From: harrison@lclark.edu (Mark Harrison)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.soundcard
Subject: Re: THE GRAVIS ULTRASOUND
Date: 15 Oct 92 17:47:07 GMT
Article-I.D.: lclark.1992Oct15.174707.7600
Organization: Lewis & Clark College, Portland OR

In article <1992Oct14.135226.14698@tamsun.tamu.edu> edb9140@tamsun.tamu.edu
(Ed Boling) writes:

>We'll that's all real nice with those prices that you have listed, but the
>GUS is NOT 16 bit at that price, nor does it have a SCSI ability at that
>price.

That's right Ed (or anyone else.  I'm not trying to pick on just Ed here.) 
And that's exactly what the specs have said right from the start.  This is
nothing new to people who have been keeping up with the GUS for a while now.

As for 16 bit.  I would love to have 16 bit recording.  But what I would
actually do with it?  Probably record Windows sound events (startup,
error, etc.)  I would also play with it.  Record something and go WOW!!!, that
sounds neat.  Then delete it.  And I might keep a few things lying around
to show off with.  The GUS is aimed at people like me.  16 bit would be
nice if it was included, but it's not.  And I doubt that I would be willing
to pay the extra $$$ for the few uses I have for it.  As many others have
pointed out, who wants to fill up precious hard drive space to hear Arnold
say "I'll be back" (well maybe a good windows shutdown event), or hear
some dumb quotes from Wayne's World.  It's fun, but not pratical for the
average user.  Another person pointed out to me that recording was fun and
got old very quickly.  I think I would agree with him here.

As for SCSI.  I have no need for it now.  But I will eventually get a
CD-ROM and need SCSI.  With any other sound board, I'm stuck with what's
there.  With the GUS, I have to choice to use theirs, or pick a better
one.  The GUS is supposed to be able to use another SCSI interface besides
the one that Gavis will sell.  In case you can't quite get that word on
the tip of your tonge, it's call "flexability."  And it's nice to know
that I'm not restricted to one choice when the need arises.  It still
stands to be proven that the GUS can indeed use another SCSI interface. 
That's just what I've heard.  But I do know that the PAS and SB DON'T have
that choice.

>  You should compare apples to apples and not compare apples to
>oranges.

Good point.  Let's forget the superficial things for now. (SCSI, 16 bit,
end price, etc)  Let's look at the sound generation abailities of the
different cards.  You CAN'T compare their similarities.  The GUS is something
totally different.  You CAN compare their differences.  I won't do that. 
It's already been overdone and I've yet to see where the PAS, SB, etc. come
out ahead.  Would anyone care to point out where they beat the GUS?  I'm not
saying that those cards aren't good.  I just curious to know what they
have that the GUS doesn't.

I don't mean to pick on just you Ed.  If you are offended, I'm sorry.  I
didn't mean this to be some kind of flame.  But I'm tired of people putting
down the GUS because of the 16 bit, SCSI thing.  Let's give the card a
chance and stop putting it down for now.  If it's a loser, there will be
no hiding it.  Remember, there's more to the GUS than 16 bit, SCSI, and SB
emulation.
-- 
=============================================================================
Mark Harrison           |  "We are the Priests, of the Temples of Syrinx
harrison@sun.lclark.edu |   Our great computers fill the hallowed halls."
              -- Me     |                                    -- Rush
Xref: sparky comp.sys.ibm.pc.soundcard:2485 comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc:13456 alt.binaries.sounds.misc:3779