From: pubpc1@library.ucla.edu Newsgroups: comp.sys.be,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.sys.apple2 Subject: Re: Apple Drops Backward Compatibility for Next MacOS Date: 5 Nov 1996 22:44:20 GMT Organization: University of California, Los Angeles Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <55og04$j12@uni.library.ucla.edu> References: <5344fe$36v@masters0.news.internex.net> <54o8mq$1pm8@uni.library.ucla.edu> <54p0bq$678@opal.southwind.net> <55bn28$9tv@opal.southwind.net> <4NOV199615033782@vax2.concordia.ca> <55lp8m$6e@elna.ethz.ch> GUDATH@EZINFO.VMSMAIL.ETHZ.CH (Henrik 'Ratte' Gudat) wrote: >In <4NOV199615033782@vax2.concordia.ca> spec@vax2.concordia.ca writes: > >> are like listening to a *real* live orchestra! What does the >> Macintosh do for music, in say a game? Digitally record real-world >> music and loop that short clip over and over. Or in some cases, just >> have you insert a compact disc and play pre-recorded music off that. >> No better than listening to a >[..] >> a hobby and enjoyment of mine, one of the reason I wouldn't be happy >> with a Macintosh. I don't believe there is even a decent way to play >> MIDI files on a Macintosh, unless you hook up an expensive MIDI >> synthesis keyboard. > >Just the facts (PowerMac): >- the Mac offers 44kHz/16bit compared to ca. 25kHz/8bit > This is a huge difference in dynamic range. I believe that in the first paragraph above, about the orchestra, Mitch was refering to the 16-bit wavetable cards for the PC compatibles that use an Ensoniq chip. These chips are the descendents of the Ensoniq chip used in the IIGS, but they have been extended to support a 16-bit wavetable. Just like the IIGS's 8-bit resolution Ensoniq outperforms the sound of the Mac Plus, the 16-bit wavetable Ensoniq based sound cards for the PC outperform the sound from PowerMacs. The maximum rate of the IIGS's Ensoniq is not 25kHz/8 bit. It is 65.491kHz (SoundShop supports the maximum, some programs are limited to 44kHz or thereof). Some of the cleanest sound output comes from setting the record rate at 26.362kHz, for example, because that's the frequency at which the power supply, etc. operates. The maximum frequency of the Ensoniq DOC is inversely related to the number of oscillators active. The Ensoniq has 32, but if you are playing sound on only one, you can push it to the maximum 65.491kHz. The PowerMacs can do 16-bit sound at 44kHz, but the IIGS can do 65.491kHz if only with 8-bit resolution. Give credit where credit is due. :) >- The Mac can play 8 channels (66Mhz) and more thru the toolbox, more > if you provide your own sound routines. But, like Mitch said, the modern Mac's sound chip is still not a synthesizer. They are simply playback devices: like a CD quality tape recorder. Don't get me wrong, the dynamic range is great, but you can't do things like you can with the IIGS. With the IIGS's Ensoniq (and 16-bit wavetable cards for the PC based on a modern model Ensoniq), you have 32 oscillators to play with that can be manipulated with different play modes, paired, and controlled to generate many different sounds from one wave. It is literally the heart of a Mirage sampling synthesizer in a computer. Giving credit where credit is due: the modern Mac, as a sound playback device, is superior to IIGS hardware (16-bit resolution vs. 8-bit resolution). For synthesis, however, the IIGS's Ensoniq is STILL more flexible. All this is in reference to non-AV Macs, of course. >- There are decent MOD players: PlayerPro and SoundTrecker. The best MOD players are on the Amiga because they set the standard (and therefore support all the effects). The Amiga's sound is 8-bits in resolution. Even the Amiga can't do synthesis very well, however, because its sound chip isn't a synthesizer chip (MODs are not synthesized music). >- QuickTime 2.5 offers quite good MIDI support. This is what I was >told on the phone by a friend who's working with a lot with >synthesizers (M3R, SY-22 etc). No doubt you can attach a MIDI instrument to the Mac. >- You can play MIDI data on the Mac without MIDI peripherals >(CyberSound VS for example) But it dosn't do this by synthesis. It basically has a bank of samples and plays them in accordance with MIDI data. This is more like playing MODs or SoundSmith than something like synthLAB, which was what Mitch was refering to. >What I'm trying to say is that the hardware is more or less up to >date. If entertainment software makes use of it is a totally different >questions. However, it's rather pointless to say that the Mac sounds >awful. He didn't say the current Macs sound awful for simple playback of samples. 16-bit resolution speaks for itself. He said it didn't handle MIDI files *as a synthesizer* the way synthLAB on the IIGS or PC wavetable cards are able to do. Now I'm sure there are some synthesis programs for a computer with such a fast CPU (using CPU power to do synthesis), but it would not be as versatile or sound as good (at least it dosn't on the Amiga...but then again, the Amiga is much slower). I suppose with a PPC processor running at hundreds of MHz, you could try to EMULATE a synthesizer chip. :) Fast Eddie emulates the Ensoniq, right? But I don't see how this can be done within MacOS? It does not have pre-emtive multitasking. Does Fast Eddie run outside of MacOS (like IIGS demos run outside of GS/OS)? >I'm sorry for this pro-Mac message, but credit where credit is due. I agree with that sentiment. PowerMacs have greater dynamic range and that's a credit to it. Past and present Ensoniqs (the former in the IIGS, latter ones in PC wavetable cards) can do synthesis well and that's its credit. >The Mac still can't play Alien Mind, so all these advantages are >worth...nothing. :-) Or demos. We don't see FTA stuff or the likes of MegaDemo on the Mac. The Mac is a tamed beast, strong but boring. The IIGS is a wild spirit. >- bozo