HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: davecole@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (David Cole)
Subject: Re: Adlib gold VS Ultrasound...
Organization: Northwestern University, Evanston Illinois.
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 11:24:07 GMT

In article <1992Oct2.053847.239352@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu> ry01@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (ROBERT YUNG) writes:
>I need to get this straight. The Ultrasound has 32 voices, but in stereo, it's
>only 16 voices per side. (Right?) The Adlib Gold/OPL3 has 20 stereo voices, so
>does that mean it has 20 voices per side, thus 40 voices in total?? I know the
>U.S. sould better, but I'm curious about this.
>   FYI, in the Sept. 28 PCWEEK, there's a big chart of 11 MPC companies and
>there sound cards. Other than the $900+ Turtle Beach Card, the only other card
>with 32 voices is <drum-roll> Ultrasound! Even the Sound Canvas only has 24
>voices. Anyway, according to the chart, Adlib gold came out LAST month, and
>U.S. THIS month! HA HA HA.
>-- 
>   \_(Robert) Bobby Yung_______RY01@Lehigh.Edu_____________________/


You can't take any of these voice numbers at face value.  There are all sorts
of exceptions and creative ways of counting.  For example the Sound Canvas
claims 24.  But that is 24 stereo _notes_ played simultaneously.  But some
_timbres_ require 2 of those "notes" to produce a single note.  So 24 is an
upper, best case limit (but it is stereo).  Not sure if the percussion channel
is included in those numbers.  On the older Roland LAPC-1, it claims 32 note
polyphony, not counting percussion.  So it looks better than the SCC-1.  But
in fact, it very often needs more than one tone generator to produce a single
note (because for many timbres, a note is a combination of various basic
sounds).  So in practice, the LAPC-1 actually can play fewer simultaneous
notes than can the SCC-1, even though the specs suggest the opposite.

Cards using the Yamaha chips have even more complications.  Some need two
voices to produce stereo, unlike the Rolands.  And there are lots of other
limits bringing the REAL numbers way down. In short, you can't trust the
published numbers, and you can't compare them between cards that use different
chips without alot more info.  

I saw the PCWeek list.  Don't trust the ship dates listed.  I would like to
see a good comparative review of how all the new cards actually _sound_, since
specs won't tell you that.


Cheers,

Dave Cole
From: wrp1@ra.msstate.edu (William R. Payton)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.soundcard
Subject: Where can I find Street Fighter II Sounds?
Date: 5 Oct 92 13:19:12 GMT
Organization: Mississippi State University


The  title says it all.....how 'bout it?
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.soundcard
From: ys@wam.umd.edu ()
Subject: Re: A thought about Gravis delay
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1992 01:29:17 GMT

In article <1992Sep26.203416.7538@sjsumcs.sjsu.edu> rick@sjsumcs.sjsu.edu (Richard Warner) writes:
>sasjaa@morticia.unx.sas.com (James Adams) writes:
>
>
>>That is what we normally call Vapor Ware. Wasn't IBM accused of that some
>>years ago?
>
>Geez, folks here believe that everyone ships on time?  Does anyone ship on 
>time?
>
>Let's talk major vaporware.  #1 all time is MS-Windows.  Almost 5 full years
>from announcement to shipping version 1.0.  Word 5.0?  Missed ship date by
>9 months.   NT is going to miss by at least 3-6 months (latest is 2Q93, 
>which is 3-6 months beyond the 4Q92 announced date).  IBM has had some, yes,
>but so has EVERYONE who has been in the software or hardware business for
>more than 3 months.  Let's not get the whole picture out of perspective,
>folks.  Delays are normal, not extra-normal, in this business.
>
>>-- 
>>+-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------+
>>|James Adams                          |  I am going as a Homicidal Maniac.  |
>>|  sasjaa@unx.sas.com                 |  They look like anybody else.       |
>>|                                     |        Wednesday Addams             |
>>+-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------+

True.. many companies have had delays, but at least they were fair about it 
and told the public well in advance the delays and the proposed tentative
release date. Gravis seems to have been saying, next week or any day now
for at least 6 months and more. That is the thing that has bothered many
people more than the delay itself. If you won't be able to release it for
several months, at least say that instead of, we'll release it by next week
about a thousand times, and never do...
	Just my opinion...
From: mflt_cif@uhura.cc.rochester.edu (Mongoose)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.soundcard
Subject: Help!  (With MT-32 and SB PRO)
Date: 30 Sep 92 04:03:47 GMT
Organization: University of Rochester - Rochester, New York

I just received my MT-32 in the mail today, and I am having trouble getting
any software to recognise it:  be it the midi mapper in Windows 3.1 or
mt32edit.exe.  Everything that I am playing with seems to want a MPU-801 (?)
as an interface, rather than the SB-Pro.  I was wondering if there is a
driver out there that will make the SBPRO emulate an MPU 801, or will make
any call to a perceived 801 be routed to the Pro MIDI port instead.

Needless to say, this is rather frustrating, so any input that you may have
will be welcome.

BTW, I know the MT-32 works 'cause I tried it on another machine equiped
with a normal soundblaster and an MPU-801.

send mail to:
mflt_cif@uhura.cc.rochester.edu
Thanks,
Mat
Xref: sparky comp.sys.ibm.pc.soundcard:2261 rec.music.synth:15784
From: casey@cs.mcgill.ca (Kallol DAS)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.soundcard,rec.music.synth
Subject: INFO needed for Roland Scc-1 , CM-32L
Date: 1 Oct 92 00:26:49 GMT
Organization: SOCS - Mcgill University, Montreal, Canada

I really need some information on the SCC-1 and the CM-32L.  This is
what I know:

The SCC-1 is *not* very compatible with the LAPC-1 or the MT-32.

CM-32L *is* compatible with LAPC-1 and MT-32.

Is this correct?  I know a 'friend of a friend' who returned his SCC-1
because it sounded 'strange' in WC2  and even Ballade.  Apparently the
TSR that lets the SCC-1 emulate MT-32 does not work well.  Can anyone
confirm this?

A salesman told me that the CM-32L is identical to the LAPC except it is
an external module.  However seeing as it is much less expensive I am
leery.  Does anyone know anything.

Also - I plan to use my card for *mostly* games, (I already have a
soundblaster for the DAC), so the card should ideally be able to emulate
LAPC or MT-32.  I checked some games I had and the choice in
installation for the sound card was the same for the LAPC,Mt-32 and
CM-32L.  Does this mean that whenever there is a choice for LAPC I can
automatically assume that it would work for the CM-32L?

Any comments would be a godsend. BTW, the price for CM-32L & Midi card
is ~ 100$ less than SCC-1.

				Thanks in advance.
				casey@binkley.CS.Mcgill.ca
From: terry.walter@outlan.ersys.edmonton.ab.ca (Terry Walter) 
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.soundcard
Subject: THE GRAVIS ULTRASOUND
Date: 6 Oct 92 02:34:00 GMT
Reply-To: terry.walter@outlan.ersys.edmonton.ab.ca (Terry Walter) 
Distribution: world
Organization: Outland BBS-UUCP

From what I am reading, the Gravis Ultrasound is like a Sound Blaster
Stereo Sound Card, but if you want the SCSI interface (is it true SCSI
or like the SB's) you have to buy an add-on board, if you want 16 bit,
you have to buy an add-on board.  If this is the case, give me a break,
I will stick to me PAS 16.  For the price, it does the job plus more.

I noticed on advertisements that Gravis has handed out to dealers, that
they will not compare their card to a Pro Audio Spectrum 16 bit?
From: brrian04@uctvax.uct.ac.za
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.soundcard
Subject: QUESTION ABOUT TURTLE BEACH MULTISOUND
Date: 2 Oct 92 16:30:52 GMT
Article-I.D.: uctvax.1992Oct2.143053.202959
Organization: University of Cape Town


Can the Turtle Beach Multisound be used with games like Space Quest IV etc?  I
would like to get a card which can sample,  is a high quality synthesizer and
can be used with games (i.e. is compatible with or can properly emulate at
least on of the SB/SB-PRO, Adlib or the MT-32/LAPC-1).  The Roland SCC-1 is 
not suitable because it cannot sample and it doesn't work properly with games 
designed for the MT-32/LAPC-1.  

Thanks
Ian
brrian04@uctvax.uct.ac.za
ibarrett@casper.cs.uct.ac.za
From: adkinsg@symphony.cc.purdue.edu (Garry Adkins)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.soundcard
Subject: Re: Ultrasound support/Accolade
Keywords: pas16 and starcon2
Date: 2 Oct 92 20:02:43 GMT
Distribution: world,local
Organization: Purdue University


Is starcon2 going to have PAS16 support?!

Garry
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Garry Adkins                             adkinsg@symphony.cc.purdue.edu  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: harrison@sun.lclark.edu (Mark Harrison)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.soundcard
Subject: Important question for proud new Ultrasound owners :-)
Date: 6 Oct 92 17:35:31 GMT
Article-I.D.: lclark.1992Oct6.173531.15504
Organization: Lewis & Clark College, Portland OR


I know you will probably be flooded with questions, so I would like to get
mine in early.

What I NEED to know about is gameport(s).  I bought a Gravis Gamepad but
it doesn't work right with my system.  I only have so many days to return
it, and since I live in the US, it doesn't look like I will get my
Ultrasound in time to test it.  The problem is I'm using the gameport on
my I/O card and it uses address $200.  There are no jumpers to change or
disable it.  The Gamepad needs to be at $201 to work correctly.  I can
still use it as a regular two-button joystick, but I can't get any game to
read all four buttons.  And yes, the games do support the Gamepad with all
four buttons.

So I would like to know any/all information on the Ultrasound's gameport(s). 
Time is running out.  Specifically, will I have any conflicts with my I/O
card?  Someone told me I would need to disable the gameport on my I/O
card, but that can't be done.

Also, can you tell us a little about what software is included?  How about
a developers kit?

Thanks in advance for any help.  Me and my wallet give many thanks. :-)

-- 
=============================================================================
Mark Harrison           |  "We are the Priests, of the Temples of Syrinx
harrison@sun.lclark.edu |   Our great computers fill the hallowed halls."
              -- Me     |                                    -- Rush
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.soundcard
From: c9e-dl@volga (Peter Norby)
Subject: Does anyone know of a program to change .VOC files to .WAV files?
Organization: University of California, at Berkeley
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 23:42:27 GMT

I don't  have time to wade thru the many articles that 
there are, so if somebody could mail a reply to this (if it hasn't
come up several times before) it would be nice.

On the other hand, if anyone knows of any shareware type packages that
will allow you to edit .voc files or edit something that
you can translate from voc...

I think you get the idea.
Mail a reply if possible, and I will also try and
watch the group for responses

Thank You

Peter Norby
norby@soda.berkeley.edu
From: jonathan@nova.next.nd.edu (Jonathan Bradshaw)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.soundcard
Subject: Re: Need Adlib driver for Win 3.1
Date: 28 Sep 92 00:31:00 GMT
Organization: University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame

In article <1992Sep27.010738.14427@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU> quan@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Tony Quan) writes:
>
>I'm using the beta of the new version of OS/2.  This version includes
>Windows 3.1 support, but unfortunately IBM didn't release all of the
>sound drivers.  Specifically, the "vadlibd.386" file required for 
>the Adlib driver is missing.  If someone could drop me a note telling
>me where I could get this file, I'd appreciate it.
>
>--Tony
>quan@cs.stanford.edu

Well the reason it isn't there is that it isn't actually needed. The .386
files are for Windows running in EXTENDED mode (win /3). However, Os/2
runs Windows 3.0 and 3.1 in STANDARD mode. The install programs are dumb
enough however to require these files. Either manually install (which I
did for the PAS16), make "dummy" files for the install program or modify
the install scripts to ignore them.

--
 Jonathan Bradshaw | jonathan@nova.decio.nd.edu -or- jbradsh2@darwin.cc.nd.edu
  Packet: n9oxe@n0ary.#nocal.ca.usa.na | Prodigy: XMSN02B | (Os/2)(DOS)(Linux)
  WNDU-AM/FM/TV South Bend, IN | Disclaimer "My opinions are not my employers"
  - "Busy life, not enough time to look in the mirror." - Deborah Ann Gibson -
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.soundcard
From: robinson@sml.cs.psu.edu (Andrew Robinson)
Subject: Re: WinMod PRO available via ftp
Distribution: comp
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 01:19:48 GMT

In article <1992Sep30.164729.15360@blaze.cs.jhu.edu> schles@whatever.cs.jhu.edu (Philip Schlesinger) writes:

   WinMod Pro's interface is nice, but when I went to load my mods (which were
   on a different drive), there was no drive indicator.  I was stuck in the same
   drive as the program (which sucked to put it simply).  Get winmod10.zip in
   the /pub/pc/win3/sounds directory.  Though its in german (which means you can
   forget the docs unless you understand german), it's easy to use.  Just load it
   and go to the file menu.  You'll see what I mean...Phil

   -- 
   Philip Schlesinger                         schles@cs.jhu.edu
   ------------------------------------------------------------
   "How'd you get that Cray II to run slower than my old C-64?"
   "Oh, that took a bit of doing.  Take a look at /bin/session"



I did also notice that WinMod PRO does not allow changing the drive.  Here are
some suggestions for playing MODS on other drives:

    - Set WinMod PRO's startup path in your program manager to the drive and
directory where you normally keep your MODs.  When you select Open MOD, the
program will first look for MOD files in that directory.

    - If, after doing the above step, you want to play a MOD on a different
drive, use the File Manager to drag the MOD file(s) onto the WinMod PRO 
icon.  Note that WinMod PRO supports multiple file drag-and-drop. (i.e. you can
select multiple files in the File Manager and drag then all at once.)

WinMOD 1.0 does allow changing of drives, but it doesn't support multiple
files.  Therefore, if you want to play MOD files in the background while
working on something, you will either have to keep switching to new files 
manually, or listen to the same MOD over and over again :-(.  Also, WinMOD 1.0
does not support many, if any, Protracker effects (which WinMod PRO does
support, as mentioned in my earlier post.)

 
--
     -- Andy
robinson@cs.psu.edu
Xref: sparky comp.sys.ibm.pc.soundcard:2330 alt.sb.programmer:366
From: nunn@nutmeg.ntu.edu.au (JsNO  BAR---NUNN)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.soundcard
Subject: (The MFED Editor...It's where abouts) Re: I'M After the Best MOD editor
Keywords: Unknown
Date: 6 Oct 92 15:08:49 GMT
Organization: Information Technology, Northern Territory University

In response to Oliver (os@ikp.uni-koeln.de):



  You will find the MFED 1.52b editor at:

   wuarchive.wustl.edu


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                              JsNO BAR----NUNN
        "It's his last semester......give him a good pat on the back"
                                  DARWIN, NT
                          nunn@pandanus.cs.ntu.edu.au
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.soundcard
From: rdw1@rodan.acs.appstate.edu (Robert D Warren)
Subject: Re: JukeBox for Window3.1
Organization: Appalachian State University
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 01:09:49 GMT

	Someone posted here about not using the Jukebox for Win 3.0 with
Win 3.1. The fact is that Creative updated the program and packaged
it with the updated drivers for the SoundBlaster. It also comes with
Chatterbox, a program similar to jukebox that plays WAV files. You can
find it in the update archives by calling the Creative BBS, or you can
archie for:

sbw31.zip (Soundblaster 1.5 or 2.0)
sbpw31.zip (Soundblaster Pro)

								B
--
Robert D. Warren
Appalachian State University 
AcsOp17@Appstate.Edu
From: dionf@ERE.UMontreal.CA (Dion Francois)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.soundcard
Subject: Re: List of Soundcards (Gravis and Ensoniq)
Date: 28 Sep 92 01:27:04 GMT
Organization: Universite de Montreal

In article <1992Sep24.114848.5469@news.acns.nwu.edu> davecole@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (David Cole) writes:
>This would be good news.  I had heard long ago that Ensoniq had a chipset for
>sale for building sound cards (as Emu sells and Turtle Beach uses in the
>multisound).  I also heard (not in print) that Ensoniq sold sound chips to
>Apple, and that Ensoniq chips were to be used by Gravis.  The last seems now
>to be clearly false.  

Where did you get that info? the specs are exactly the same between the DOC II
chip and the Gravis!! (except a lower S/N ratio which has nothing to do with
the DOC II chip but with the filters). Dynamic range 96 dB ( of course since
it is 16 bit), 32 channels etc... Also RTM's Audiomaster card IS available and
uses the Emsoniq DOC II chip. Also Ensoniq chips can be found in the Apple II GS
and all Macintosh, but they are old chips, not DOC or DOC II (they are 8 bits,
not 16 bits). Note that the ASR10 keyboard ( just out from Ensoniq) may use a
DOC II chip. (Not confirmed) and will have 31 (1 voice not used for a strange
reasons). The difference of course is that Ensoniq ASR ( and other high end
synths and cards like TurtleBeach) have 64x oversampling which the Gravis does
not have. Once again it's not the fault of the DOC II chip, but simply the
Gravis implementation.

Last, the gravis has a S/N ratio of 80dB NOT 96dB, which is the dynamic range.
If anybody doesn't understand the difference, i'll post an explanation.

>But if Ensoniq joins in, then there will be soundcards with chips from many of
>the major synthesizer manufacturers: Yamaha, Roland, Emu and Ensoniq.  This
>should push the price of the high-end sample players down.  The specs you cite
>are comparable to the Multisound, with the added feature of Quad recording. 
>Quad would be nifty for games.....
>
>Cheers,
>
>Dave

Ciao,
--
Francois Dion
    '  _   _   _
 CISM (_) (_)  _) FM       Montreal , Canada       Email: CISM@ERE.UMontreal.CA
      (_)  / . _)             10000 Watts          Telephone no: (514) 343-7511
_______________________________________________________________________________
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.soundcard,comp.music
From: stefanb@delos.stgt.sub.org (Stefan Bechtold)
Subject: Soundcard etc. recommandation wanted
Followup-To: comp.sys.ibm.pc.soundcard
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1992 00:25:16 GMT
Organization: Delos Stuttgart, Germany

Hi !
I'm planning to buy the notation software finale and want to
use a midi-keyboard with finale.

Is it a good choice to take a master-keyboard and a soundcard
or would it be better to take a synthesizer and only a midi-
interface ?

What soundcard would you recommand for my purpose (not playing games,
but making music) ?

Thank you for any responds,
Stefan
-- 
+ Stefan Bechtold # stefanb@delos.stgt.sub.org # Voice +49 711 813240 +
++++++++sed nemo potuit tangere: merda fuit ! (Martial III 17)+++++++++
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.soundcard
From: tfinn@crash.cts.com (Aaron Grier)
Subject: Re: Disney Sound Source
Organization: CTS Network Services (crash, ctsnet), El Cajon, CA
Date: 02 Oct 92 16:10:20 PDT

In article <1af11uINNe38@fido.asd.sgi.com> autry@sgi.com (Larry Autry) writes:
>Are you saying that the Covox and Disney are functionally the same?
>If so, you differ from the article outlining the sound boards.  Can
>anyone confirm this one way or the other?
>
>So, what if they are the same?  It would benefit "wanting" Sound
>Source owners if Sound Thing compatible applications could be used by
>them.

They are NOT compatible... the Disney Sound Source has a small FIFO and a
couple other things you have to tweak with to get it to produce sound...

tfinn@crash.cts.com


Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.soundcard
From: norlin@midway.ecn.uoknor.edu (Norman Lin)
Subject: Re: Mod Edit 3.0
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 16:46:19 GMT
Organization: Engineering Computer Network, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK, USA

msutter@uhunix.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu (Michael Sutter) writes:


>Does anyone know the status on Mod Edit 3.0?
>I read a couple of weeks ago, that it would be released shortly.      
>Also does anyone have Norman Lins current e-mail address?
>I tried norlin@129.15.22.2, but the mail bounced.
>Thanks in advance.
>--Mike--

My address is norlin@mailhost.ecn.uoknor.edu.

A few functions remain to be completed on Mod Edit 3.0 (block editing and
transposing).  If I get pressed for time, I may choose to omit these
features at this point.  The documentation is currently nonexistent, and
will take a few days to complete.  An optimistic release date is this
weekend.  I'll post here when it's done.

Norman Lin
norlin@mailhost.ecn.uoknor.edu
From: gridlock@cats.ucsc.edu (Will Gridweed)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.soundcard
Subject: Re: PAS+ or PAS16
Date: 27 Sep 1992 01:18:59 GMT
Organization: University of California, Santa Cruz
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: am.ucsc.edu


mxt5182@usl.edu (Tangjarukij Montri) writes:


>Hi, everyone

>    Could anyone suggest me which one I should buy between PAS+ and PAS16?
>I want a soundcard just play games. Is the sound different between them when
>you play only games. Thanks for any suggestion.

	I would suggest the PAS16. The soundblaster compatibility is easier
to use...

-- 
gridlock@cats.ucsc.edu
"Evil Pays"
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.soundcard