Deprecated: mysql_connect(): The mysql extension is deprecated and will be removed in the future: use mysqli or PDO instead in /storage/content/49/145849/famitracker.com/public_html/forum/classes/dbHandler.php on line 29
FamiTracker
During my as yet brief sojourn into the world of chip music it has been proposed to me a few times the idea that I am somehow "cheating" when I make my music. If I use vsts in a modern-style music program, for example, my work is "hardly authentic". If I use expansion chips in famitracker, I'm cheating because famitracker is "not supposed to have" the expansion chips. I find this all a very curious viewpoint, and was wondering what other peoples' standpoints were.
If you're the sort of person who just wants to use the original 5 channels, and see what you can make from them, then that's great, I really get what you're doing and the satisfaction you achieve from it. Respect to you for sure. If you are on top of that, someone who tries to garner some feelings of superiority from the experience, then you lose my respect a little and gain a little tut under the breath and a shake of the head from me.
Let's examine the idea of "cheating".
So, perhaps you want to make a tune in the same way that the original NES programmers did. OK, cool. Did the original NES programmers sit around using emulation software on a laptop in a café? No? Oh, well careful then, you might be considered cheating. Did they have all the resources of the modern internet and a community forum such as this one to learn their trade? No? Careful not to cheat... Did they have a regularly updated wiki to refer to?
I really don't understand the viewpoint that one person is cheating and another isn't. I mean, the whole concept of recorded music is to emulate live music - you tell a machine to reproduce the sounds of a band, so you can "cheat" and have them in your house or headphones. Electronic music takes that one step further, we "cheat" the parts of drums, bass, lead etc.
In fact life is cheating. I mean if you look at the laws of physics, parts of matter are supposed to attract to each other with a strength based on mass. Growing arms and legs, getting up and walking away is a clear breach of those laws.
At the end of the day we're all finding ways of creating sounds we like for our own and others' enjoyment. We're all cheating, or none of us are cheating, depending on how you want to look at it. If you want to deride my music and call it Fakebit or whatever no skin off my nose, you just failed to enjoy something someone put a bit of love and effort into in the hope that others would enjoy it and take something away. You didn't harm me, you didn't make yourself bigger, you just let yourself down, that's all. At the end of the day plenty of people enjoy the music of those of us who happily "cheat".
[quote=Naff_Natty]
In fact life is cheating. I mean if you look at the laws of physics, parts of matter are supposed to attract to each other with a strength based on mass. Growing arms and legs, getting up and walking away is a clear breach of those laws.
[/quote]
That is quite the non sequitur... made my head spin a bit. But I agree, good music (as well as bad) can be found everywhere no matter what the methodology used in writing it. (I mean, one of my favorite [url=http://savestates.bandcamp.com/album/mindhouse]NES style albums in fact is written exclusively with VSTs and samples. I'd rather listen to that than badly written NES music, no matter how authentic it may be.)
[quote=Naff_Natty]If I use expansion chips in famitracker, I'm cheating because famitracker is "not supposed to have" the expansion chips.[/quote]
[quote=[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memory_Management_Controller]MMC entry on Wikipedia]As only first-party hardware was allowed in North America and Europe, these third party chips were supposed to be used only in Japan.[/quote]
[quote=About Me in FamiTracker]A [b][i]Famicom[/i][/b]/NES music tracker[/quote]
Going further, then again, involves the differences between NES specs and NSF specs. Welcome!
[quote=fluidvolt] That is quite the non sequitur... made my head spin a bit.[/quote]
My point with that Fluid, aside from my own amusement, was that you you can keep cutting deeper and making different grades of "cheating" if that's what you're out to do. TBH, I could have happily done all the grades between electronic music and life itself, but I think it would have become irritating to the casual reader. I just cut to the chase. I think my overall point is that it's good for people to set their own goalposts, but they should leave others' goalposts well alone.
[quote=Naff_Natty]So, perhaps you want to make a tune in the same way that the original NES programmers did.[/quote]Nobody said that "no cheating" is done a track in the same way that it was done in the 80s, no cheating is obtain a song with the same instructions used back in the 80s.
In other words, a true chipmusic is a song that can be interpreted by the real soundchip or an emulator, a song that you can actually "see" the register writes to the soundchip.
The problem by using VST or another "fakebit tool" is that you can, easily, jump the border that separates what the chip can do and what not, and also, you cannot obtain a file that can be executed on the actual hardware or by an emulator.
Of course, someone that knows perfectly the limits of the soundchip, can use a VST instrument and never jump the border.
I consider a song done in that way a Chiptune, BUT it is a shame that the track never could be executed on the actual hardware because that tracks deserve it.
This is a thing I don't understand: so, you've defined very specifically what "counts" as a chiptune and what doesn't, but as pretty much none of us are going to attach our music to a game on a console cartridge, what's the point of being picky about the limitations? There's no point limiting yourself to something without good reason. Scratch that. I stand by what I said before, limit yourself as much as you want, but there's no point limiting someone else on the basis of passé limitations, just because they were the original.
[quote=Naff_Natty]This is a thing I don't understand: so, you've defined very specifically what "counts" as a chiptune and what doesn't, but as pretty much none of us are going to attach our music to a game on a console cartridge, what's the point of being picky about the limitations?[/quote]And why you said this?, are you behind me every time I done a song?, are you behind me when I am programming my NES stuff?, are you behind me while I am compiling roms for the 6802?. You're funny. xD
[quote=Naff_Natty]
I There's no point limiting yourself to something without good reason.[/quote]Make chiptunes is not a good reason?, done software that could be executed by the NES or GameBoy is not it?. What "is good" is a personal calibration, you should know who I am or know anybody to said that there are or not good reasons to done this.
There are A LOT of good reasons to be limited, for example, a lot of painters done art by using only black or white colors, I think that the limitation and the art go side by side closely.
[quote=Naff_Natty]I stand by what I said before, limit yourself as much as you want, but there's no point limiting someone else on the basis of passé limitations, just because they were the original.[/quote]I am not limiting anybody, I am just saying what I consider chiptune or not. If you want to make chiptune, the limitation is there, if you do not want to be limited, good, make good music, nobody will limit you, but you could not make a chiptune without the limitations of a soundchip. And that is a fact.
[quote=Delek]And why you said this?, are you behind me every time I done a song?, are you behind me when I am programming my NES stuff?, are you behind me while I am compiling roms for the 6802?. [/quote]
Wow! Calm down, I'm not behind you. It's just that for most of us, I believe (I could be wrong, because you're right, I'm not omnipresent), we're not programming onto chips, or for consoles. If you are, great! And good luck to you
I said there's no point limiting (whoever) for NO GOOD REASON. If making a chiptune is good reason, then there's no beef. I think you misunderstand me. I downloaded famitracker in the first place because I wanted the limitations, or to be more precise, I wanted to create a "more authentic" chip sound. If I can make my music better to my own ears, by stretching and adding in a way that perhaps wouldn't sit too happily with your 6802, then so what? My music's not going to be used for that. Give me a job programming NES tunes and I'll happily abide by your limitations.
You are telling me that my music isn't chip music though. Well, to me it is. What do I need to do, build an augmented NES with a more facilitating chip inside? It could easily be done. Would the existence of such a thing allow me to call my music chip music? If so, think about that. The existence of a machine somewhere that is irrelevant to my music could decide whether I was "genuine" or "fake"...
[quote=Naff_Natty]Wow! Calm down, I'm not behind you. It's just that for most of us, I believe, we're not programming onto chips, or for consoles.[/quote]This is the point.
A tracker like Famitracker is ACTUALLY programming the 2A03, you can export to .NES or .NSF that are, actually, programs for the NES/Famicom. This is a Famicom/NES Chiptune Tracker, and not a VST or "8bits samples pack for FL Studio". You are indirectly "programming" the soundchip, and that's the difference between fakebit and chipmusic. Your track IS REGISTER WRITES FOR THE SOUNDCHIP.
[quote=Naff_Natty]The existence of a machine somewhere that is irrelevant to my music could decide whether I was "genuine" or "fake"...[/quote]So, the existence of the machine and the soundchip inside it is irrelevant for your music, BUT you said that you are doing CHIP MUSIC, how much irrelevant is then?.
The relations of the term chipmusic and the "machine" are very strong, I think that you should run your tunes in the actual hardware or by an emulator in order to call it chiptune/chipmusic.
But that is my opinion, if you want to call your music chiptune/chipmusic even if it cannot be executed in any actual CHIP or in any actual emulator of the chip, fine, you are free to said that, there are a lot of people saying this. But I do not agree with that idea, I prefer the term "lo-fi digital music" for that type of songs.
Art has taken advantage of technology to reach newer heights from time immemorial (this includes the original NES/Famicom specs, which were built on a hundred+ years of previously seen technological advances), I don't see any reason why expansion chips should be regarded as "unethical." Personally I think it's cooler when the chiptunes run on the actual hardware just due to the higher levels of craftsmanship involved, and things like VSTs, hacks, etc. remove a lot of that, but if something sounds great then I'm generally okay with it. The main problem with things like e.g. GXSCC to me isn't that they can't run on actual hardware, the main problem is that they usually sound like bland dogshit. It's harder to achieve an aesthetically pleasing effect with a lower number of limitations, and easier to screw up, but at the same time you can achieve something even better than before (e.g. painters who just use black and white versus the Renaissance or Romantic painters who used a full palette of colors, or 20x20 indiependent games blown up 16x versus Metal Slug's pixel art, or even 2A03 classical versus VRC7 (don't kill me.))
[quote=Naff_Natty]In fact life is cheating. I mean if you look at the laws of physics, parts of matter are supposed to attract to each other with a strength based on mass. Growing arms and legs, getting up and walking away is a clear breach of those laws.[/quote]
I... that... what? If you look at the "laws" of physics you'll find that human beings with arms and legs are pretty well accounted for (they're built of those parts of matter that attract each other with a strength based on mass.)
_______________________
[url=http://steelassault.com][b][i]Steel Assault[/i] - NES styled 2D action game[/b]
Oh crap, I'm going to have to keep coming back to that thing I said about life, which was a light-hearted off-the-cuff remark. The point about it WAS something pretty much similar to what you're saying about technological evolution Srik - matter growing arms and legs is a way for it to circumnavigate and bend the laws! But no one should take that too literally, or ponder on it too much, because it's distracting from topic.
Delek, I get what Famitracker is, and that is why I like it. It sounds like the original NES tunes of my childhood, although I'm taking it and producing different melodies. I dislike the term "lo-fi digital music" but it absolutely fails to describe my music, which is based on the sounds of old consoles and arcades, all of which came originally from a chip. That's why I call my music "chip music" - because it has its roots and soul in those sounds, not because it will run on a chip. I also sometimes call my music reggae, even though there's not a guitar or a bass in it. Strangely more traditional reggae artists seem to like my music and recognise the same roots, rather than quibble that I'm not authentic, and tell me that my reggae isn't genuine.
At the end of the day if we create very similar sounds using different methods, we're still part of the same genre
Natty, this is a non-issue. If some loser calls your stuff "fakebit" on the internet, you can argue with them, but you'll be arguing with a loser on the internet. This is not a great use of your time.
If working with the limited means of a particular chip don't excite you, who cares? Do something else. Leave it to people it does excite.
And yes, there are a lot of people who like to run chiptunes on the intended hardware. That is one of the things that can be fun about chiptune.
Just don't take GXSCC midi crap, put it on youtube and call it NES music.
Haha, but I'm having such a great time rainwarrior! I like to tussle with muddy thinking. I especially like it when it throws a decent punch back - it me helps question myself and clear my own thinking. I'm learning loads here.
I'd love to run something on a NES, but to be fair, for me, getting a NES and working out how to run my tune on it doesn't sound worth it. Maybe when I've got my 8-bit sound system set up I can incorporate a NES, and put it on a podium to make sure everyone can see I'm playing it through one.
[quote=Naff_Natty]
Delek, I get what Famitracker is, and that is why I like it. It sounds like the original NES tunes of my childhood, although I'm taking it and producing different melodies. I dislike the term "lo-fi digital music" but it absolutely fails to describe my music, which is based on the sounds of old consoles and arcades, all of which came originally from a chip. That's why I call my music "chip music" - because it has its roots and soul in those sounds, not because it will run on a chip. I also sometimes call my music reggae, even though there's not a guitar or a bass in it. Strangely more traditional reggae artists seem to like my music and recognise the same roots, rather than quibble that I'm not authentic, and tell me that my reggae isn't genuine.
At the end of the day if we create very similar sounds using different methods, we're still part of the same genre [/quote]
Just because the sounds come from a chip does not make it chipmusic. You are making sampled music. The limitations of famitracker allow it to be run on the chip itself. Go buy a powerpak and see these tunes played on hardware for yourself.
The hardcore enthusiasts and those in the demoscene would adhere to the definition of chipmusic being instruction writes to a chip. I would assume they have the authority of the use of the word.
I don't consider the use of expansion chips to be cheating. Fine, I'm not making 2A03 chipmusic. But I am making VRC7 music that can be played on the LagrangePoint cartridge for famicom.
