Hey Rushjet1, that hardware recording is interesting; I've been comparing it to the output from Famitracker, which seems impressively close, actually.
Other than the inherent noise (and a quiet ringing tone around 15700Hz), your hardware version has a sharp cutoff at about 18500Hz, whereas Famitracker begins a much more gradual falloff beginning around 12000Hz.
I can hear a little bit of extra brightness in the squares and when the noise frequency is high. It's not far off from indistinguishable, which... is pretty cool!
Hey Rushjet1, that hardware recording is interesting; I've been comparing it to the output from Famitracker, which seems impressively close, actually.
Other than the inherent noise (and a quiet ringing tone around 15700Hz), your hardware version has a sharp cutoff at about 18500Hz, whereas Famitracker begins a much more gradual falloff beginning around 12000Hz.
I can hear a little bit of extra brightness in the squares and when the noise frequency is high. It's not far off from indistinguishable, which... is pretty cool!
Neat. I put a potentiometer in my NES for the expansions so I could change their volume / match it (thanks to b00daw for suggesting it). I matched it to virtuansf's output levels.
Wow Javel...I'm just getting around to hearing your amazing work.
Truthfully, does cerebral music making just come naturally to you, or do you spend hours/days/weeks chiseling away until a tune is done?
My ADD won't let me sit and focus for that long!
Also, I come from a background of playing jazz on instruments, and you get kinda used to that immediacy. Composing in trackers and stuff, while rewarding, is frustrating to me!
I'd love to know more about your process...your attention to detail...minute detail...is stunning.
What's with the constant Fxx commands in otherwise "straight" sounding tunes? Is it just to "swing" the subdivisions enough to break from the mechanical quantization?
What's with the constant Fxx commands in otherwise "straight" sounding tunes? Is it just to "swing" the subdivisions enough to break from the mechanical quantization?
<MOOT>
It's a technique known as rational tempo, where you use a constant switching between two different speeds to obtain a stable tempo that you need. When you mess with the tempo setting in Famitracker (i.e. something other than 150), Famitracker creates the new tempo by shortening some rows' frames and lengthening others, which can cause slight timing glitches and skewed sound. It's a little thing, but it makes a big difference.
So...you're saying that by using "rational tempo", I can get expressed tempos other than the ones determined by the speed settings at 150bpm (i.e. 90, 100, 112, 128, 150, 180, etc)?
Or does this Fxx technique compensate for the frame "skipping" introduced by tempos other than 150bpm?
The only thing I'd seen it used for prior to this is just to create "swung" 16th notes.
Also, Moot, when you keep your tempo always set to 150 and only use speed/F0x to control the real tempo, your speed number is actually the number of 60hz frames per row.
Knowing exactly how many frames each row takes is great for being able to line up instrument macros, or figure out how to make triplets, etc. If you use the tempo setting instead, there's not really a good way to know and the frames per row is inconsistent.
Right right. I never deviate from 150bpm as the tempo, I just do it with speed or Fxx commands. So that's actually telling how many frames per row...interesting. I don't remember seeing that in the documentation...it should be!
Thanks rainwarrior!
.png){kind=avatar}
