Jump to content
Have You Played Atari Today?
2600|5200|7800|Lynx|Jaguar|Forums|Store  

andym00

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    1,048

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Posts posted by andym00

  1. Posted

    I don't get very far with that..

    It starts up (with crap all over the screen), does its caching, then just locks up dead, with crap on the screen where it should be clear.. Which is odd because all the screen data is >$E000 and is cleared earlier on, and the appearance of the data isn't particularly random either..

    post-3913-0-83719600-1331719278_thumb.png

    That's running it in 130XE mode, which the later versions of this thing needed..

    Ummm, without any debugger this isn't going to be a particular enjoyable task :)

  2. Posted

    Which version is this based on ? Atari800 ? Atari800+ ? Atari800++ ? Or whatever other mad naming convention it could be..

    And where can I get all the ROMs from since if I recall it needs the ROMs to do anything sensible..

    I'll give it a whirl in the evening and see if I can tell you what's up with it..

  5. Posted

    Just a wild guess, but does Atari800 support the lax #imm instructions ? These are unstable across the 6502 family, but the lax#$00 instruction is stable due to the AND with 0.. Just a thought, since I did other stuff using the POKEY timers in the same way, some time back, and there were no complaints iirc.. And I've recently started (ab)using lax #$00 a lot :)

  6. Posted

    Well I've just thrown up the guts of the code on CSDB in case anyone is really interested..

    I'm loathe to put it all out because there's lots of embarrassing hackery going on in places, but the code there is the core of the whole thing..

     

    http://noname.c64.org/csdb/forums/?roomid=12&topicid=90296

     

    With that anyone should be able to take this stuff and make lots of funky voices for little CPU overhead, and Emkay should get his dream.. You can now just give the programmer the code and say 'hey add me some software voices!' ;) Good luck..

    • Like 1

  7. Posted

    Saying that the original tune is NOT out of tune, whereas emkay's edit IS out of tune is nonsense, just because it's the same tune, except some added / edited instruments.

     

    And it's the instruments that have made it out of key in places then ? No ? And it makes it unpleasant to listen to in my books..

    If that's not the case then I guess it's simply not there.. Or maybe youtube ? Or my ears then ? Again.. Stupid stupid ears :)

     

    Then his comments seem far more like 'hidden personal attack', as we've heard so much, pointed at emkay.

     

    There's no hidden personal attacks going on here bar the ones you're trying to manifest by acting like a 3 year old..

     

    If you can't hear the tunes out of key in places after the tunes been modified then fine.. Emkay realises this, hell he even said here I think, hence his passion for wanting better music systems.. Why you have to keep jumping in and trying to fan whatever flames you perceive I really don't know..

    • Like 1

  8. Posted

    I know, your intention of writing into my threads isn't to aid my cause. But, in every of them I explain that there ARE differences. And the "nice" stereo effect. seems to be a result of the usage of 2 operators. losing the Focus in the emulation, the real POKEY can play it even better... monaural... but better.

     

    I've got nothing against your cause, you assume I do, but you've got it wrong.. I honestly don't care either way at the end of the day.. In this particular case you caught my attention with a very nice sounding tune that sounded way better than it should be.. And it turned out that it was..

     

    Anyway, I'm not going through every page, but at no point on the first page of this did you mention they weren't from real machines or say they were from emulators.. My fault for assuming that the grotty quality of the video was down to a shitty capture.. My fault for assuming I guess..

     

    The nice stereo effect, since you still haven't seemed to have grasped it, is present in both the originals and the tweaked versions, it's not some side effect of any 'operator' shenanigans, just down to magic pixies changing a few bits here and there I guess that magically resulted in that lovely phase shift.. Fancy that eh :)

  9. Posted

    I don't get what you want to say with these vague messages. If I play the "xex-version" of this tune on the A800win-emulator, then it sounds crystal-clear to me, compared to the youtube-version of this pokey-tune added to post 50. To my opinion I'd like to say that the emu-version sounds better. (On the other hand: did you already listen to this tune on the real machine?) The vid in post 50 sounds more like a recording from the real machine to me, by the way.

     

    I'm afraid it's a very subjective 'difference of opinion'. I'd like to say: let's ignore these opinion-differences from now on, and just pay attention to pokey's possibilities emkay tries to point out. Then maybe build a tracker which completely supports ALL pokey's features instead, or just stay out.

     

    There's no vague messages at all, neither is there anything subjective about anything I've said.. The only subjective issue is the one you've made with regards to thinking your real machine sounds the recording from post 50 with the lovely stereo effects.. You've certainly got a special machine there then..

     

    I didn't play them on the real machine, because I took it for granted that the recordings had been made to accurately represent what I would hear coming from a real machine.. After all, I thought that was the entire point of this because the emulators and stuff don't do these effects justice.. Hence I questioned if I was listening to a dual-pokey song, because it wouldn't have been the first dual-pokey song in this thread if I recall correctly.. I asked because that's what it sounded like to me when I heard it due to the stereo imagery I was hearing.. End of.. Really...

  11. Posted

    Just for reference :)

    I took the first part of the above video.. The first 30 seconds is as you've posted it.. The 2nd 30 seconds is converted to mono..

    2nd half mono.mp3

    Here's a grab of the spectral phase, of both halves, you can clearly there..

    post-3913-0-26289800-1331562945_thumb.png

    This is taken from the reimported mp3 after converting the 2nd half to mono and then saving, so you can see there's a small phase error in the 2nd half, which is what i'd expect from a true mono signal being fed into just about any halfway decent psychoacoustic compression system these days..

     

    There is a massive difference in the first half.. And it's very very audible indeed when you AB them..

    How exactly are you capturing these audio files in the first place ?

  12. Posted

    It actually doesn't sound worse on monaural devices....

     

    The phase effects in the posted version give a lovely depth to the sounds that actually sounds very very nice and a nice spread over the bottom end of the spectrum.. It's how nice it sounds (the phase effects) that made me question the source because it sounded too well defined to be artifacts from compression, although I'm not saying it isn't exactly that..

     

    Lets forget it, there's nothing to argue about here.. All I wanted to clear up was that when I asked if it was 2 POKEYs was because I could hear stereo imagery in there.. Miker said it wasn't, and I put it down to me being tired or having some wacky setting enabled on my sound card somewhere.. It was bugging me, hence I checked again with fresh ears, and I posted what I found..

  13. Posted

    Emkay's version of that tune is a mono-pokey tune. POINT. Possibly the recorded file posted on youtube has some artefacts, which motivate your error-conclusion.

     

    I don't disbelieve that.. The point is the posted tune sounds considerably better than the true mono version.. That's all I'm saying :)

  14. Posted

    Indeed, possibly they are, but they're so pronounced as to be questionable in my opinion..

    I mainly wanted to clear up the fact there is in-fact quite clear stereo imagery in those songs and they sound considerably duller when converted to mono..

    That.. And, also I obviously wasn't imagining things as intimated..

  16. Posted

    Seems, you'd have to check your ears ;)

    The only difference in Miker's version and my modulation adds... is just the modulation adding. It's only the frequency effect which is a straight multiply of the ground pitch. If you hear stereo effects while the frequency is changing, there must be some "other" problem.

    The basses are still "off the road" , as they were limited to standard POKEY usage.

     

    Actually, no ear checking is required, they're functioning exactly as they should be, which is good since they're essential to my job :)

     

    I had a few minutes, so I thought I'd extract the audio and see what you've done to it because it was unsettling me..

     

    The source audio you've put there wasn't Mono.. I knew I wasn't hearing things..

    It was at some point, but you've done something to it, a first guess appears to be a slight delay between the left and right..

     

    Anyway.. 2 screen shots.. One showing you the mid/side signal of your audio material.. Clearly not blatantly stereo, but wreaks of post-processing..

    post-3913-0-18270500-1331555877_thumb.png

     

    And the second, much more telling, showing the relative phase of the 2 channels..

    post-3913-0-77934200-1331555976_thumb.png

     

    Hmmm, someones been playing with effects on that audio..

    Maybe it's time to check your ears ;)

    • Like 1

  17. Posted

    Weird, I thought I was hearing slight stereo effect in there, hence me asking.. In fact I do and I'm not going mad ;)

    And they're more noticeable in Emkays version..

     

    That tunes a good point of what I actually like about POKEY though.. I know Emkay won't believe it, but I do actually listen to the the SAP music archive stuff a lot, because I do like a lot of the POKEY music and the sounds it makes..

     

    The original one there actually sounds nice, musical and in tune.. A good tune in its own right that can actually be appreciated, and has that POKEY flavour to its sounds that I actually like, which seems to be the thing that is most hated for some reason.. Where as the 2nd one just sounds out of key, as is the common theme to these things.. It's verging on unpleasant at times.. Granted it has it moments, when you think that sounds okay and can relax, and then it has a car running over a cat moment and all enthusiasm vanishes.. Granted, this one manages a bit longer before an innocent cat gets it ;)

    • Like 1

  22. Posted

    Who cares ? Let the topic stay on target..

     

    Personally I'd also like to hear some classical stuff, see what Pokey can do without getting it all bent out of shape and sounding like an acid casualty from the days of musique concrete..

     

    (null)

  23. Posted

    Surely just moving the POKEY timing reference point so that the two don't overlap is sufficient ? I mean, it's not like DLIs and VBLs get triggered at some random cycle on a line..

     

    Either I've fabulously misunderstood something here, or I just don't see how this is actually an issue in the real world ?

    Well, if you're using timers it limits your values to ones which have repeating patterns that never overlap NMI's and it requires you to start them with a known scan-line alignment. Not a huge deal but it limits your choices. You also lose NMI's during things like disk loading which have a degree of randomness to them. Some disk loaders with fancy graphics flicker from time to time for this reason.

     

    Ah, okay, that makes sense.. I've not tried loading stuff from the disk with masses of DLIs floating about.. Kind of glad I didn't now :)

  24. Posted

    Surely just moving the POKEY timing reference point so that the two don't overlap is sufficient ? I mean, it's not like DLIs and VBLs get triggered at some random cycle on a line..

     

    Either I've fabulously misunderstood something here, or I just don't see how this is actually an issue in the real world ?

AtariAge
Forums
Store
General
Follow AtariAge

Copyright ©1998-2021 AtariAge

×
×
  • Create New...