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

VinsCool

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    367

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Posts posted by VinsCool

  1. Posted

    45 minutes ago, rensoup said:

    Can you clarify that a little? I've hardly ever used RMT 😀. If you have a 8 bit instrument, do you switch to 16bit manually with AUDCTL ? wouldn't it sound completely different ?

    Yeah, that's what I'm saying, same for any other mode and combination.
    The only way to get certain things to work is either rely on the hardcoded method provided by RMT (which is pretty much very limited, but "just works", or manually... by creating a new instrument for every setting, and manually chose the frequency if it needs to be adjusted.

     

    47 minutes ago, rensoup said:

    Any chance of making a very simple test which would demonstrate the various AUDCTL modes?

    In what way exactly, however?

  2. Posted

    2 hours ago, Stephen said:

    Great stuff here.  I'd get some recordings on real hardware for you, but I have a noise issue that needs diagnosed in my 1088 XLD.

    Thanks! I appreciate the offer but I got all my hardware needs covered now :D 
    I was lucky enough to get a 800xl of each region, so no issue there! 
    Hardware will come sometime soon... maybe tonight? 👀

     

    1 hour ago, ivop said:

    That's due to his alternate tuning. Perfect 8ths, perfect 5ths (how about 3rds?), and tune to the bass notes. Distortion A does not need a well-tempered tuning with A=440Hz. Tune to the bass notes! 👍

     

    It could be nice to calculate which keys are best suited to the (fixed) Dist C frequencies, and then create just intonated Dist A tables for those keys.

    I'm so happy this tuning adventure really paid off after all, I really thought I was wasting my time... I'm glad I was too stubborn to give up just yet!

    Honestly the Distortion C frequencies (any timbre minus the unstable/muting ones) are about as good as I could get them... There are a few notes that turned out to be debatable... and happen to be directly related to the A ones I was hesitating with, but overall, I'd say about 90% of them are nicely in-tune with a relatively consistent amount of cents off... which is honestly a lot better compared to how the notes were originally.

    Hopefully, my efforts may be useful for later projects :3 

    • Like 2

  4. Posted

    32 minutes ago, emkay said:

    ...

    This version changes the face of the main voice in intervalls and on dedicated notes. Changing the release from "spacy" to "getting down" and "moving into far space. In short "colors of sound" :)

     

     

     

     

    I like this version better personally.
    It sounds a lot more pleasant.

    • Like 2

  5. Posted

    4 hours ago, tane said:

    Making a comparison with v1.30, it seems that the speed runs 1 step slower, ie: (speed v1.30)=05 is similar but not equal to (speed v1.30 patched v9)=04.

    Are you sure about that? I've tested about as many tunes I as I could and everything sounded exactly like intended, in both region. This is the only reason why something would run at a different speed on some tunes.
    If a tune was made with NTSC in mind, but runs in the tracker in PAL, it will indeed play slower, and the opposite is also true.

    • Like 1

  6. Posted · Edited by VinsCool
    Fixed a dumb hex editing mistake, oops

    By the way if anyone is interested, here's my own edited version of RMT, using the Alternate Tuning tables I posted in this thread.
    Rmt Vin Tuning Patch V9.exe
    I also edited RMT2LZSS the same way, it actually was how I was able to test most of my tunes en masse easily, otherwise it would have taken at least 3 eternity to even get something lol
    It replaced the table for RMT 1.28, the other ones were not touched.
    RMT2LZSS Vin Tuning Patch A and C and E V9.exe
    I hope you are okay with that rensoup? 😶 If there's anything I shouldn't have posted I'll delete upon request.

    There is 1 particular change in the Bass 1 table however, in order to get proper notes below G#1, it uses the "Distortion E" bass timbre for those notes. This is only a personal preference, but otherwise everything should be virtually compatible with tunes made in 1.28(1.30).
    Hopefully I did not break as many things as I tried to improve a bit :D 

    • Like 4

  7. Posted

    9 hours ago, Heaven/TQA said:

    now I like that more than the video before... why? this doesnt sound like typical POKEY tune... and I like that distorted bass sound...

    Thank you very much!

     

    I believe there is still a lot of very cool sounds this chip can produce, and I do my best to understand how they work and also make use of them :)

     

     

    • Like 2

  8. Posted

    Been playing around a bit more tonight, and now applied the same idea into the bass tables.
    I have to say, this is some incredibly good results, compared to how these tunes originally sounded.
    Some of these tunes got considerable improvements with these changes, some things may also have been broken, there's many things that could go wrong too.
    Currently, even when there is a bit of dissonance somewhere, it feels a lot more fitting, if that makes any sense, lol. I suppose anything could happen.

    I also really liked how my tune, still unfinished, sounded like with these tuning changes, so here's a video :D 


    I also attached a bunch of executables I had listened at random earlier, I hope you guys enjoy how things sound like!
    Credits go to their own authors when they aren't my own tunes, of course!

    tunes tests 4.zip POKEY Table 64khz (Octave Pattern, C) v10.txt

    • Like 7

  9. Posted

    6 would mean that depending on what setting we are trying to achieve, specific tables would be called to it, so for example, turning an instrument into 16 bit on the fly would switch to the same note but on that table, high pass filter could have its own if certain modulation is intended (eg: the channel is 7 semitones up to get a "distortion guitar" sound), going into 15khz or 1.79mhz with a different distortion would make the frequency adjusted to the note that was playing, etc

     

    Pretty much what RMT already does automatically, except the user would be allowed to chose what, how and when things would happen.

     

    At least this is what I believe I understand this would be.

     

     

    • Like 1

  10. Posted

    1 hour ago, rensoup said:

    I tried those latest tunes and while they sound good I didn't notice any difference (but I'm not very familiar with them)

     

    I prefer this over making something sound worse! lol
    The idea I had was to make things sound as good as they could be, if I am even able to, that is.
    Technically the higher octaves have barely any difference, it's what lies below that was mostly changed, in order to make everything a lot more consistent.

     

    1 hour ago, rensoup said:

    So I checked aurora and SAPRed both the original and your version, and while there lots of differences, all the values vary by a single unit, surely that can't have a big impact ?

    Well the best way to know is to listen to each version side by side, that really was all I did to know if what I tried to do helped or broke something.

    1 tiny change can make a big difference, especially in the higher tones, so yeah, hopefully it really did help a bit overall :P 
    There is also giai_phon_mien_nam, or computer_world, or castle_von_krumpen_arp_fix, or hopefully most of the tunes that made use of the Distortion A the most, that might see major improvements, or fail miserably if my idea was shit, lol. 

    Hopefully I was able to improve the tuning in a good way.

    For the ones I personally have listened several times with comparison in mind, many notes seem to work better together now, but some others are a bit debatable, mainly sharps, and E and G that feel slightly off in some situations, so it's a lot of trial error, so far the combination I have is currently the nicest of the bunch, but it's definitely possible to improve it, there are 256 tones that can be chosen after all!
     

    I also noticed a few combinations that also made many of the Distortion basses tones work much better in the mix, and I noticed a certain pattern that I wanted to experiment a bit later tonight or maybe another day lol
    If my theory turns out to be actually true, that means there may another potential improvement using the same approach, this time in the Distortion C 😮 

    I mean, what I had in mind here wasn't to make the perfect tuning, but to making as many things as possible sound in-tune together, which ultimately makes the whole thing seem correct, instead of having many notes that are sounding wrong, or out of tune.
    I like to believe if I make everything equally out of tune, the resulting sound might be in-tune! :D
     

    1 hour ago, rensoup said:

    I'm curious if you may have been wandering for too long and gone back to your starting point 😶 ?

     

    I honestly felt that way the other day, and I really was ready to give up since I felt like I was wasting my time on some stupid ideas, and would eventually make a fool out of myself, lol
    But now I believe I am finally starting to understand, and so far got to a point I wouldn't have expected, so maybe it was actually worth it? :D 

    At worst, it would be experience and no one is harmed, or at best, I would be able to contribute something useful in the Atari 8-bit scene.

    • Like 3

  11. Posted

    4 hours ago, NeoNZJ_Slayer said:

    Looking at this table, something was missed with replacing the distortion settings and set to the note table. Only one bit pattern is needed for "Volume Only, Wave File PlayBack, or Digital Sounds" like $1v. V is the column level. Can $30, $50, $70, be used indicate different pokey/table settings? Like make $F0, be the 16bit note table merger 2 channels together. I need to look it up, can the tables be larger than 64 bytes and use 2 tables for the upper and lower bytes and get 8 octaves.


    I acquired these note tables awhile ago for possible solutions for 88 notes, 8 octaves. 

     


     

    That would certainly make a lot of sense that way I believe.
    When I was making own observation regarding the notes mapping, it surprised me how so many things could have been done differently, just for having more settings, and cases for different table use.

    I especially really like the mapping of your table above, being able to pick up what distortion to use on specific notes would make a lot of things faster since it would remove the necessity to add an additional instrument, however I don't know how well things like vibrato and portamento would be handled from that point, I suppose a check to not have these effect used on these distortions would make sense.
    From what I could tell 16 bit was already done in a way similar to yours, having tables for high and low bytes, but this is pretty much absolutely necessary in the first place, since doing notes manually is pretty slow directly in the music tracker.

    As far as I know, things were done in the way they are currently done in order to save as much memory as possible, so I can understand the reasoning behind it.
    I am not a programmer however, so my own observation as an outsider may be absolutely wrong. hahaha :D 

  14. Posted

    Finally got some very good results now.
    This is possibly the best I could get the Distortion A tuning for now.
    There are some things that still aren't that great, mainly sharps being a bit off, but it's not as bad as my earliest attempts.

    I also made some interesting observations with that alternate tuning:
    - The overall sound is more stable in certain conditions, such as high pass filter special sounds created with certain semitones interval, 7 semitones apart does some really nice power chord tones, for example.
    - Chords now shouldn't sound as dissonant as they used to be, since the intervals are a bit more constant up to the 7th octave, most things shouldn't sound out of tune as much as a result, up to certain limits, that is.
    - As the frequencies go higher in tone, it gets closer and closer to the "original" RMT table, which was based on some 1983 documentation specific for NTSC tuning, which was probably what made it sound so weird in PAL and 15khz mode. However, now it's actually purposefully scaled to these frequencies, so things are more "in-tune" between the lowest and highest octave. Not quite perfect but I think it sounds much better that way.
    - Harmonies are much better with distortion C(E) basses, there is some really good resonance on many notes, and I noticed their "frequencies" are also very similar now... This cannot be a coincidence... and I am too curious to not check this out sometime later 👀
    - Running tunes in PAL with my new table makes about everything sound considerably better, in fact now the notes are incredibly close to a really good 440hz based tuning, which was actually not expected. Same behaviour as described above.
    - Running that table in 15khz seems to have drastically improved the tuning as well, for the reasons mentioned above. I suspect 1.79mhz mode will also benefit? I need to confirm.
    - My new table is now incredibly close to synthpopalooza's Distortion A 15khz table, even though it was actually intended to 64khz, based on a 443hz tuning, clearly there is a connection somewhere...
    - Note B-2 is actually possible to get with the frequency FF... which is actually not officially supported by RMT for some obscure reason.
    - Perfect octaves come from perfect divisions in the frequency value. for example, B-2 uses FF, B-3 uses 7F, and that makes a perfect 2:1 resonance. Same observation for every notes. Unfortunately, this logic didn't translate perfectly downward between notes, however, I was able to get as many octaves as I could to be "perfectly tuned" together. As long as a "good" tuning frequency exists in the higher range, dividing downward will always produce a perfect 2:1 resonance, but the opposite isn't always true. So I picked up as many notes as I could that were nicely tuned and made them go downward.
    - Fun fact, I noticed that 00, the highest possible frequency, is actually a B-10 note, perfectly in-tune to FF, and no, I am not making this up, do the math! 😮 

    Also just for fun I tried out the "Merge" feature of RMT2LZSS... Works pretty nicely for making medleys!
    I just did a sloppy conversion of my Raymaze 2000 tunes as a test, also using this tuning theory.
     


    I still am testing out tunes for now, but so far I got some pretty conclusive results.
    This makes me pretty happy... I was starting to believe I wasted my time for the last few days, but now I think it turned into my favour :D 

    So now I'm just about to mass convert my .rmt files for like the 3rd time this evening, and I'll make sure to report back the results, hopefully I won't encounter yet another serious problem on a random tune... :P 

    POKEY Table 64khz (Octave Pattern) Final.txt Raymaze 2000 Themes (Merged).xex

    • Like 8

  15. Posted

    4 hours ago, emkay said:

    Sounds all interesting. 

     

    Table Manuscrite sound very special, using the extreme distorted guitar sound from time to time. Even the reverb is working nicely. 

     

    But, you are sure about the uridium sketch?

     

     

     

    Thanks, these distorted sounds could have been more stable tbh... I probably have reached the limit of my own patience trying to get the tuning work anymore too, I'll just give 1 final check today then move on to something else I wanted to experiment :D 

    Uridium I just liked the way the notes sounded together with my tuning change, but that's about it, it was not my own tune after all.

    • Like 1

  16. Posted

    Gave a new attempt, and like I said in my edited message earlier... my idea turned out to not work as well as I wished :(
    I got a near perfect series of octaves up to the highest pitch, but then came to the realisation... the notes weren't that great together.

    Anyway I did some more changes, and pretty much just broke more things now lol
    I got some good results, some bad, and some pretty catastrophic, that I also included because I deserve to be laughed at 🤣
    I broke most of the 15khz sounds because of that, but the lower octaves sound pretty good I think.

    in short: I messed up Octave 6 and 7, C and G are sharp, G is especially the worse in some tunes, it often sounds off. C seems okay in most cases, however.
    In the less good results, there are parts that were caused by my manual adjustments when I made them before, and so this didn't translate too well into a different tuning table.

    Did I waste my time? most likely lol

    POKEY Table 64khz (Octave Pattern) v10.txt tunes tests 2.zip

    • Like 1

  18. Posted

    2 hours ago, rensoup said:

    https://famistudio.org/ seems nice too 🤪

     

    I don't know if converting a tracker for a different machine is doable but It wonder how fast it would be compared to rebuilding something around RMT in C#.

     

    In the end it's all about being able to modify frequencies and volumes in various ways I guess ?

    haha yeah, that sounds pretty much like it!

  19. Posted · Edited by VinsCool
    Fuck you, F#! Always that one note...

    3 hours ago, rensoup said:

    Some real nice sounding tunes!

     

    I can't say I hear much difference between your updated frequency table and the regular one, at least not with Ivop's noisy pillars (still using shitty headphones/speaker though) 😶

     

    Thank you! I'm just about to try something different, I noticed a lot of things wrong.

     

    I have actually figured out a new pattern, which doesn't actually just fix the dissonance, but make me able to literally get ALL notes in-tune! 😮
    At least I was able to try several min7, maj7, and other funny combinations, and they all pretty much sounded great, so I have really good faith about this one!

    I just freshly hacked up RMT2LZSS and currently converting many of my .rmt to test out what it sounds like.
    It's very likely to make distortion basses sound off to it, but if I go with Distortion A alone, B2 up to B10 is now tuned!

    All octaves, 5ths, and most intervals sound pretty good! I haven't noticed any major dissonance now, and if there is, usually vibrato will get through it.

    I took another approach this time, octave based, starting from the highest pitch and descending, in perfect divisions by 2 each time until the lowest octave.
    I expected more issues since it no longer matched my theorical 443.9 scale from the last time, but like everything that sounded wrong seems correct now.
    That means, essentially, I could get as many notes as possible to sound nice together, and that approach worked much better. Trying to get as close as possible to existing tuning scales ultimately cause serious detune on certain notes.

    I'll report back with a handful of executables later tonight :D 

    [EDIT] and of course just to look like an idiot it seems like I was wrong lol, I wonder where I messed up this time... I get some serious problems with F#, but everything else seems ok so far...

    • Like 1

  20. Posted

    58 minutes ago, ivop said:

    Possibly, but a nice feature you mentioned before was arpeggios in the pattern domain, instead of the instrument domain. Converting such a GoatTracker file to RMT will lose that, because RMT does not have that feature. The only way RMT could handle that is if each pattern line is exactly one frame. But you still cannot edit the chords/arpeggios within RMT.

     

    SIDWIZARD also has some great ideas for managing effects too, a bit like a mix of several methods into 1 efficient way.

  21. Posted

    Specifically Atari, I had done something dumb but I don't think it was that bad.
    I had one of my 800xl disassembled and cleaned up thoroughly, and once I was done I was meticulously reassembling it, tightening ever screws together... then put everything back on, and wiped the surface one last time.

    Somehow that made the keyboard no longer work properly, with an entire row unresponsive and the A key stuck at power on.
    Thankfully I only had to loosen the screws under the keyboard to bring it back to normal, so I assume they really were "loose" on purpose, probably to not make the keyboard contacts too close to the keys.

    I also had done several stupid things in the meantime for all sort of electronics, but never really damaged anything beyond repairs, the most recent one has to be shorting my VIC-20 with the video cable I use for my Atari, trying to find which one was actually carrying the video signal...
    I certainly found which one was carrying the voltage, oops. Nothing was damaged at least, it simply made my monitor flash for a second, and the VIC-20 to reset.

    Another pretty cursed one I did was to use a nail filer and a knife to take off some plastic from a C64 shell, since each halves weren't fitting together, and I had no other parts around, so I made them fit regardless... 😏
    Sure that was pretty stupid, but in the end it did work and also didn't look too bad from the outside, haha.

  22. Posted

    I think I made more progress with the improved tuning idea now.
    So I tried out some random tunes I had around to see how they got sounded like... and well I like it so far :P 
    The tunes that depended on certain notes to achieve some special modulation really sound nice now :D 
    To get these executables generated I used a nice little workaround where I hacked my own table in the RMT2LZSS executable lol

    A bunch of these tunes aren't actually mine, but you get the idea, it was mainly to see how the sounds harmonised now.
    Not too bad for only changing the "pure" table I think.

    I'll attach the table I came up with so far too. There is definitely some room for improvements, and 15khz specific things to try, but I think it sounds pretty good now.

    tunes tests.zip POKEY Table 64khz (A=443hz Theorical 2) v5.txt

    • Like 2

  23. Posted · Edited by VinsCool
    I can't English

    1 hour ago, NeoNZJ_Slayer said:

    No one has done any major modification to RMT or had did any other music tracker.

    Technically I did do some modifications for some of the tunes I posted here yesterday, but it was mainly intended to improve the tuning instead of adding or changing features :D

AtariAge
Forums
Store
General
Follow AtariAge

Copyright ©1998-2021 AtariAge

×
×
  • Create New...