green and * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Greenish-yellow (Blue was taken by IBM)
t22918@ursa.calvin.edu (Matt Ranney) (03/17/91)
s117986@lehtori.tut.fi (Salmij{rvi Janne) writes: >And yes it multitasks quite well, but but... Do I need a multitasking editor ? Maybe YOU don't need one, but I do. >Nope (at least not yet), with one Meg (and only 512 kbs of it Chipmem) it isn't >very wise to use mem for something else when composing. Besides I'd like to >hear what do you all who run after multitasking editors run with those ? Well, that's my setup too (unfortunately), and I still couldn't live without a tasking editor. In fact, most of the time, I don't even edit in MED, I use it to play songs while running JRComm. There aren't any decent player programs out there (yet) that play songs at the right speed, and don't eat up all kinds of processor time, so I just use MED. Just hack the JRC screen to 2 colors and you've got all kinds of memory left. Say you download something, well you can just pop right out and lz x it without disturbing everything else. And even when I do write music, I still like to have JRComm open all the time, in case I need to call somewhere really quick. I'm probably starting to sound like a .advocate here, but it's how I feel: If I've got this great operating system that multitasks, there is no reason to have to shut it off to use some music editor that isn't going to need all the CPU time anyway. That's stupid. >What does MED3.0 possibly offer you need that is not in Protracker1.1b ? >(except then a 'possibly-bug-free' program, PT1.1b still has some bugs left) >And what is wrong with PT's multitasking ? I think it works as well as MED. I've never seen PT1.1, so I can't really make a judgement on it. In fact, MED 2.0 was the first *tracker type editor that I've ever seen, and I've never bothered with anything else. -- Matt Ranney mranney@wybbs.mi.org t22918@ursa.calvin.edu mranney@mole.ai.mit.edu (or any other FSF machine)
s117986@lehtori.tut.fi (Salmij{rvi Janne) (03/19/91)
> First of all, I disagree with the 'ugly' part. Secondly, MED gives you the > MOST IMPORTANT FEATURE IN AMIGA SEQUENCERS EVER! (Totall ignoring the > 'note' style editors such as sonic and DMCS, of course ;-): but MED is no REAL sequencer... polyphony limited to 16 voices Of course that is enough if you're running it with only one synth (like I do) but still ... (Are those ALL sequencers (MIDI) programs you have ? If so you haven't seen a sequencer on amiga yet). Music-X I'm using has no 'note' style editor, insteads it has quite similar to that of those trackers. (More info on same row of course) > Note that these opinions are quite personal, since the feature in question is so utterly perfect for the type of music I do. Others may not find it as useful, > but I love it! Yep... so were mine and I have to admit that I'm a more NT/ST/PT-user, and they are SO easy to use (at least newest versions). (personal opinion again) ;) -- Janne Salmij{rvi s117986@cc.tut.fi
cseaman@sequent.UUCP (Chris "The Bartman" Seaman) (03/20/91)
s117986@lehtori.tut.fi (Salmij{rvi Janne) writes:
< Here is what I think of this long awaited editor:
< I got it last thursday and I've been examining it since then. First thing that
< struck me when I loaded it was the outlook... It was still the same ugly screen
< except the new menubar. And there was this annoying guy still left to jump (or
< not to jump) to the pointer (sorry Topi but I think your bitmappersonality
< is pretty annoying). Although I have to say that the way it looked didn't hide
< the amount of options there... (when I start creating/composing noise with any
< editor, the outlook affects the result. I just can't make good tunes with lousy
< looking editor, when with neat editor it is much more easier. There is this
< psycholical(?) thing you know)
I think you must be seriously disturbed. :-) Actually, I find MED much
'better looking' than Protracker or StarTrekker. And I get a kick out of
the 'dancing pointer'.
< And sample-editor is great and synthsounds, wow! It includes almost the best
< syntheticsounds on amiga (I think SidMonII sounds better but I just saw a
< glimpse of it). 'Programminglanguage' for them sounds great and it is great
< when I tested it. With it you can create a sound that you wished, almost ;)
I haven't had a chance to play with the synthsounds yet, but the demo
provided was quite nice. And the sample editor, while it may be no threat
to AudioMaster (II or III), is still quite useful. Much more so than the
one in StarTrekker (at least to me).
< And yes it multitasks quite well, but but... Do I need a multitasking editor ?
YES!! I absolutely refuse to use a 'productivity tool' which can't
multitask. That's why I threw Protracker out the window (metaphorically
speaking). Of course, I also hated the way Protracker insisted on trying
to open a PAL screen on my NTSC Amiga, and the fact that it uses the
vertical blanking of the screen for its timing, causing EVERY song to play
way too fast. MED, on the other hand, uses CIAB, which makes it
compatible with ANY Amiga, including the A3000. That is a BIG plus.
I wish those of you in Europe who compose music, and wish for us in lowly
America to enjoy it, would consider that none of the Tracker tools allow
us to do so. The only way I can enjoy it is to load it into MED, which
still has an occasional problem with a Tracker module (more on this
below).
< Besides I'd like to
< hear what do you all who run after multitasking editors run with those ?
What do I do while composing or listening to music with MED? Anything I
want. :-) Since it does multitask, I don't have to worry about what I
can't be doing.
< Nowadays when the editors have sampler and sample-editors they have everything
< you need when making music in themselves.
This assumes that 'making music' is all you do with your Amiga. If so,
then that's great for you. On the other hand, I use mine for a lot more.
< So here is the conclusion:
< + Synthsounds
< + MIDI
< + Lotsa commands and options
< - Outlook
I think the word 'outlook' should probably be replaced by 'appearance',
or possibly 'interface style'.
On another topic, I tried loading some Tracker modules into MED 3.00 last
night, and, to my great surprise, the Tracker compatibility has
significantly improved. I did have a problem with mod.klisje_paa_klisje.
During blocks 3-5, there is extensive use of Portamento. Unfortunately,
it didn't appear to be working correctly. I ended up changing all of the
Portamento commands to the 'Change Pitch' command (FFD). This corrected
the problem (or at least made it much less noticable), but I would like to
know if anyone else has had problems with Portamento. What basically
happened is that, midway through the block, it lost almost all of the
volume from the instrument being 'slid'.
Any help on this would be greatly appreciated.
Regards,
Chris
--
Chris (Insert phrase here) Seaman | ///
cseaman@sequent.com <or> | /// Make up your own
...!uunet!sequent!cseaman | \\\/// mind.
The Home of the Killer Smiley | \XX/C503719@UMCVMB.MISSOURI.EDU (Baird McIntosh) (03/20/91)
In Message-ID: <55591@sequent.UUCP>
cseaman@sequent.UUCP (Chris "The Bartman" Seaman) said:
>[responding to comments on MED's poor appearance and Topi, the pointer-guy]
>
>I think you must be seriously disturbed. :-) Actually, I find MED much
>'better looking' than Protracker or StarTrekker. And I get a kick out of
>the 'dancing pointer'.
>
Here, here! So far I've only seen StarTrekker (the version on ab20), and
besides the PAL screen, the program interface was disorganized. I like the
way MED has 10 separate 'menu panels' for different types of functions as well
as 5 separate 'big panels' (i.e. vertical edit, horizontal edit, synth sounds,
sample editor, and sample list). Finally, the jumping pointer is cute and
shows that Teijo has a sense of humor. Lighten up, people! :-)
>I haven't had a chance to play with the synthsounds yet, but the demo
>provided was quite nice. And the sample editor, while it may be no threat
>to AudioMaster (II or III), is still quite useful. Much more so than the
>one in StarTrekker (at least to me).
The sampler doesn't digitize or monitor Perfect Sound 3.0 hardware--of course.
Otherwise, the editting features look cool and better than Perfect Sound 3.1
in some ways. (Is this saying a lot? ;-)
>On another topic, I tried loading some Tracker modules into MED 3.00 last
>night, and, to my great surprise, the Tracker compatibility has
>significantly improved. I did have a problem with mod.klisje_paa_klisje.
>During blocks 3-5, there is extensive use of Portamento. Unfortunately,
>it didn't appear to be working correctly. I ended up changing all of the
>Portamento commands to the 'Change Pitch' command (FFD). This corrected
>the problem (or at least made it much less noticable), but I would like to
>know if anyone else has had problems with Portamento. What basically
>happened is that, midway through the block, it lost almost all of the
>volume from the instrument being 'slid'.
>
>Any help on this would be greatly appreciated.
The ReadMe I got with klisje_paa_klisje mentioned a bug in MED's portamento
command (number 3, is it?) and I have noticed that MED plays the song wrong
compared to ModuleMaster 1.7's playing of the song. Apparently, MED is
supposed to Portamento with the last used data-values if the data-values of
the current note's Portamento are zeros. Instead, it uses 00 as the data for
the Portamento. This affects the sound of the song.
| Baird McIntosh | c503719@umcvmb.missouri.edu <-or-> c503719@umcvmb.bitnet |
| "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few." |
| "Let's go!" LEMMINGS "Oh no!" |s117986@lehtori.tut.fi (Salmij{rvi Janne) (03/21/91)
From article <55591@sequent.UUCP>, by cseaman@sequent.UUCP (Chris "The Bartman" Seaman): > YES!! I absolutely refuse to use a 'productivity tool' which can't > multitask. That's why I threw Protracker out the window (metaphorically > speaking). Of course, I also hated the way Protracker insisted on trying > to open a PAL screen on my NTSC Amiga, and the fact that it uses the > vertical blanking of the screen for its timing, causing EVERY song to play > way too fast. MED, on the other hand, uses CIAB, which makes it > compatible with ANY Amiga, including the A3000. That is a BIG plus. Hmm... haven't you looked into setup PT ? There is this little switch: Timing : VBlank or CIA ;) . you can set that to default by saving those prerences as number 00 (that's the one that is automatically loaded). Besides I tested PT1.1b in an environment where there was CED running with PT1.1b and it worked just fine. Ok, you can't change the PTscreen with LeftAmiga+N/M (whatever) but you can use `/~ insteads (above TAB key, you know) :) Only thing I got it crash when I started playing with Xoper :) But tell me a program that stays up and running when you do what you want with Xoper ;) > > This assumes that 'making music' is all you do with your Amiga. If so, > then that's great for you. On the other hand, I use mine for a lot more. > Yep, when I make music I make music and nothing else. But when I'm not making music I do a lot more too... > > I think the word 'outlook' should probably be replaced by 'appearance', > or possibly 'interface style'. Whatever you want... Sorry for wrong word, but I just couldn't think anything better at the moment. > -- > Chris (Insert phrase here) Seaman | /// > cseaman@sequent.com <or> | /// Make up your own > ....!uunet!sequent!cseaman | \\\/// mind. > The Home of the Killer Smiley | \XX/ -- Janne Salmij{rvi s117986@cc.tut.fi