ceej@.ai.mit.edu (Chris Hillery) (03/06/91)
I just read a couple of articles about people's trouble with MED. I don't want folk to stop using this, as I think it's the best around, so I'll offer a few suggestions: First off, this program is not really SoundTracker/NoiseTracker compatible, so don't give it bad marks for not working with ST/NT modules right. It does it right, to the best of its abilities. It (MED 2.13, anyway) translates NT modules as it loads to fix most gross differences in the commands (F00 for pattern break, for example), so you can play them; it also relegates tempo settings 1-16 (I believe) to NoiseTracker speeds. However, these speeds are slightly skewed from the real speeds, for some reason; I'd assume that MEDs method of timing is not the same as NT's. It's a fairly simple matter to correct this, really, by changing the speeds to the correct MED values; I'm writing a program to do just this on an automated basis. It's possible that MED does sound right on PAL machines for the same reason that some NT modules do (different Vblank sync rate); I haven't had the chance to work with a PAL Amiga to see. (MED's speeds are also more logical and flexible than NT's; they are in beats/minute, 16 lines/beat, so far as I can tell). However, there are more serious problems when saving a Med song as a Noise- Tracker module. This is due quite literally to the fact that MED is a better program than NT. Many features of MED are just not available in NT and the like that I have seen (double-time notes, for example, as well as varying pattern lengths which is VERY handy), and so any song which uses these features will naturally sound absolutely bazookas on a normal NT-player. Also, as mentioned before, MED's speeds are completely different, and one can't build a one-to-one correspondence from MED speeds to NT speeds as one can the other way. This is the main drawback to MED, in my opinion, but it's a price I'm easily willing to pay for the much greater power MED offers. What the world needs is a good background MED module-player (the one included isn't too bad, but could be better and perhaps will be in 3.0). Come to that, we could really use a good NT-module player too... Anyway, I would assume that this is the answer to the poster who couldn't get MED modules to play in a NT-mod player. He also said it sounded as if some sample lengths were corrupt and playing parts of other samples; I've heard this in many many NT-mods and I honestly think it's either a fault of many players (which would not surprise me) or possibly inherent for some bizarre reason in the NT-mod format. Either way, I don't think MED is to blame. The other poster who couldn't get IFF-sounds to load: were these sounds be any chance saved out from NoiseTracker or SoundTracker? I know for certain that NoiseTracker 1.2 and possibly many others save out bad IFF samples. Audio Master cannot load these either (or rather, chokes for a while and then says "Bad IFF: Loading as RAW", allowing you to chop off the little garbage header and save it out as a good IFF). MED has never given me any problems with IFF loading when the file it was asked to load was good. This poster also mentioned that he couldn't get NT-mods to load correctly. I don't know what it is about NT-mod format, but it seems to be seriously prone to odd flaws that make no difference to one program but totally be- wilder another. I have had modules that, when loaded into MED, played random garbage with no discernable sound at all, but play just fine when loaded into IntuiTracker or NoiseTracker. I don't understand it, but since many variations of this have occured (some programs can load it, others screw it up) I really can't blame MED. Unfortunately I don't know of a solution either. To sum: Please keep using MED! I have yet to see an editor with fewer flaws or more power. To me consistent multitasking alone is enough to make it worth using. Things can only get better with 3.0! Happy Tracking! Ceej aka Chris Hillery ceej@rpi.edu
DEB110@psuvm.psu.edu (Doug Bischoff) (03/07/91)
I would like to find a good soundtrack maker for the A3000 that will be ab
le to play under AmigaVision and Deluxe Video III. Will MED do this? I hope s
o. Please let me know, and tell me where I can get the latest version.
Also... how would one go about writing background music that would play
while a program was running (like in conjunction with a game!)... ala Turrican.
Thanks for the help!
/---------------------------------------------------------------------\
| -Doug Bischoff- | *** *** ====--\ | "I'm not God... |
| -DEB110 @ PSUVM- | * *** * ==|<>\___ | I was just |
| -The Black Ring- | *** *** |______\ | misquoted!"|
| --- "Wheels" --- | *** O O | -Dave Lister |
| Corwyn Blakwolfe | T.R.I. ------------- | RED DWARF |
\---- DEB110@PSUVM.PSU.EDU D.BISCHOFF on GEnie THIRDMAN on PAN -----/greg@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Greg Harp) (03/07/91)
In article <13748@life.ai.mit.edu> ceej@.ai.mit.edu (Chris Hillery) writes: >I just read a couple of articles about people's trouble with MED. I don't want >folk to stop using this, as I think it's the best around, so I'll offer a few >suggestions: I'd love to keep using it, but it's getting on my nerves at the moment. >First off, this program is not really SoundTracker/NoiseTracker compatible, so >[Chris describes differences between the MED and NT formats.] >they are in beats/minute, 16 lines/beat, so far as I can tell). > >However, there are more serious problems when saving a Med song as a Noise- >[More descriptions, differences, and reasons why MED is better...] > >Anyway, I would assume that this >is the answer to the poster who couldn't get MED modules to play in a NT-mod >player. He also said it sounded as if some sample lengths were corrupt and >playing parts of other samples; I've heard this in many many NT-mods and I >honestly think it's either a fault of many players (which would not surprise >me) or possibly inherent for some bizarre reason in the NT-mod format. Either >way, I don't think MED is to blame. I am the post you mention here. I understand well the differences in features between MED mods, 16-sample ST mods, and the newer ST/NT mods. I'm not trying to save modules in MED's format and then load them into NT players. I'm saving them using the ST-mod option on the save menu. Before anyone asks, let me assure you that I am not doing anything in my music that is MED-specific. All of the codes are ST/NT standard. To quote the version 2.1x documentation: (discussing the ST-Module button on the save menu) "If you want to export the music to SoundTracker 2.x or NoiseTracker, you can use this gadget to save it as a module." It can't be any clearer than that. What we have here is a direct statement by Tiejo Kinnunen (the author of MED) that his program will save an ST/NT compatible module, which I can then load into NoiseTracker or a compatible program. Well, I can tell you that not one of Intuitracker, Module Master, NoiseTracker, ProTracker, or StarTrekker believes MED here. I doubt seriously that all of those programs share the same bug (they do not all contain the same code) and MED is the only program that doesn't. The answer is simply that MED's idea of an ST/NT compatible module is not correct. It's saving something having to do with the position and lengths of samples incorrectly. >The other poster who couldn't get IFF-sounds to load: were these sounds be >any chance saved out from NoiseTracker or SoundTracker? I know for certain >that NoiseTracker 1.2 and possibly many others save out bad IFF samples. >Audio Master cannot load these either (or rather, chokes for a while and then >says "Bad IFF: Loading as RAW", allowing you to chop off the little garbage >header and save it out as a good IFF). MED has never given me any problems >with IFF loading when the file it was asked to load was good. My major gripe here is that MED loads IFF samples and then ignores the sampling rate. I know this to be true because I had a sample that was _very_ out of tune with the others, so I loaded it up in a sample editor (AudioMaster II, in case you think it's buggy, too) and changed the sampling rate appropriately. I then reloaded the sample into MED and it was still out of tune. I loaded the old (unmodified) copy of the same sample into a different bank and compared them. They were exactly the same! This sample was nearly a full step off key (but not quite) and when I loaded both versions into MED I got the _same_ note. Loading them both into AudioMaster produced _vastly_ different notes (the old version was still nearly a full step off and the new one was correct). Simply playing the sample from the command line (using 'sound') produced different notes and displayed different sample rates. Why, then, does MED ignore this sampling rate? It should be modifying the given rate appropriately to play different notes, not using some set table of playback frequencies and ignoring any specified rate given in the IFF file. >This poster also mentioned that he couldn't get NT-mods to load correctly. >I don't know what it is about NT-mod format, but it seems to be seriously >prone to odd flaws that make no difference to one program but totally be- >wilder another. I have had modules that, when loaded into MED, played random >garbage with no discernable sound at all, but play just fine when loaded into >IntuiTracker or NoiseTracker. I don't understand it, but since many variations >of this have occured (some programs can load it, others screw it up) I really >can't blame MED. Unfortunately I don't know of a solution either. I can _certainly_ blame MED here. Look at the evidence. Everything else seems to work correctly with true ST/NT compatible mods. MED doesn't. Therefore, MED is buggy. Tiejo Kinnunen needs to sit down and figure out just what he's done wrong. >To sum: Please keep using MED! I have yet to see an editor with fewer flaws >or more power. To me consistent multitasking alone is enough to make it >worth using. Things can only get better with 3.0! I really like MED's editor, and, well, it's the only true multitasking ST/NT mod editor I've found. I have to give the author that. I'd really like to keep using MED, but I want my music to be ST/NT compatible -- I'll have none of this program-specific module format. Now, I'm pretty unhappy that I spent all the time that I have writing under MED only to discover that I can't output a working ST/NT mod. Since there's no printing feature (I believe NoiseTracker or one of the other clones has this... Hmmm...) I have to figure out some way to get a hardcopy of the music info & enter it into a _working_ program. I'd love to see MED 3.0 correct all of the problems in 2.13 and earlier versions. However, since the only source I have seen for 3.0 is to send the author money via Snail-Mail to Europe, you can count me out. I'll gladly pay for it when I have a working version on my disk, and not before. >Happy Tracking! Maybe someday... >Ceej >aka Chris Hillery >ceej@rpi.edu Greg -- Greg Harp |"How I wish, how I wish you were here. We're just two |lost souls swimming in a fishbowl, year after year, greg@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu|running over the same ground. What have we found? s609@cs.utexas.edu |The same old fears. Wish you were here." - Pink Floyd
chuckt@theborg.mlb.fl.us (Chuck Teschke) (03/07/91)
There is someone here on the net that wrote an Arexx player for MED that will let you play med tunes in amigavision via AREXX |Chuck Teschke | |---------------------------------------------------------------------------- | USENET:chuckt@theborg.mlb.fl.us |"If i have 5 megs of RAM, then why does | FIDONET: 374/1 | this program keep accessing the disk?!?" |---------------------------------------------------------------------------- "My employer could care less about my opinions..."
ceej@mole.ai.mit.edu (Chris Hillery) (03/09/91)
In article <45212@ut-emx.uucp> greg@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Greg Harp) writes: >In article <13748@life.ai.mit.edu> ceej@.ai.mit.edu (Chris Hillery) writes: > >I am the post you mention here. I understand well the differences in features >between MED mods, 16-sample ST mods, and the newer ST/NT mods. I'm not trying >to save modules in MED's format and then load them into NT players. I'm saving >them using the ST-mod option on the save menu. Before anyone asks, let me >assure you that I am not doing anything in my music that is MED-specific. >All of the codes are ST/NT standard. > I wasn't assuming you tried to save a song as a MED modules and then wanted it to work in a NT-mod player (I'll give you THAT much credit... =). I WAS thinking that you tried to use MED-specific commands and then wanted them to work in a NT-mod player. That, obviously, won't work... However, since you say you didn't do so, I am confused. I've done several times, and just did again to be sure, exactly what you said, with no problems that I can recall; certainly it worked just dandily this time. I loaded in a song with only NT-type commands (and speeds, too; I'll assume you used the correct speeds) and saved it as an ST-mod. It played just fine in both Module Master, and in IntuiTracker. > What we have here is a direct statement by Tiejo >Kinnunen (the author of MED) that his program will save an ST/NT compatible >module, which I can then load into NoiseTracker or a compatible program. > >Well, I can tell you that not one of Intuitracker, Module Master, NoiseTracker, >ProTracker, or StarTrekker believes MED here. >... It's saving something having to do with the position and lengths >of samples incorrectly. > Again, I remain confused. I've had no real problems. I have heard songs that sound as though the sample-lengths are screwy, however, and it's possible that those songs were developed in MED and it messed them up. If so, that's a bona fide bug and will hopefully be cleared up. I guess my main question is really "So what?" I'm all for basically scrapping NoiseTracker format in favor of MED's anyway, simply as it appears more stable and certainly, incorporating as it does all of MED's more powerful features, is much more, well, powerful. More on that in a minute; but lemme get this next bit done: >>The other poster who couldn't get IFF-sounds to load: were these sounds be >>any chance saved out from NoiseTracker or SoundTracker? [...] >My major gripe here is that MED loads IFF samples and then ignores the >sampling rate. I know this to be true because I had a sample that was >_very_ out of tune with the others, so I loaded it up in a sample editor >(AudioMaster II, in case you think it's buggy, too) and changed the sampling >rate appropriately. I then reloaded the sample into MED and it was still >out of tune. I loaded the old (unmodified) copy of the same sample into >a different bank and compared them. They were exactly the same! This >sample was nearly a full step off key (but not quite) and when I loaded >both versions into MED I got the _same_ note. Loading them both into >AudioMaster produced _vastly_ different notes (the old version was still >nearly a full step off and the new one was correct). Simply playing the >sample from the command line (using 'sound') produced different notes and >displayed different sample rates. Why, then, does MED ignore this sampling >rate? It should be modifying the given rate appropriately to play different >notes, not using some set table of playback frequencies and ignoring any >specified rate given in the IFF file. > Here I KNOW exactly what the "problem" is, and sorry, it's you. There's a very good reason that MED ignores sample rates; it's supposed to. By definition (IFF 8SVX definition, I believe), middle-C (C-2 in MED) is to be played at 8363 samples/second, and all other notes are set rates directly related to that. I'm rather surpised that you, as an Amiga musician, didn't realize that. Let's consider why, from MED's standpoint. Over MED's nearly four-octave range for internal samples, it covers sample rates from 4000 sample/sec (approx; half of middle-C, anyway), which is nearly too low a rate to be of much use, to nearly 32000 samples/sec (also approx), which is considerably higher than the poor sound chip's top speed of around 28000 samples/sec. So, you see, MED covers nearly the Amiga's entire effective range of sample speeds. MED doesn't care what sample speeds are for the sake of computing speed and standardization; all Amiga music programs should be the same way. If you simply change the sample _Rate_ in Audio Master, it naturally won't affect what MED plays since you have changed the _number_ of samples or their values. This much should be apparent. Fortunately, MED (and no other program i'm familiar with, actually, another superior feature of MED) allows you to transpose individual samples (as well as tracks, blocks and the whole song); for instruments, simply go to the Sample frame (F3) and change the Transpose gadget. Granted this only works in half-step intervals (and this is a feature I would dearly love to see, fine-tune transposing of at least the whole song for use in live performance (listening, Teijo or Zap?)), but it is easy. Basically this means if you enter a C it'll actually play an F# (for instance) if you have the transpose set to 6. The alternative is to load the sample into Audio Master and actually re-sample the data to a different samplerate. This actually changes the samples and such, so it'll have the desired effect in MED. >>This poster also mentioned that he couldn't get NT-mods to load correctly. >>I don't know what it is about NT-mod format, but it seems to be seriously >>prone to odd flaws that make no difference to one program but totally be- >>wilder another. > >I can _certainly_ blame MED here. Look at the evidence. Everything else >seems to work correctly with true ST/NT compatible mods. MED doesn't. >Therefore, MED is buggy. Tiejo Kinnunen needs to sit down and figure out just >what he's done wrong. > I still can't 'cause, looking at my evidence, sometimes some programs can't load stuff. MED is NOT always the one that can't. However, it's possible that's it screwy. Well, again, I wish that we could forget about NT-mod format. It certainly has it quirks, as do the vast majority of the software programs which output in it. >I really like MED's editor, and, well, it's the only true multitasking ST/NT no, no, no... ^^^^^ >mod editor I've found. I have to give the author that. I'd really like to >keep using MED, but I want my music to be ST/NT compatible -- I'll have none >of this program-specific module format. > *shrug* why not? Remember, NT-module format was once a non-standard format specific to one program (remember SMUS?)... why not make way for a new one? And at any rate, MED is not designed to really be a NT-clone (more power to it), and has complete support for using its compositions in outside software as was the original point of SoundTracker; if there are some growing pains I'm not surprised nor concerned. At the least I don't think Noise- Tracker incompatibility, however slight, is a reason not to use MED. (While full working multitasking IS, most definitely; I often run many many things at once and can't afford to either shut them off or have a music program crash while they're going. And MED is more bug-free than a fair number of commercial products I have used.) >>Happy Tracking! > >Maybe someday... > >Greg >-- > Greg Harp |"How I wish, how I wish you were here. We're just two > |lost souls swimming in a fishbowl, year after year, >greg@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu|running over the same ground. What have we found? > s609@cs.utexas.edu |The same old fears. Wish you were here." - Pink Floyd Ceej aka Chris Hillery ceej@rpi.edu Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.audio Subject: Re: MED things Summary: Expires: References: <13748@life.ai.mit.edu> <45212@ut-emx.uucp> Sender: Followup-To: Distribution: Organization: The Internet Keywords:
mapjilg@gdr.bath.ac.uk (J I L Gold) (03/15/91)
Howdy! I've heard more than a rumour that MED3.00 is now available. *WHERE* can I get my paws on it? (Please?). Cheers, -- # J.Gold | mapjilg@uk.ac.bath.gdr # # University of Bath , UK | jilg@uk.ac.bath.maths # # The more improbable an event is, the more likely it is to happen :-) #