EMUSIC-L Digest Volume 58, Issue 02 This issue's topics: PC Soundcards - Should I be taking them seriously now ? (15 messages) Your EMUSIC-L Digest moderator is Joe McMahon . You may subscribe to EMUSIC-L by sending mail to listserv@american.edu with the line "SUB EMUSIC-L your name" as the text. The EMUSIC-L archive is a service of SunSite (sunsite.unc.edu) at the University of North Carolina. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1993 23:39:59 -0000 From: Tony Jewell Subject: PC Soundcards - Should I be taking them seriously now ? Eventually my Atari gav up the ghost - There's only so much you can do with sellotape and string. Okay, says I, to the 486 in the corner of my office, sitting there quietly running Excel, its time for you to do something more interesting with your life. A PC can now run Cubase, midi cards are cheap, seems like the ideal answer. So I pick up 'Computers are Fun in Bed', and look up Midi cards, and I spy something called a Gravis Ultrasound. For 169 quid, I can have Midi plus a 16bit sampler plus a Wavetable synth. Now, I've been using computers to drive synths for a long time now, but I've never taken their pitiful beepings very seriously - the idea of a computer actaully producing sound is new to me.. So I listen into comp.ibmpc.soundcards for a bit, and they seem to take it all very seriously, with a whole new language of jargon for me to learn. So, the question is - For 169 pounds, do I get a free synth ? Can send midi *to* the computer and play samples and this Wavetable synth thingy ? Should I bother ? How does the quality of synthesis compare to a *real* keyboard. Is it just a baby Kawai K1 or MT32 in there, or is it anything useful ? Can Cubase talk to it directly ? Can Cubase Audio talk to it (if it comes out for the PC). Oh, someone please help me out here !! Thanks a million Tony Jewell -- __ ___ EMail: tony@cityscape.co.uk / |_ Tel: (UK) 0223 566950 \__ ityscape |__Mail Tony Jewell ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 26 Nov 1993 11:21:06 GMT From: Ian Donaldson Subject: Re: PC Soundcards - Should I be taking them seriously now ? tony@ns.cityscape.co.uk (Tony Jewell) writes: >Eventually my Atari gav up the ghost - There's only so much you can do >with sellotape and string. Okay, says I, to the 486 in the corner of my >office, sitting there quietly running Excel, its time for you to do >something more interesting with your life. A PC can now run Cubase, midi >cards are cheap, seems like the ideal answer. Every so often new computers com out with new features. Eventually, they all make their way to the good old PC. ;) >So I pick up 'Computers are Fun in Bed', and look up Midi cards, and I >spy something called a Gravis Ultrasound. For 169 quid, I can have Midi >plus a 16bit sampler plus a Wavetable synth. Now, I've been using >computers to drive synths for a long time now, but I've never taken their >pitiful beepings very seriously - the idea of a computer actaully >producing sound is new to me.. So I listen into comp.ibmpc.soundcards for >a bit, and they seem to take it all very seriously, with a whole new >language of jargon for me to learn. Indeed. The days of PC speaker bleeping are (thankfully) over. >So, the question is - For 169 pounds, do I get a free synth ? Can send >midi *to* the computer and play samples and this Wavetable synth thingy ? >Should I bother ? How does the quality of synthesis compare to a *real* >keyboard. Is it just a baby Kawai K1 or MT32 in there, or is it anything >useful ? Can Cubase talk to it directly ? Can Cubase Audio talk to it (if >it comes out for the PC). Oh, someone please help me out here !! 169 pounds sounds a tad expensive for a GUS, but yes, you do get a free synth, more or less. The Gravis Ultrasound is more limited that I would like. Firstly, as it is a WaveTable board, it needs on board memory to store its samples, and although it can be upgraded to 1 Mb of memory, it only comes with 256k. Now, how much MIDI is good enough? If you are playing 32 notes at once, then all 32 have to fit in this 1 Mb. At 16 bit, 44.1 Khz stereo, that 1 Mb doesn't last too long. Also, as you go past 14 simultaneous notes, the sample rate drops. You sounds like a serious MIDI user to me, so I dont think the GUS is for you. How much cash have you to throw around? I would imagine you like a MPU-401 MIDI port. Why not buy some cheap MPU-401 sound card, and connect it to a Roland LAPC/1, or Sound Canvas, or even a RAP-10 if you has the money? If you want to go really cheap, even a humble MT-32 card could serve your needs. If you work under Windows exclusively (which is very wise, when dealing with PC MIDI) then a late version Sound Blaster card will provide full duplex MIDI, with enough left over for a decent synth module? As far as Cubase goes, I have no idea. I use Cakewalk Pro for Windows, and I am very very happy with it. The only area I find it lacking is that it cant print sheet music, but that is not really its province. I am using the humblest of equipment, only a Sound Blaster Pro, and an DX-7 II, and an Ensoniq SQ-R+ when I can get my hands on it for a while. Please, ask for more info if you need it. Ian ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 26 Nov 1993 15:43:31 -0000 From: Tony Jewell Subject: Re: PC Soundcards - Should I be taking them seriously now ? Ian Donaldson (icd@mame.mu.OZ.AU) wrote: : 169 pounds sounds a tad expensive for a GUS, but yes, you do get a free : synth, more or less. The Gravis Ultrasound is more limited that I would : like. Firstly, as it is a WaveTable board, it needs on board memory to : store its samples, and although it can be upgraded to 1 Mb of memory, : it only comes with 256k. Now, how much MIDI is good enough? If you are : playing 32 notes at once, then all 32 have to fit in this 1 Mb. At : 16 bit, 44.1 Khz stereo, that 1 Mb doesn't last too long. Also, as you : go past 14 simultaneous notes, the sample rate drops. You sounds like : a serious MIDI user to me, so I dont think the GUS is for you. Oh my. Maybe I haven't quite got my head round how this works. Does the GUS not use the PC's memory/hard disk for sample storage (say, I just want to digitise a record, for instance). And why does the number of simultaneous MIDI notes effect memory ? What is happening inside this card ? Cheers, TJ -- __ ___ EMail: tony@cityscape.co.uk / |_ Tel: (UK) 0223 566950 \__ ityscape |__Mail Tony Jewell ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 26 Nov 1993 11:57:47 -0500 From: David Habermehl Subject: Re: PC Soundcards - Should I be taking them seriously now ? In icd@mame.mu.OZ.AU (Ian Donaldson) writes: >tony@ns.cityscape.co.uk (Tony Jewell) writes: >As far as Cubase goes, I have no idea. I use Cakewalk Pro for Windows, and >I am very very happy with it. The only area I find it lacking is that it >cant print sheet music, but that is not really its province. I am using >the humblest of equipment, only a Sound Blaster Pro, and an DX-7 II, and >an Ensoniq SQ-R+ when I can get my hands on it for a while. Actually, the latest version of Cakewalk (v.2.0 I belive) DOES print music. Dave zephyr@panix.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 26 Nov 1993 22:30:52 GMT From: "Cornel H. Huth" Subject: Re: PC Soundcards - Should I be taking them seriously now ? In article <2d5873$e6v@ns.cityscape.co.uk> tony@ns.cityscape.co.uk (Tony Jewell) writes: >Ian Donaldson (icd@mame.mu.OZ.AU) wrote: >: playing 32 notes at once, then all 32 have to fit in this 1 Mb. At >: 16 bit, 44.1 Khz stereo, that 1 Mb doesn't last too long. Also, as you >: go past 14 simultaneous notes, the sample rate drops. You sounds like >: a serious MIDI user to me, so I dont think the GUS is for you. >Oh my. Maybe I haven't quite got my head round how this works. Does the >GUS not use the PC's memory/hard disk for sample storage (say, I just >want to digitise a record, for instance). And why does the number of >simultaneous MIDI notes effect memory ? What is happening inside this >card ? First off, the GUS isn't a "MIDI" card, it's a sound card. Any MIDI product coming out of a GUS is strictly due to software executing on the PC. That said: The GUS hardware can play from 14 to 32 voices simulataneously. Due to timing restrictions, updating 14 voices permits sample rates of 44.1kHz, but with, say, 24 voices active, updating all those means less available time for any one voice, so the sample rate max goes down (@24 max=25725Hz; @32 max=19292Hz). Yes, the GUS stores its patch data on disk, and the software program (such as Ruckus, a toolkit by me) loads in whatever patches are required or requested. The total patch size on disk is about 5.5MB (128 melodic patches and about 61 drums, included with the GUS). The max addressable GRAM (GUS onboard RAM) is 1MB. While this is yet another 640K-type limit, most sequences will not be bothered by this. If it is a problem, the software can load the patches, or a subset of them, in 8-bit mode (all supplied patches are 16-bit samples), thereby doubling effective GUS storage. Also, the GUS hardware makes those 8-bit samples sound "better" than, say, it would sound on an 8-bit card. The guy above said that 32 notes simulataneously would bump up against 1MB fast. True (most likely), but it's not very likely you'll have 32 completey different _patches_ in use at the same time. It's not terribly likely that you'll even have 32 different patches in any one sequence at all. The key difference here is that a patch contains as many as 16 ranges for an instrument, and this is all contained in a single patch. An average melodic patch is about 40K in size, with about 4 ranges. An average drum patch is about 12K, all having a single range (being a drum, you know). In short, the GUS requires sophisticated software to really max out its capabilities. The GUS has been out less than a year. The next will make or break it. As for recording, the standard GUS is limited to 8-bit sampling. A daughter- card has always been advertised with the GUS and is to allow 16-bit recording. The GUSMAX, a new card altogether, will have 16-bit recording and a SCSI port built-in. Neither of these two products is available now. In the end, I'd say you'd be happier with a true MIDI sound module. The GUS is really intended for the game player (the music capability puts to shame any of the non-wavesample cards) or the casual musician. For $130 what do you expect? -- chh Internet: chuth@lonestar.utsa.edu Fidonet: 1:387/800.8 BBS: The 40th Floor;V32b@1(210)684-8065;M-F:5pm-9am,WE:1p-9a CT ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 27 Nov 1993 23:15:24 GMT From: Philip Lockwood Subject: Re: PC Soundcards - Should I be taking them seriously now ? chuth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Cornel H. Huth) wrote: > > The guy above said that 32 notes simulataneously would bump up against 1MB > fast. True (most likely), but it's not very likely you'll have 32 completey > different _patches_ in use at the same time. It's not terribly likely that > you'll even have 32 different patches in any one sequence at all. The key > difference here is that a patch contains as many as 16 ranges for an > instrument, and this is all contained in a single patch. An average melodic > patch is about 40K in size, with about 4 ranges. An average drum patch is > about 12K, all having a single range (being a drum, you know). In short, the > GUS requires sophisticated software to really max out its capabilities. The > GUS has been out less than a year. The next will make or break it. > > In the end, I'd say you'd be happier with a true MIDI sound module. The GUS > is really intended for the game player (the music capability puts to shame > any of the non-wavesample cards) or the casual musician. For $130 what do you > expect? Well, in all fairness to the GUS, it's a very good card. The sound might not be quite as good as a Sound Canvas, but you have a lot more freedom in patch selection. I think it's a great deal for the money, and you are overlooking some features. For instance, I am assuming he has some decent synths to run. With cakewalk, can't you redirect output, so that some of it would go out the midi box? This would greatly increase the number of voices available. Also, the meg limit is very seldom a problem, unless you want to have a 44.1khz 30 second sample playing along with your instruments. Of course you can get around that using cakewalk to play the wav... Also, I wouldn't recommend a SB or any other game card (even with the waveblaster). I think if you want to do serious midi, the GUS should work ok. It has the (Ensoniq?) GF1 chip inside. I wouldn't waste any money on an fm synth card. Like he said, you should also consider an MPU card, or a Roland. I wouldn't suggest a Turtle Beach, because it appears that they are on the way out. I have a GUS, though, and am using it to do music. I have been very happy with it, especially considering the price. Some patches are better than others, it all depends what kind of music you are into. The guitars (imho) are pretty sad. But I just lay real guitars instead... Another GUS owner to talk to is dionf or fdion ( francois dion) on the comp.sys.ibm.pc.soundcard newsgroup. He posts a lot and seems to use the GUS quite extensively for commercial music production. He also seems to be very pleased with it. Later, Philip p.s. if you have any other questions you can email me, and i will do my best to answer them. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 28 Nov 1993 00:28:38 GMT From: "Cornel H. Huth" Subject: Re: PC Soundcards - Should I be taking them seriously now ? In article <2d8n2c$6hr@jaws.cs.hmc.edu> plockwoo@hmc.edu (Philip Lockwood) writes: >> In the end, I'd say you'd be happier with a true MIDI sound module. The GUS >> is really intended for the game player (the music capability puts to shame >> any of the non-wavesample cards) or the casual musician. For $130 what do you >Well, in all fairness to the GUS, it's a very good card. The sound might >not be quite as good as a Sound Canvas, but you have a lot more freedom in >patch selection. I think it's a great deal for the money, and you are >overlooking some features. For instance, I am assuming he has some decent Considering I'm probably only one out of maybe 10 in the entire universe that has written a MIDI player for the GUS from the ground up, it's not all that likely that I am "overlooking some features". I spent four months with the thing and pretty much know what it can and can't do. Anything good coming out of a GUS is 90% software and 10% hardware, and since there is so little software for the GUS (now), well, you figure it out. >available. Also, the meg limit is very seldom a problem, unless you want to >have a 44.1khz 30 second sample playing along with your instruments. Of >course you can get around that using cakewalk to play the wav... I could play a 100MB 44.1kHz/16-bit sample on a GUS if I so desired. Playing samples (VOCs or WAVs and that like) is the least of problems in getting the GUS to do something (though interleaved stereo (as are all stereo VOC/ WAVs) does mean even more software work). Getting the GUS to play a MIDI file is 100 times more complex. Sure, if all you use is an app, like Cake, then none of this really matters. If you program the thing, or plan to develop an app yourself, it becomes _THE_ thing. In any case, a serious musician isn't going to go head-over-heels about a GUS since he's bound to have better already. -- chh Internet: chuth@lonestar.utsa.edu Fidonet: 1:387/800.8 BBS: The 40th Floor;V32b@1(210)684-8065;M-F:5pm-9am,WE:1p-9a CT ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 28 Nov 1993 02:03:49 -0500 From: Phil Somebody-or-another Subject: Re: PC Soundcards - Should I be taking them seriously now ? Why would you say that Turtle Beach soundcards are on the way out? I was under the impression that the Multisound (emu proteus onboard) was pretty much the state of the art in pc sound? Thanks- Another Phil sps5251@siena.bitnet p.s. sorry to the rest of you....my mailer munged his address and I couldn't reply via email ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 28 Nov 1993 13:19:15 -0400 From: "ANDREW G. YOUNGER" Subject: Re: PC Soundcards - Should I be taking them seriously now ? Actually "Another Phil", I am glad you responded via the mailing list, as I too would be interested know what he feels about the Turtle Beach sound card. I am only running a Sound Blaster 16 at the moment and I get excellent results with a bit of fiddling. however this fiddling is only useful on some instruments. It was cheap so there you go, that was a big part of the decision. Does anybody have any feelings on which is better - the Roland or the Turtle Beach cards? Thanks - Andrew AYOUNGER@ac.dal.ca ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 28 Nov 1993 18:43:02 +0000 From: Nick Rothwell Subject: Re: PC Soundcards - Should I be taking them seriously now ? >So I pick up 'Computers are Fun in Bed', and look up Midi cards, and I >spy something called a Gravis Ultrasound. For 169 quid, I can have Midi >plus a 16bit sampler plus a Wavetable synth. I wish I knew what they meant by "wavetable synth." I mean, it's not a PPG, is it? Nick Rothwell | "That's the Waldorf set for General MIDI." CASSIEL Contemporary Music/Dance | "FZZIIIIAAAAOOOOUUUMMMMMM ZUMZUPZUMZUP..." cassiel@cassiel.demon.co.uk | "Is that 'STRINGS 1'?" cassiel@cix.compulink.co.uk | "Yeah. You got a problem with that?" ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1993 04:44:58 GMT From: Jim Kresge Subject: Re: PC Soundcards - Should I be taking them seriously now ? Yes--Cakewalk Professional latest version prints the infor from the "staff" line. David Habermehl (zephyr@panix.com) wrote: : In icd@mame.mu.OZ.AU (Ian Donaldson) writes: : >tony@ns.cityscape.co.uk (Tony Jewell) writes: : >As far as Cubase goes, I have no idea. I use Cakewalk Pro for Windows, and : >I am very very happy with it. The only area I find it lacking is that it : >cant print sheet music, but that is not really its province. I am using : >the humblest of equipment, only a Sound Blaster Pro, and an DX-7 II, and : >an Ensoniq SQ-R+ when I can get my hands on it for a while. : Actually, the latest version of Cakewalk (v.2.0 I belive) DOES print music. : Dave : zephyr@panix.com -- Regards, +--------------------------+-----------------------------------------------+ | Jim Kresge LOCKHEED ISC | These are my opinions and not legally binding | | Voice: 408-987-4586x2009 | INTERNET = kresge@lims.lockheed.com | | FAX: 408-987-4625 | COMPUSERVE = 76366.2360 | +--------------------------+-----------------------------------------------+ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1993 13:17:00 EDT From: John Rossi III Subject: Re: PC Soundcards - Should I be taking them seriously now ? Whether PC Soundcards are to be taken seriously is mostly a matter of what you are intending to do with them. As I have previously stated, the Turtle Beach Multisound card does AD/DA direct to disk work which is in all respects 'CD' quality (in stereo). When coupled with some decent editing and assembly software (Wave 2.0, Digital Soup, etc), the Multisound card provides a very functional stereo direct to disk recording system. On the MIDI sound generation side, however, the Multisound sticks you with what amounts to a Proteus-1 sample playback unit which is showing its age. It does, however, allow MIDI bi-directional control so you could easily add an external MIDI device. [I have noticed that most people continue to recommend MPU-401 compatible interfaces for MIDI. While this choice may have been prudent several years ago, the Windows multiple-driver environment takes care of any ionterface requirements for any software which is worth a shit, anyway. Also, most decent DOS software has drivers which support non-401 interfaces. So, I would think that the 401 compatibly in the MIDI interface is a non- issue]. Back to boards, yesterday I purchased a Reveal 16-bit sound card (complete with ton'o'software, microphone, and headphones) for $140 in a local computer store. This board apears to be a knockoff of the Sound Blaster Pro II board complete with audioo mixing. The board offers only 4-op FM (this makes this board the 5th MIDI device I have owned which has used 4-op [the list includes an IBM Music Feature, BTW]) for MIDI sound, buit it does ahve full CD-ROM control capability and the ability to mix audio from CD, Microphone, FM, and D/A converters minto a 6-watt amp section. Anyway, for $140, this board performs quite well. While it doesn't sound a good in the A/D-D/A section as the Multisound, it is a hell of a lot better than any analog cassette system I have heard. For the purchase price, this thing seems to be a winner. John ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1993 13:35:00 EDT From: John Rossi III Subject: Re: PC Soundcards - Should I be taking them seriously now ? To the contrary, Turtle Beach soundcards are not on the way out. Their new A/D-D/A card suposedly functions as well as the Multisound (sans the Proteus). I have not heard the new card, but if it is as good as the Multisound, this will definately end up being the best solution for stereo direct to disk recording on PCs. John ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1993 22:00:27 -0500 From: "Lee Bottemiller and I don't like this gobbledy-gook." Subject: Re: PC Soundcards - Should I be taking them seriously now ? >>{John's $140 Reveal Card} Yes, I know. I'm a spand-brankin'-new-to-the-internet-green-in-the- eyes-listserv-eager-beaver, but may I be so bold as to ask what you plan on doing with said sound card? It kinda sounds like that's gonna be your stereo digital mastering destination... Lee Bottemiller Bottemillerl@Belmont.edu ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1993 10:23:00 EDT From: John Rossi III Subject: Re: PC Soundcards - Should I be taking them seriously now ? I plan on playing with the card. I have more than enough 'pro' stuff to do anything serious I might ever want to do (providing, of course, I ever get the time to do it). In playing with the card, I am sure that I will find that my musical productivity skyrockets because everything can be in one place (my office at work), and all the base level tools are provided. I still have my Multisound (which got moved to my home studio for direct-to-disk applications) for critical work. I expect that 'playing' with the Reveal card will satisfy most of my 'real' requirements. After all, exceprt for the noise, there really isn't a lot of difference in 6dB of dynamic range in the 10-20K range, at least not for the normal ear. John ------------------------------ End of the EMUSIC-L Digest ******************************