The GUS Daily Digest Sunday, 17 December 1995 Volume 26 : Number 010 Today's Topics: 2 soundcards Pro Patches Lite - a discussion Standard Info: - Meta-info about the GUS can be found at the end of the Digest. - Before you ask a question, please READ THE FAQ. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: kyhsin@singnet.com.sg Date: Sat, 16 Dec 1995 23:16:52 +0800 Subject: 2 soundcards Hello. I saw from some mails that some GUS users has two soundcards installed on their computers and I wonder how would they connect the audio connector of the CDROM drive. Can one drive be connected to two soundcards? Kenneth ------------------------------ From: Gerd Reichinger Date: Sat, 16 Dec 1995 18:41:57 +0100 Subject: Pro Patches Lite - a discussion I hope this discussion about the quality of Pro Patches Lite does interest other readers of the Digest, too - if not we'll discuss it per personal email. >>First of all I want to say that Eero R{s{nen did a great job compiling >>this new patch set. It is well-balanced and it seems to be a big improvement >>when playing MIDI files from commercial games software. > >Could you just decide your opinion about Pro Patches Lite. I don't like >this kind of manipulation. First you're saying "it seems to be a big >improvement" and later "I'm a little disappointed". Hm, I did not think that I'd have to explain it to you, Eero. The GUS patch set is somehow very "different" from other wavetable boards. Most MIDI files will sound more or less the same on the majority of wavetable soundcards, but they often sound very different on the GUS. Sometimes they'll sound better, sometimes they'll sound worse. With PPL, the GUS is getting closer to those "ordinary" wavetable boards. This means an improvement for games software because most games programmers compose (or try out) the music on a standard Roland soundcard. >HAH !! It's the GUS we are 'talking' about here !!! The oldest cheap >wavetable card there is , with NO effects and relatively small memory. >If you mean by "ordinary wavetable card" card like "Ensoniq soundscape", >I am pretty flattered. Actually, I meant some of the older SB wavetable upgrades like Waveblaster, Wave Power etc. As you may know these boards are (were) in the price range of the GUS, but their sound quality was mediocre at best. >>However, I cannot agree with the enthusiastic opinions posted by various >>people in this digest. > >I am getting them by Email also...and there are LOTS OF of them !! >What can you say about that ? Everybody's wrong ?!! That's okay for me - please remember that I also see something positive in PPL. Isn't it allowed to critisize PPL without getting flamed? >>Not much is left of the often-mentioned brilliant sound quality. > >If GUS' sound quality is so brilliant, then, why GUS is getting the worst >results when comparing the sound of WaveTable sound card ?? >Sure, things were a bit different one or two years back. It's because the patches are not good enough. I fully agree with you that the patch set should be improved, but I'd like Gravis or Eye&I Prod. or whoever professionally makes MIDI patches to do it. >When I bought GUS, I was pretty disappointed to the sound quality, because >I had just heard Ensoniq SoundScape. That's why I made Pro Patches Lite. >I bought GUS, only, because it was cheaper (money didn't come from my rear >end :) )...and because of the support for demos and other software. Yes, sure - I guess that's why we all bought a GUS. I don't know that Ensoniq soundcard, but I once listened to a Roland SC-55 (oomph!), and I know how some of the SB wavetable upgrades sound. >>the new patches are well chosen many of them sound a bit muffled and dull. > >That only your personal opinion...not a 'complete truth'. Exactly, that's my personal opinion. I never said that it's "the truth". >>I guess the problem is that Eero does neither have the equipment nor the >>skill to produce high-quality patches like the professionals (Roland, >>Terratec etc.). This is not meant as an offence but as an explanation. > >Bet I don't have the equipment. Skill ? I know something... > >I just have 1 meg GUS, Ess688 based 16-bit cheap SB-clone and couple of Wav >editors. Just about anybody could do what I did and imagine how much better >the sound of GUS would be, if there were more people developing sounds than >people who are just critisizing the productions :(. What kind of argument is this? Only because I don't develop patches myself I don't have the right to criticize your productions?? >You must remember that I am not getting any money (not a dime) from this and >that's why you cannot expect the results to be perfect...nor even good. >You can think PPLT as "a free present". If you like it, use it and >enjoy...if you don't like it, don't use it and shut up ! I can understand that you're angry and disappointed because I criticize your work. But there's no need to be offensive. >Well, you could always ask Roland or Terratec to do a patch set for GUS. >Hope it won't cost you anything :) !! I think we should all ask for (demand?) a better patch set from Gravis. And that really shouldn't cost us anything. I'm anxious to hear the patch set of the PnP GUS. Let's hope that one's better. >In contrary, there are thousand of midi files which are not made specially >made for GUS, which...almost all...sound a lot better with PPLT. I strongly disagree. "Sounding better" for me also means that you get crystal clear sound - that was always the best feature of the GUS. Once again, Eero: I appreciate your hard work to make the GUS sound better. It's just that I don't want the readers of this digest to believe that PPL can be recommended unreservedly. I advise all readers to try out PPL, just don't expect too much. Greetings, Gerd. - -- no .sig - this posting is long enough :) ------------------------------ End of The GUS Daily Digest V26 #10 *********************************** To post to tomorrow's digest: To (un)subscribe or get help: To contact a human (last resort): FTP Sites Archive Directories --------- ------------------- Main N.American Site: ftp.orst.edu pub/packages/gravis wuarchive.wustl.edu systems/ibmpc/ultrasound Main Asian Site: nctuccca.edu.tw PC/ultrasound Main European Site: src.doc.ic.ac.uk packages/ultrasound ftp.pwr.wroc.pl pub/ultrasound Main Australian Site: ftp.mpx.com.au /ultrasound/general /ultrasound/submit South African Site: ftp.sun.ac.za /pub/packages/ultrasound Submissions: archive.epas.utoronto.ca pub/pc/ultrasound/submit Newly Validated Files: archive.epas.utoronto.ca pub/pc/ultrasound Mirrors: garbo.uwasa.fi mirror/ultrasound ftp.st.nepean.uws.edu.au pc/ultrasound ftp.luth.se pub/msdos/ultrasound Gopher Sites Menu directory ------------ -------------- Main Site: src.doc.ic.ac.uk packages/ultrasound WWW Pages --------- Main Site: http://www.xmission.com/~grue/gus.html Main European Site: http://src.doc.ic.ac.uk/packages/ultrasound/ Main Australian Site: http://ftp.mpx.com.au/archive/ultrasound/general/ http://ftp.mpx.com.au/archive/ultrasound/submit/ http://ftp.mpx.com.au/gravis.html Mirrors: http://www.st.nepean.uws.edu.au/pub/pc/ultrasound/ GUS Digest Archives: http://gpu.srv.ualberta.ca/~itam/digest.html http://www.student.adelaide.edu.au/~godfathr/gus/gus.html MailServer For Archive Access: Email to Hints: - Get the FAQ from the FTP sites or the request server. - Mail to for info about other GUS related mailing lists (programmers, musicians, etc.).