[Radium]

Sorry I had to start a new thread because some off-topic, cold-
hearted, sadistic, sick f---ks introduced irrelevant content.

On Mar 4, 7:23 am, "Rick Massey" wrote in
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.e...11bf852?hl=en&
:

Creative Music Synth. It's a program for editing sounds on a Creative Labs
sound card.

Actually, Creative Music Synth is not a program.

Creative Music Synth is the digital hardware chip-based FM synth
present on the SoundBlaster 16 ISA card.

Usually Creative Music Synth is set to an I/O address of 220, though
in some PCs I've seen it at 240.

Radium is obsessed with this little program the company created
a while ago, and for some unfathomable reason, has set this four operator
consumer level synth as his or her gold standard for synthesis.

Well, as I've stated in http://groups.google.com/group/sci.e...2cea68f?hl=en&
and http://groups.google.com/group/sci.e...9a64386?hl=en&

Despite doing my own research, I still don't have the foggiest idea
how the out-of-phase signals are generated in Creative Music Synth.
Sorry if my persistence on this topic is annoying but I am insanely
interested in it.

Creative Music Synth does not -- to any extent -- playback samples
from memory. It freshly generates its tones. It is physically built to
generates its tones from scratch without stealing any energy from the
PC's main CPU.

[Peter Larsen]

Radium wrote:

Sorry I had to start a new thread because some off-topic, cold-
hearted, sadistic, sick f---ks introduced irrelevant content.

Yes, the thread was an irrelevant dead horse from the day you started
it.

Creative Music Synth does not -- to any extent -- playback
samples from memory. It freshly generates its tones. It is
physically built to generates its tones from scratch without
stealing any energy from the PC's main CPU.

Yes, all later versions of the chipset have required a pentium 90 as
minimum. I had to return a newer card and get the last remaining AWE32
in the shop back in 1997. As soundcard it was "not hifi", but the on
board synth chip has a sp-dif leg, and the output is on the card. Used
like that with an external DA converter it sounds very very good. BUT
the synth that sounds well on that card is not the FM synth, that one is
plain crap. Yes, the cards that also had the FM synth sounded good, but
it was only if their main synth was used.


Regards

Peter Larsen

[Radium]

On Mar 4, 5:29 pm, "Daniel Mandic" wrote:

The FM Chip is very well, on SB Cards.

Yes, it certainly is.

You mean the e-Mu Chips (8000, 10000) are sounding good? :-)
Yes they do!

Emu is an emulator/sample playback/softsynth/soundfont MIDI
*soundcard* synth. Its made from encoding the sounds of stale, cheap,
worn-out instruments. It steeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeenks!!!!!!!

FM adlib and OPL4 sounds better! Own!

Creative Music Synth sounds even better.

P.S.: AWE32 in a High-End 386 Board, 386DX25, ISA at /2. Where's the
prob? MIDI, GM-MIDI, everything worked...

Problem only occur if a poor-quality emulator/sample playback/
softsynth/soundfont MIDI *soundcard* synth emits it farts.

[Quoting myself] As I said in http://groups.google.com/group/sci.e...18c77f0?hl=en&

"If a soundcard-based sample playback synth/soundfont/synth-emulation/
softsynth has has a sample-rate, bit-resolutions, # of operators, # of
voices, # of channels** that are at least a 100 times whats necessary
for the average human auditory system to consider "music", AND [even
more important!!!!!!!!!] the recordings are that of actual, high-
quality, new, premium, clean, authentic, tradional instruments [such
as piano, violin, flute, guitar]. Sigh...... Then yes, I am willing to
give it a try and might actually enjoy it -- though, obviously not
*nearly* as much as Creative Music Synth."

"But, unfortuntely, most soundcard-based sample playback synths/
soundfonts/synth-emulations/softsynths don't have sufficient sample-
rates, bit-resultions, # of operators, # of voices, # of channels**
near whats necessary for the average human auditory system to consider
"music". *More importantly*, the recordings are made from cheap,
dusty, broken-down, poorly-conditioned instruments -- which is why so
many sample playback synths/soundfonts/synth-emulations/softsynths
stinks like the human kakaa they are. Ever listend to M$ GS
"wavetable" synth? I feel like making and spreading a virus to infect
that softsynth piece of s---."

"**Yamaha's OPL3 has 18 channels"

In terms of *SOUNDCARD-MIDI-SYNTH-AUDIO* Nothing sounds more
refreshing the sound of Creative-Music-Synth's polysynth pads with the
central channel removed. [See note about NOTE on out-of-phase stereo
signals*]

If you include *NON*-soundcard-MIDI-synth-audio, there are lots of
audio and musical equipement that sound better than any soundcard-midi-
synth -- including the MIDI soundcard synth, Creative Music Synth.
However, I am talking only about *SOUNDCARD-MIDI-SYNTH-AUDIO*

Of couse, the best instruments are the non-synthesized, non-MIDI, real
authentic instruments.

I rate Creative Music Synth as being the best soundcard-MIDI-synth,
not the best audio or musical device. The best audio equipments are
the authentic real instruments [violins, pianos, flutes, harps,
harmoniums, etc.].

*NOTE on out-of-phase stereo signals:

I try playing Creative Music Synth [220], through my so called
'karaoke voice canceller' -- which inverts the phase of one stereo
channel [right or left] and then combines it the other channel --
which results in anything identical in both the left and right
channels being removed. I get a mono of what was different in the left
and right channels.

When I play Creative Music Synth [220] audio through the voice-
canceller, it sounds more treble, sharper, brighter, warmer, and
crisper than when I don't use the voice canceller. I like this. I
notice this difference when playing the polysynth pads.

Due to the above, my MIDI synth dream would be a mono, 64-bit-
resolution, 2.88-Ghz-sample-rate, 40,000-voices, 4,000-operators-per-
voice, 10,000-channeled**, version of Creative Music Synth based
solely on the signals that were phased differently in the original
Creative Music Synth.
Creative Music Synth is a stereo FM synth who left and right signals
are phased
differently, this is why I get a different sound when I play throught
voice-canceller. The signals of Creative Music Synth that have the
same phase for both L and R have a more cheesy sine-wave quality [such
as a "whine" or "moan"] which I don't care for. The signals in
Creative Music Synth that are phased differently in L and R tend to
resemble a fresher sawtooth-wave quality [such as a "buzz" or "fiz"]
which I like. That is why I want my version of Creative Music Synth to
be based on the sounds that were phased differently in the original
Creative Music Synth. I want my version to be monoaural because I want
all speakers to give out the same signal.

**Yamaha's OPL3 has 18 channels

[Bob]

Dude,

Go get yourself a girlfriend. Nobody here likes you. Go away.

Bob

[Karl Uppiano]

I would like to know why a softsynth needs 100x human auditory resolution to
sound musical. That seems like a complete waste of bandwidth to me.

I would also like to see what data you have that supports your assertion
that the softsynths sample low-quality, worn-out instruments. It seems to me
that the synth mfrs would consider their sound fonts to be their crown
jewels, and would sample them as carefully as possible with the highest
quality instruments available, even if, for their lower-end products, they
down-sample, compress, and stretch the samples over too many notes, in order
to economize on computing resources.

I submit that the sonic aberrations you object to are due to various forms
of data reduction and economizing, and not poor quality instruments in the
original sound.

[Radium]

On Mar 4, 8:09 pm, "Karl Uppiano" wrote:

I would like to know why a softsynth needs 100x human auditory resolution to
sound musical. That seems like a complete waste of bandwidth to me.

Because sounds above 20 khz [the supposed highest pitch a human can
hear] have significant effects on the subconscious psyche and usually
do affect emotion and mood.

for their lower-end products, they
down-sample, compress, and stretch the samples over too many notes, in order
to economize on computing resources.

Yes, this is another problem. F--king economizing/data reduction!
Which they'd stop that s--t.

I submit that the sonic aberrations you object to are due to various forms
of data reduction and economizing, and not poor quality instruments in the
original sound.

Whether the former [economizing/data reduction] and/or the latter
[poor quality instruments] are the cause, there are equally extremely
annoying even by themselves. Put them together, and give me an
auditory nightmare.

Creative Music Synth uses NO economizing/data reduction at f--king
all.

Either:

1. Use premium-quality instruments and cease any economizing/data
reduction

OR

2. Stop the consumptions and productions of any & all of the following
soundcard MIDI synths:

A. *softsynths*

AND

B. *synth emulations*

AND

C. *sample playback*

AND

D. *soundfonts*

Cuz with economizing/data reduction, A though D are sure to stink like
the stinky-thick-stinky-foamy-human-diarrhea-kakaa-foam-of-a-human-who-
eats-stale-cheddar-cheese-and-sticky-milk-chocolate-and-rotten-lentils

Thats not to say they'd necessarily be any less stinky without
economizing/data reduction.