From: dcole@ua.d.umn.edu (david cole)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.soundcard
Subject: Re: Help with soundcards
Date: 5 Jan 1993 17:11:08 -0600
Organization: University of Minnesota, Duluth
NNTP-Posting-Host: ua.d.umn.edu

In article <scham_ta.8.726256156@slab.unt.edu> scham_ta@slab.unt.edu (Linda Schamber's TA) writes:



>
>1.  Is the SBPro substantially different in terms of the sound it produces?  
>    By that I mean will the sounds in a game be different with the pro 
>    than with the regular board?
>
>2.  I have heard the Roland LAPC-1.  It is wonderful for music but how does 
>    it work on sound effects?  How does the MT-32 stack up in comparison, if 
>    a comparison can be made.  How does manufacturer support stack up for 
>    either of the Roland Boards?
>


There is very little difference between the LAPC and the MT32.  The LAPC is
just an MT-32 on a card with some additional sounds and RAM.  
Thus the only comparison between the two that is very important is that the
LAPC is internal and the MT32 is external (along with the fact that the LAPC
is current while the MT-32 is discontinued).  
I don't know what you mean by "manufacturer support".  Roland is a major
synthesizer (and plotter) company.  As a rule, however, all software for
their cards is third-party.  Since the support you usually need for a
soundcard is software, you get it from the software makers.

Contrary to some reports I have seen on this group, the Roland LAPC is very
good at sound effects -- much better than the Soundblaster/Proaudiospectrum
on the games I have heard.  It has some builtin effects, and others are
created by the game soundeffects writers.  Lots of explosions, crashes, laser
cannons, engines, footsteps, dog barks, etc.  Plus both Roland cards have
reverb and echo built in and under software control, unlike the SB class of
card.

There is, in my opinion, no strong reason to upgrade from the SB to the SBPro
or the PAS cards.  There is a very good reason to get a Roland LAPC -- it
sounds alot better on both games and music.  

I have not heard the GUS, but I doubt that it sounds as good as the LAPC.  I
have no doubt that it sounds better than the SB/PAS cards.  The LAPC runs
about $370; the GUS is less than half that.  Still, the LAPC has a much more
powerful synthesizer on it than any other card that I know of.  I would
suggest that if you want to play games that have been released in the past
two years, you should think seriously about the LAPC (or MT32).  It will make
them the most fun to play.  If you don't care at all about games released so
far and are willing to take a gamble that the GUS will be supported, it is
less expensive.

By the way, an SB or PAS can peacefully coexist with no problems in the same
system with an LAPC.  Some games (e.g. recent Sierra) have separate support
for the Roland for the music and an SB/Disney etc.  for the digitized audio.
With others, you just make your choice when you set them up (I always choose
Roland becuase the FM synth sounds so cheesey).

Cheers,

Dave

>3.  I have just heard of the GUS as of yesterday from this board.  I gather 
>    that manufacturer support is somewhat lacking at this point.  Is this 
>    likely to change in the future?  Do different manufacturers issue 
>    patches for their games to make them compatible with the GUS?  I also 
>    gather that the card will emulate the SB.  Does this include speech?
>
>4.  Given the current market, what is the best choice for a sound board 
>    today?
>
>Again, if all this has been covered in a FAQ or elsewhere, I apologize and 
>just delete this post.  Any input would be greatly appreciated.  Thanks in 
>advance.
>
>Robert Barker
>barkerb@slab.unt.edu
>
>