Noise Approximation

[emkay]

Well, I'm still at the point that POKEY is the master of chip-sounds, but musically , it can turn into a horrific task.

 

In the past, people used heavy arpeggios to compensate the low 8 bit frequency resolution, other used wrong basses/tones ... whatever.

 

My goal always was to use a combination of the lowest compromises, to get a piece of music working with the generators of POKEY, so the "music" could beused in any game.

 

This is almost 5 years old. It uses the modulation feature of the "filter" , sometimes it switches to 2 operator modulation.

The basses get a fast switch on the generators, so you get a random row ot the resulting "orbits", which turn the basses into a passively correct sounding bass.

And so on....

 

 

This on is new, uses the same techniques. This time I tried to get the "cool" flair of the SID sounds. And it takes more attention of 2 operator modulations.

Well, 50Hz programming isn't much time. That's why sometime a compromise had to be done, using the cleaner voice or the cleaner pitch.

The 1st Part of the tune is what I could get with RMT, to somehow sweeten then tune. The rest is still experimental...

 

 

 

 

 

Things could get interesting, if it was possible to manipulate the generators in a modulation way, free from the limits of either 50 or 60 Hz ...

[thorfdbg]

Well, I'm still at the point that POKEY is the master of chip-sounds,

 

You surely must be kidding. Pokey is a relatively simple sound generator for music and sound effects in games, and while it works great for that, it is not a software driven synthesizer as SID was. SID wasn't great for game effects, but it was surely a good design to generate music and immitate instruments.

[fujidude]

Here we go...

[emkay]

You surely must be kidding. Pokey is a relatively simple sound generator for music and sound effects in games, and while it works great for that, it is not a software driven synthesizer as SID was. SID wasn't great for game effects, but it was surely a good design to generate music and immitate instruments.

Where could be the kidding part? Or is your post meant to be ironic?

[+FujiSkunk]

Well, I'm still at the point that POKEY is the master of chip-sounds, but musically , it can turn into a horrific task.

 

 

SID wasn't great for game effects, but it was surely a good design to generate music and immitate instruments.

 

And... where's the disagreement again?

[emkay]

And... where's the disagreement again?

The interresting part is that POKEY is better for music creation than the creator of the chip was thinking of.

This depends on side effects, the chip "suffer" from.

While the Hi-Pass-Filter is in real a modulation function, it also allows to use 1 or 2 operators. This allows to create forward and backward sawtooth, also it allows to create triangle waves, and mixtures of it.

Using the 1.79MHz clocking "filter" allows to create waves similar to OPL3 at approx. 3.5MHz. Resulting in analog sounding signals.

 

The biggest flaw of POKEY is the low pitch resolution, which only makes a small part of the available waves useful for music.

 

About "instrument generating" with SID. Actually, it is far below the expectations. A Guitar sounds never like a guitar on the SID, there were similar soundstyles, but not sounds available.

Or, to say it in other words, there are many SID tunes that sound great to me , because they sound like "synth" and I don't really like most of "E-Guitar" sounds in "Hard Rock" or "Heavy Metal" "Songs".

Edited August 5, 2015 by emkay

[emkay]

Things could get even more interesting , if a tracker allowed to handle all available waveforms to solve the resolution problem. RMT is very limited in that part. To reach the full potential of POKEY, it is recommended to have a "fixed" software, to build "music" on it.

 

I wonder, if people realize what they hear in the two videos.

Using POKEY as intended, you would get something like that:

 

http://asma.atari.org/asmadb/search.php?play=3607

 

And, well, that ... humm... "nice tune" uses 2 POKEYs

[emkay]

As usable in RMT and the given "sharpness" of the timings, things get able to show in a huge variation of available sounds.

As the resolution in high notes get worse, you have to play with some tricks, to get a melodic part mostly correct from the start to the end.

Many POKEY tunes endup using 1 or 2 octaves and "blink" a fitting higher noise in, if the resulting sound fits.

 

The 2 Operator modulation allows to do that in a more fluent way, but the soundstyle is a little hard , because of the limited environment-steps when using a Tracker at 50-60Hz, and the needed "correction steps".

 

 

The main synth-sound in that tune plays all notes and variations/sweeps, as in the original tune. Using 50Hz programming...

 

[emkay]

About "modulation"... have a look at the analyzer.... It's one operator, to have the wave clean...

 

[emkay]

Two operator modulations at 15kHz clocking results in this...

 

[emkay]

And , well, it's also possible to "ring modulate" different generators...

 

[thorfdbg]

The interresting part is that POKEY is better for music creation than the creator of the chip was thinking of.

This depends on side effects, the chip "suffer" from.

While the Hi-Pass-Filter is in real a modulation function, it also allows to use 1 or 2 operators. This allows to create forward and backward sawtooth, also it allows to create triangle waves, and mixtures of it.

Using the 1.79MHz clocking "filter" allows to create waves similar to OPL3 at approx. 3.5MHz. Resulting in analog sounding signals.

 

The biggest flaw of POKEY is the low pitch resolution, which only makes a small part of the available waves useful for music.

 

About "instrument generating" with SID. Actually, it is far below the expectations. A Guitar sounds never like a guitar on the SID, there were similar soundstyles, but not sounds available.

Or, to say it in other words, there are many SID tunes that sound great to me , because they sound like "synth" and I don't really like most of "E-Guitar" sounds in "Hard Rock" or "Heavy Metal" "Songs".

Let's be a bit realistic here. What I do not like about your posts is the blind "fanboy-ism" that shines through. Yes, Pokey has undocumented features, sure. Yet, SID also has undocumented features. Given that you're a non-expert in using SID (so am I), you just do not know them and you haven't tried. Neither have I, admittedly. I only implemented a pretty good POKEY emulation.

 

Yes, a Guitar never really sounds like a guitar on the SID, but you can get close. However, that's much better than what pokey had to offer - you cannot get a guitar on pokey in first place. Of course, you can create a sound with Pokey, claim that "this is how I want my guitar to sound like", but in reality, that's just wishful thinking and more a coincidence, and backwards-arguing. Of course POKEY can create sounds SID cannot, but the same goes also for the other way round.

 

Look at the design of the chips: SID offers a configurable waveform of four basic forms and configurable analog filters, so it is a computer-controlled synthesizer. POKEY is not. It is a digital noise generator, and it works entirely digital. Whether that's better or worse depends on the application. Pokey was constructed to generate game sounds, and it works great for that (think of the sound effects in "Rescue on Fractalus", great stuff). SID cannot generate these sounds. SID is for music. SID can create something that sounds perfectly close to a flute or a guitar or a piano. POKEY cannot (and yes, even if you claim you can - in reality, no, not really, it's rather a poor excuse). There is no way POKEY can add a filter to its digital output (and no, the high-pass filter flag is *not* a filter. It is an AND-gate, nothing more).

 

So please stop being a blind fan-boy. Look at what the chips were made for, and let's be honest: POKEY is not a synthesizer to immitate instruments. With some luck, you find certain configurations that may sound somehow to some instrument of your imagination, but that's really more coincidence than intend. If I'll have a specific sound in my mind (say, a trumpet, just for the sake of an example), there is no reasonable way how to configure POKEY to get exactly that sound. It's unlikely you'll find one, and even if, how to play a tune with that. A harmonic sounding tune even more so. With SID, in principle, you can. The spectrum of a trumpet is more or less known, so one can start from the base frequency, check the overtones and configure filters appropriately to get something that is close to this frequency spectrum. In prinicple, this is a doable task. Or at least, there is a terminating and well-defined algorithm of "how to make a trumpet sound on SID", because that's what SID is good for. There is no such algorithm for POKEY.

[emkay]

So please stop being a blind fan-boy.

Yawn...

Check the SID , have a look at the rather limited waves frequency range, and the "Ringmodulation" also is an "and gate".

Well, the analog filter is a benefit, and the 16 Bit resolution makes SID the best chip for music for the early 80s.

But, keep in Mind, POKEY exists from the mid 70s on. The "music" , the videos show above, is playable on a 400 ... and in 1979, SID didn't even exist.

Also, the "and gate" is defined in the books as "Hi-Pass-Filter" which is a fully wrong term.

 

SID had the pre defined ADSR "processing" , but this isn't helping in all circumstances. Remember "Wizball" is created using 200Hz Updates....

 

It was a very false decision by the Designers of the Atari, not to upgrade POKEY from time to time. With 16 Bit resolution and the 1.79MHz clocking, it would sound like a full OPL3 chip.... and even better.

 

And, my threads are about creating software algorithms to have a clear instrument generating available.

[emkay]

About approximated noise.

 

This tune uses 2 operator modulations which adds the more flexible frequency recognition.

Also the basses were used with changing Orbits, for bass approximation

And some drums use 16 Bit...

Some special side FX keep their place

 

[emkay]

OK.

With SID, in principle, you can. The spectrum of a trumpet is more or less known, so one can start from the base frequency, check the overtones and configure filters appropriately to get something that is close to this frequency spectrum. In prinicple, this is a doable task. Or at least, there is a terminating and well-defined algorithm of "how to make a trumpet sound on SID", because that's what SID is good for. There is no such algorithm for POKEY.

OK. What is the best example of a trumpet played by SID?

Some of the sound above at least play a "multi trumpet" aka "brass section" .... easily with POKEY, even cleaner as SID is able to reproduce it in all of those "1000s" of tunes I have listened to.

Seems, this depends on the 2 operator modulations, as 2 voices sound "more than one voice". And still 4 channels there for "music"... no need to reduce to 3 channels for this.

Edited August 6, 2015 by emkay

[thorfdbg]

OK. What is the best example of a trumpet played by SID?

How the heck should I know? Look, apparently, you haven't really understood what I'm saying. Look at the design of SID: It generates a waveform to start with, with a given frequency spectrum. It includes three additional analog filters that allow you to filter the spectrum such that you can control what comes out of the chip, by a subtractive sound synthesis. This gives you all the flexibility for generating a lot of spectrums. It is, by the very design, a (simple, but fairly complete) synthesizer on a chip. IOWs. (some) professional keyboards work pretty much alike, just with a lot more filters, probably additive synthesis and so on, but the principle idea is not too far off. SID is a software-controlled synthesizer.

 

Pokey isn't. There is no algorithm how to generate a given spectrum. It's a trial-and-error approach, and there is no condition or no guarantee that you can even get the spectrum you want. It lacks all the components for a soft synthesizer - simply because it was never designed to be one.

 

Once again, that doesn't make any chip "better or worse". It's just that POKEY is designed for something entirely different. Claiming that it is a "superior chip" is just stupid fanboy-ism. It is a good chip for game sounds - simple, but good enough for its age, and it served this purpose well. Actually, much better than a lot simpler YM chips you find in the Atari ST. Nevertheless, POKEY is a lousy synthesizer. For SID, it's probably the other way round. It had different design goals, and as far as generation of music is concerned, it is the superior design. I don't really see any reason to argue about it. If you look at the chip design, it becomes entirely obvious. You have to jump in circles to get a specific instrument on POKEY if you can get it at all. For SID, the functionality is built-in. *THAT* is the difference I want to make.

 

Note that I'm speaking as an engineer. I never owned a C64, and I never wrote musical scores on SID. Yet, I can still admire the SID design, and I can listen to SID tunes, and I can admire the simplicity of the code you need to get a certain sound. It was a very clever and feature-rich chip, and - for generating instrumental music - a lot better suited than POKEY.

[emkay]

Pokey isn't. There is no algorithm how to generate a given spectrum. It's a trial-and-error approach, and there is no condition or no guarantee that you can even get the spectrum you want. It lacks all the components for a soft synthesizer - simply because it was never designed to be one.

This is simply NOT true. As POKEY is using "fully" physical limits, you simply can create sounds by physically related calculations.

In the past, it only had been a problem to coders to understand that. Today it seems "not worth the hassle".

The tunes , I create, are 100% reproduceable. The "trial and error" is depending on the given software and false preinformation of what POKEY does actually.

 

To make it clear : SID has some presets built in to be better understood by musicians. That's what your argumentation is build upon.

 

How the heck should I know?

So where's your base of argumentation in this thread?

Edited August 6, 2015 by emkay

[thorfdbg]

This is simply NOT true. As POKEY is using "fully" physical limits, you simply can create sounds by physically related calculations.

 

Exactly not. That's what I'm saying all the time, but you don't get the argument. If I want a frequency spectrum with even harmonics but a strong attenuation at the fourth harmonics, I can do that with SID, and it is (in principle) clear how to create such a sound. Use a sawtooth base frequency which includes even and odd harmonics (unlike a square wave), compute the cut-off frequency of a notch filter of four times the frequency of the base, and enable the notch filter. That is simple. Of course, you have to compute a bit and use the documented configuraiton of the filters and the base generator, but in principle, this can be done. I don't have the tables handy, but I don't need to - I know what SID can do.

 

For pokey, you first need to create a sawtooth. That is not exactly possible. The best you can get is an approximation of a pulse-width modulated digital signal whose low-pass filtered analog hopefully close enough to the sawtooth. Well, maybe close enough, though not precisely. Now, how do I suppress the forth harmonics?

 

The answer is: You can't. You cannot create a base frequency without harmonics, or only the second and third harmic, you can probably approximate something close to that by using the non-linear mixture that people confusingly call the "triangle generator" of POKEY, which it actuallly isn't. It is at best the non-linear mixture output of two channels that looks everything like a triangle - and since it is a second order effect, is of low volume. Besides, you wouldn't have a second harmonic because symmetric signals don't have one. It has only odd harmonics. So you're still not at the effect I'm suggesting, and yet at this point, you've already used up all four channels.

 

And you are constrained in the volume, because the base frequency has to be generated by a second-order effect (almost, but not entirely unlike a triangle) and the upper harmonics have to be created by a sawtooth-like PWM-signal from two other channels. And you are constrained in the frequencies since Pokey creates its sounds from dividing the base frequency, which limits the availability of high-frequencies a lot (small divisors), especially those you need for creating the required harmonics. And even that fails to reproduce the spectrum I have in mind exactly.

 

So please, don't tell me about calculations. I know my math, and I know how to model pokey in the time domain. That still doesn't give you the freedom of SID for generating a specific spectrum.

 

POKEY is anything but a synthesizer. It's a nice sound chip for games, but surely not the ideal design for music and certainly not the ultimate answer for generating music. That came with a much simpler design a couple of years later, from the same chip designer. PAULA (in the Amiga) is nothing but four DMA channels plus four D-A converters. Can create any sound you like, including the effect I had in mind. Actually, even early programs like SONIX had a graphical designer for such sounds. Elementary, and yet, the overall design of PAULA is so much simpler than POKEY, and much much simpler than SID.

[emkay]

Exactly not. That's what I'm saying all the time, but you don't get the argument. If I want a frequency spectrum with even harmonics but a strong attenuation at the fourth harmonics, I can do that with SID, and it is (in principle) clear how to create such a sound. Use a sawtooth base frequency which includes even and odd harmonics (unlike a square wave), compute the cut-off frequency of a notch filter of four times the frequency of the base, and enable the notch filter. That is simple. Of course, you have to compute a bit and use the documented configuraiton of the filters and the base generator, but in principle, this can be done. I don't have the tables handy, but I don't need to - I know what SID can do.

Ths refers to : What a musician understands.

 

1. The Waves of SID were also not really "analog"

2. If I want to do something similar with POKEY, I have to think about Physics.

Build the main wave, put the resulting overlayed wave onto it, Chose, if the wave is additive or substractive, set the fitting volume on both channels, and build an offset on the 2 channels, to have a variations of shapes from "upward sawtooth to "triangle" to "downward sawtooth", the analog circuitries outside POKEY do their "dither job", so harmonics get lost, the higher the pitch is. SID cannot do that in any case. This is also the case, why SID plays at 3.6kHz and not higher, it'S to remove the quantisation noise. If you produce a similar chip without that heavy filtering, your ears will bleed.

 

For pokey, you first need to create a sawtooth. That is not exactly possible. The best you can get is an approximation of a pulse-width modulated digital signal whose low-pass filtered analog hopefully close enough to the sawtooth. Well, maybe close enough, though not precisely. Now, how do I suppress the forth harmonics?

 

The answer is: You can't. You cannot create a base frequency without harmonics, or only the second and third harmic, you can probably approximate something close to that by using the non-linear mixture that people confusingly call the "triangle generator" of POKEY, which it actuallly isn't. It is at best the non-linear mixture output of two channels that looks everything like a triangle - and since it is a second order effect, is of low volume. Besides, you wouldn't have a second harmonic because symmetric signals don't have one. It has only odd harmonics. So you're still not at the effect I'm suggesting, and yet at this point, you've already used up all four channels.

A base frequency without harmonics, is a clean sine wave. How should SID do that?

 

And, well, a clean waveform is not an instrument. Every instrument has it's harmonics. POKEY's harmonics turn every sound into "metal based" , while Sid can offer some "wood" like sounds, also human voice typical sounding.

 

And you are constrained in the volume, because the base frequency has to be generated by a second-order effect (almost, but not entirely unlike a triangle) and the upper harmonics have to be created by a sawtooth-like PWM-signal from two other channels. And you are constrained in the frequencies since Pokey creates its sounds from dividing the base frequency, which limits the availability of high-frequencies a lot (small divisors), especially those you need for creating the required harmonics. And even that fails to reproduce the spectrum I have in mind exactly.

 

So please, don't tell me about calculations. I know my math, and I know how to model pokey in the time domain. That still doesn't give you the freedom of SID for generating a specific spectrum.

Really? Any example of a perfect POKEY sound? Any tests?

 

And, btw. You cannot handle everything with SID. You're restricted to timers, waitstates....

While you can program POKEY in 32 cycle speeds on every channel.

You should forget, what you have heared until now ... if you calculate the possibilities.

 

 

POKEY is anything but a synthesizer. It's a nice sound chip for games, but surely not the ideal design for music and certainly not the ultimate answer for generating music. That came with a much simpler design a couple of years later, from the same chip designer. PAULA (in the Amiga) is nothing but four DMA channels plus four D-A converters. Can create any sound you like, including the effect I had in mind. Actually, even early programs like SONIX had a graphical designer for such sounds. Elementary, and yet, the overall design of PAULA is so much simpler than POKEY, and much much simpler than SID.

Your argumentation still takes place on the usability for Musicians.

Paula is able to create realistic sounds.

Both use some techniques that POKEY provided. Paula, because it is a successor of POKEY, SID , because POKEY was one of the chips that have been taken as design models for SID.

 

Btw: A real Synthesizer is able to be easily understood for musians and to play realistic sounds.

Edited August 7, 2015 by emkay

[thorfdbg]

Ths refers to : What a musician understands.

 

No, this refers to "how the physics of instruments works".

 

1. The Waves of SID were also not really "analog"

2. If I want to do something similar with POKEY, I have to think about Physics.

 

Rather: On math. I already gave you the math. The described problem is not doable on POKEY. I told you why. Ok, you can sample the waveform and play it with a 4bit PCM. However, that keeps your CPU busy all the time. Not exactly a solution for the problem, and very distorted, too.

 

 

Build the main wave, put the resulting overlayed wave onto it, Chose, if the wave is additive or substractive, set the fitting volume on both channels, and build an offset on the 2 channels, to have a variations of shapes from "upward sawtooth to "triangle" to "downward sawtooth", the analog circuitries outside POKEY do their "dither job", so harmonics get lost, the higher the pitch is.

 

You still don't understand the problem. Pokey has no way to "get rid" of harmonics. It has no filter. The only thing you can do is "trying to avoid the harmonics in first place". The low-pass output characteristics of POKEY is a filter with a static cut-off frequency, you cannot configure that, so you cannot use it to get rid of exactly the harmonics you don't want to have. Despite, it's a low-pass filter only, i.e. it does not allow you to keep higher harmonics in.

 

 

SID cannot do that in any case.

 

SID can certainly filter, and it can certainly create an additive synthesis if you want to (three voices). But why do you want to do that in first case given that all the hardware is there in first place?

 

This is also the case, why SID plays at 3.6kHz and not higher, it'S to remove the quantisation noise. If you produce a similar chip without that heavy filtering, your ears will bleed.

 

To be honest, my ears bleed on your "music". Sorry, but most of this sounds off-tune and disharmonic. Sure, POKEY is limited, especially at high frequencies, no miracle due to its synthesis process. Unfortunately, that are exactly the frequencies you need for the "advanced effects". So not your fault, really, I don't blame you for that. But please, stop being a fan boy and start being a bit honest.

 

 

A base frequency without harmonics, is a clean sine wave. How should SID do that?

 

I don't remember whether it had a sine oscillator, but even if it does not, it has a triangle. A triangle has low amplitude odd-harmonics only, so all you need is a low-pass filter of a cut-off frequency between the first and the third harmonics, and off you go. It is really *that* simple. Of course, that is an approximate solution, but it works well enough *if you want a sine*.

 

 

And, well, a clean waveform is not an instrument. Every instrument has it's harmonics. POKEY's harmonics turn every sound into "metal based" , while Sid can offer some "wood" like sounds, also human voice typical sounding.

 

Pokey can create very distorted sound effects, which is exactly what I said: It is made for game sounds. These are not instruments, but rather some distorted techno-sounds. Ok, whether you like that or not is a matter of taste, but at least, POKEY cannot immitate instruments. Real ones, I mean. Once again, look at the example I gave: Consider an instrument with all even and odd harmonics (decaying) but the fourth harmonics suppressed. You cannot do that with POKEY. SID can. Thus, with POKEY, you cannot start from the spectrum of the instrument you want to immitate, and use an algorithm how to configure the chip to get the sound you want. For SID, it is a matter of looking at the spectrum, picking an "approximately right" base waveform and "cut it down" with the filters to the spectrum you want.

 

And, btw. You cannot handle everything with SID. You're restricted to timers, waitstates....

While you can program POKEY in 32 cycle speeds on every channel.

 

SID is a synthesizer. POKEY is not. Yes, of course you cannot program SID on a per-cycle basis. But the point is: To get music out of it, you don't have to. It's built into the chip, whereas POKEY is a fairly simple digital polycounter plus sampler approach. It is a fairly simple device.

 

Your argumentation still takes place on the usability for Musicians.

Paula is able to create realistic sounds.

 

Paula is able to create *any* sound. You just have to record it. Having PAULA play POKEY sounds is an easier exercise. Just feed it the waveform. Done.

 

 

Both use some techniques that POKEY provided. Paula, because it is a successor of POKEY, SID , because POKEY was one of the chips that have been taken as design models for SID.

 

I guess you've to take your history lesson again. SIDs development is independent of POKEY, and so is PAULA. PAULAs design is a lot simpler, and quite a lot different from POKEY. As said, PAULA is a DMA channel plus a D&A-converter, or rather, four of them. That's all. It is a very basic design, but basic enough to do anyhting you want. PAULA has no polycounters, or "high-pass filters". What for?

 

 

Anyhow, calling pokey a "top notch music chip" is just outright wrong. It was build for game effects, and it's doing well. But its abilities to generate music are simply limited and not on par with SID.

[emkay]

No, this refers to "how the physics of instruments works".

Your argumentations ONLY depend on the music creating. You ignore all flaws SID had, and pull the last bit of flaws you can find with POKEY.

So , who's the fanboy?

 

Get your thoughts in a clean row and then come back. Thanks!

Edited August 7, 2015 by emkay

[fujidude]

I do have to take a little bit of an issue with this statement that I keep seeing pop up:

 

 

SID is a synthesizer. POKEY is not.

 

Natural sounds are made from purely mechanical processes. Any electronic, logic programmable device that is used as the basis to generate sounds, is synthetically creating sound, and is therefore a synthesizer. That would most definitely include POKEY. The argument comes down to the programmable synthesizing capabilities of each chip. They definitely are different, and each lends itself to sets of tasks better or worse than the other.

 

I'm an Atarian. What I mean by that is I owned Atari computers and never a CBM one. But I have friends that had C64s. I have heard a ton (tonne for the non U.S. folks) of both SID and POKEY sounds and "music". My degree isn't in sound or physics, though I do have probably more than the average understanding of a lot of sciences. But, I can listen and decide what I think is pleasing musically, or cool for sound effects. So here is where I present my view, based on my opinion.

 

I had put music on quotes because frankly, neither POKEY or SID are worth a wet shit musically. That's right; they both suck ballz. Amazingly good for their time and affordability? You bet. Musically good? Aren't and never were, no matter how nostalgic we may get. To my ears, judging by all the stuff I have heard over many years from both chips, my assessment is that POKEY is superior for sound affects, and SID is superior at music (though, as I said, that isn't really saying all that much). So that opinion is in agreement with throfdbg.

 

Now, I do want to point out though, that I recognize that emkay may have a point that is worth noting. emkay seems to me to be suggesting that POKEY is more musically capable than most everyone has historically understood, because there are newer different ways to approach programming it that provide better musicality. Perhaps that is true. If it is true, how much does it improve the muscality of POKEY? I don't know. I just know, that until now, everything I have heard doesn't do anything to change my opinion I stated in the previous paragraph, and that includes any links in this thread.

[emkay]

I had put music on quotes because frankly, neither POKEY or SID are worth a wet shit musically.

Clean words

 

That's right; they both suck ballz. Amazingly good for their time and affordability? You bet. Musically good? Aren't and never were, no matter how nostalgic we may get. To my ears, judging by all the stuff I have heard over many years from both chips, my assessment is that POKEY is superior for sound affects, and SID is superior at music (though, as I said, that isn't really saying all that much). So that opinion is in agreement with throfdbg.

POKEY cannot get better for music than SID. There were actually too much flaws. Particular the low pitch resolution ruines most tasks.

The idea is to use all possible sounds/creations with POKEY to fix the gaps.

 

Now, I do want to point out though, that I recognize that emkay may have a point that is worth noting. emkay seems to me to be suggesting that POKEY is more musically capable than most everyone has historically understood, because there are newer different ways to approach programming it that provide better musicality. Perhaps that is true. If it is true, how much does it improve the muscality of POKEY? I don't know. I just know, that until now, everything I have heard doesn't do anything to change my opinion I stated in the previous paragraph, and that includes any links in this thread.

The bold sentence part really should make ME thinking

 

The tunes have nothing compareable in sounding , neither in the 70 , 80s, nor in the 90s... even today it's a lonely Isle...with some inhabitants

[emkay]

The "Green Beret" synth f.e. plays the double of "correct" notes of one instrument than 99% of the Atari "music" plays . There is only this one Synth-melody available on the A8.

You either find "soundtrack" like restricted note rows or extremely off tune melodic parts.

 

That's where the "noise approximation takes place, to get the sounds of a low note more similar to the high notes and volumes.

[emkay]

In another thread I already told that this one is build on straight 64kHz... no 1.79MHz used there...

 

If you want to check after 4:20

 

Triangle based sound FX ...

 

Here and there some "trumpet like sounds... all created within the limits of RMT....

 

Edited August 7, 2015 by emkay