quote:Original post by Protricity
fmod kinda sucks... no wonder is soo cheap...
anyway, I''ve never played UT, but I''ve played plenty of others and none used mods or ITs...
anyone know another way to play these files?

Try BASS - http://www.un4seen.com/

Ok, first of, anything that an MIDI sequencer can do with soundfonts, trackers can do
simply because trackers USE sound fonts
and BTW, MIDI SUCKS!

Second, I dont want to be limited to just instruments
and furthermore if an instrument in a certain soundfont doesnt sound the way I want it to sound, theres nothing I can do except change to a new soundfont and then all my OTHER instruments sound different.
So, I hope we established that MIDI sucks.

anyway, what Im looking for is something like the trackers (modplugtracker and so on) which has many effects and filters (echo, res, cut, phaser) and isnt limited in anyway.
I just finnished learning and trying out FruityLoops and I must say that it is VERY VERY VEERRRRYYYY (sorry, Im stressing a point) Limited!!
if I wanted to make a song that is even remotely complex, it would need 100s of those damn loop pattern things... (too much work)

well, now I''ll check out http://www.un4seen.com/ regarding the previous post to this one. hopefully it will be better.

there must be atleast ONE good one out there no?

and if anyone wants to email me about helping me out with music or trackign programs or even to see what wonderous work I did with my modplug tracker, Id appreciate it.

This is in retort to JAXX.

First off, how did we trail off from the gaming aspects of mods?
:p
Second, this forum is supposed to be viewing GAME music from a GAMING standpoint.
Third, its really not fair to talk down to the rest of us like some kinda sound god at all, and definately not when your arguments are really not that good, Im sorry but their not,
So, though it drains me to go back and forth like this...

1. Layering is not a serious advantage for Midi over Trackers. In other words, you cant do anything with layering that you concievably wouldnt be able to do without.(and you dont have to ''make things clear for me'' thats rude.

2. I didnt know that standard soundfonts could play ANY SOUND IN THE WORLD, thats a rather serious claim isnt it? Trackers on the other hand...
I think u need to clearify your #2,JAXX

3. Yes, Claymore is correct about this one. modifying a soundfont file and the reloading it into the memory can take minutes even 10s of minutes on some computers. and u have to do that for EACH instrument u want to change. Trackers on the other hand can do it instantly. INSTANTLY, even on Pentium 1s! and ofcourse theres the problem of lack of sterio instrument compatability with Midis and lack of vst support.
and I''ll add a few to that, rdy?

a. Midis cant bend pitch to the same degree of trackers (midi +- one note pitch, trackers infinite)

b. Midis cant pan as well as Trackers.

c. Midis support about 1/3 as many instrument effects as Impulse Tracker made standard.

d. Midis have built in instrument settings that are very hard to modify while tracker instruments (.xi) are very VERY flexible, I mean VERY!! you can change anything about an instrument. Pan, cutoff, everything.

4. You stated the fact that you can add 1000s of effects to your tracks if you rip them individually and then mix them all together. However, you made it sound like this was an advantage of MIDI over tracker. I hope thats not what you meant to say, because MIDI and Trackers can both be riped to wave just like anything.
HOWEVER, I dont WANT to have to rip each track to a wave just to see how it will sound. I want it to calculate effects on the fly while Im making my song. AND, this is something that trackers have a definate advantage with. VST! Its not supposed to be as good as something like Cool Edit Pro or Sound Forge, its entire purpose is to run on the fly so u can hear it sound right away as ur making ur song. Much smarter. oh, MIDI dont support VST. not that I know of....


5. AND NOW, HERES THE KICKER, rdy fo this yo?

We are in a video game forum here, we are supposed to be relating this to video games hopefully regarding my original post. SO,
Which is easier?

Method #1
Including a sizable soundfont with my game that would somehow have to be modified in some advanced and creative way so that all my songs sound and act in exactly the same way as they were originally intended.
Also were ignoring the fact that not all cards out there are like the SBlive and they cant all load soundfonts. And yes, I know there are emulators and soundfont players that would load ur soundfont file and play it just fine. Downside to that would be that it would take up about 4 to 6 as much proccesor speed as MODs would in the BEST case scenario AND ofcourse, you have 10 megs gone from ur ram cause of that damn sound font.

Method #2
Include a Mod,Xm, or preferably an IT for each song each could be anywhere from 50k to 1 meg (the one megs ofcourse being higher quality)
Pros:
ITs are loopable (hence the game references)
ITs take up very little proccessing speed.
ITs can be customized from the user''s side on any machine to sound better or run faster (polyphony and such)

ITs, UNLIKE MIDI, can use soundeffects like ambient explosions and environmental audio (rain, wind) in thier songs (alot of games do that)

WHOA! I hope I made a good arguement.
Now, if you want to argue my other point about witch is better to use (MIDI or trackers) to make raw audio files (mp3s oggs) then Id have to say i can retort anything u have to say about MIDI equally as well on that topic as I have here.

But again we must stick to the forum topic which is NOT concerned with this.

Thank you for listening to all this and Id very much apprecieat if all future posters could maintain their composure and not be rude. Refrain from using phrases like ''get ur facts first'' or ''your arguement makes no sence''
I HATE comments like that.

Anyway, Im drained.
and thx everyone for your help and Ideas
-Protricity

quote:Midis cant bend pitch to the same degree of trackers (midi +- one note pitch, trackers infinite)

Infinite pitch bend; that must really hurt the ears of the neighbourhood dogs. And having to have an infinite sample rate to accomodate this is a real killer. Seriously though, MIDI pitch bend can be set to any amount. By default, this is the +- one tone that most GM Midi sets ship with, but this can be set to a couple of octaves if required. Unfortunately, this is per channel, not per note. A limitation, but no different from a tracked format.

quote:Midis cant pan as well as Trackers.

Yes they can.

quote:Midis support about 1/3 as many instrument effects as Impulse Tracker made standard.

The GM set that most people equate to mean MIDI is, on the whole, horrendous. Strangely enough, I have never had any use for a helicopter or gunshot sfx in any composition. However, people tend not to use the default GM samples, they use MIDI to control external synths, samplers, mixing desk or even smoke and light machines.

quote:Including a sizable soundfont with my game that would somehow have to be modified in some advanced and creative way so that all my songs sound and act in exactly the same way as they were originally intended.

Distributing MIDI's for game is rare nowadays; they are nearly always PCMed and compressed.

quote:I didnt know that standard soundfonts could play ANY SOUND IN THE WORLD, thats a rather serious claim isnt it? Trackers on the other hand...

Trackers can indeed play any sound in the world; as can any sampler.

quote:I know there are emulators and soundfont players that would load ur soundfont file and play it just fineDownside to that would be that it would take up about 4 to 6 as much proccesor speed as MODs would in the BEST case scenario

Not sure of this, but probably true to an extent. I haven't any figures to back this up, so could be quite wrong, but how much CPU processing is used to play a MOD in real-time? For 16 channels at 44.1Khz, coupled with the filters and envelopes, mixing and panning, I'm guessing quite a bit. Certainly more than playing an mp3 or ogg.

quote:ITs are loopable (hence the game references)
ITs take up very little proccessing speed.
ITs can be customized from the user's side on any machine to sound better or run faster (polyphony and such)

Looping is very important; it is also conceivable to be able to jump around a MOD to provide interactive music a la all those Lucasarts games. But there is no reason why you can't jump around either a MIDI file or any other file format, other than consideration for missing note off messages. I'm unconvinced about the processing point, but should point out that I haven't any figures to back it up, and could be spectacularily wrong. The customisation point is a very good one; although it could be applied to midi files too, and a sample-rate reduction could also be used with a PCM audio file.

Looks like the old MOD vs MIDI argument will never die, although it is a pointless argument because they are essentially two different formats for two different purposes. Many of the arguments against MIDI are moot when you consider DLS, which combines the sampling aspects of a tracked format with the control of MIDIs. In my opinion, MIDI is the better format, hands down. I have never had a great deal of experience with MOD's, and everytime I try to I hit the limitations and realise that I can do things a lot better with my MIDI gear. Professionals using MOD's for games are in the minority, but if you are comfortable with them don't change just because everyone else says 'MIDI's can do ... '. It's just a format, the composition will be the same whatever you use.

Edited by - Colin Barry on October 31, 2001 4:38:44 AM

Sorry Claymore, but it appears that you dont understand some of my points.
MIDIs canNOT use VST. only certain programs that happen to use MIDI can. So that is not an advantage. VST is not part of the MIDI standard whereas VSTs can be used in ModPlayers. I have yet to see an MIDI player that supports VSTs. (Im not talking about a whole music studio program, Im talking something simple like ModPlug)

And I very much dissagree about Layering. Having significant experience with several MIDI studio programs and several MOD programs, I can guarantee that a MOD can produce the same sound on several tracks as an MIDI can on one track with Layering. HOWEVER, using several tracks, you get more flexability. Its easier to set not velocity/panning, AND you can do pitchbends on isolated notes rather than having the whole damn Layered Channel pitch bend.

And, i also very much dissagree about the flexibility of Soundfont instruments as opposed to IXs. IXs can be changed in many more ways than SoundFont Instruments can. Period.

C. Berry, I didnt understand most of your retorts. But I dont like it when someone says something like:

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Midis cant pan as well as Trackers.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yes they can.

Why say that? You didnt back it up and you cant. MIDI has one panning effect and MODs have 3.

I didnt mean to make a point of it, but theres no need to retort something that unimportant when ur gonna be wrong anyway.

and this:

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I didnt know that standard soundfonts could play ANY SOUND IN THE WORLD, thats a rather serious claim isnt it? Trackers on the other hand...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Trackers can indeed play any sound in the world; as can any sampler.

was that supposed to be a retort also? ur just repeating my point.

Your arguments were very unclear, Im not sure what you were trying to say.


As of yet, I still havent heard of any significant advantage of MIDI over MODS for games.

Also, Im not sure why were still on the MIDI vs MOD subject.

Sorry for being so blunt, but I think some people on this forum are exagerating and making up facts and I dont see why. Were not here to prove anything

Opps, I said something wrong,
Mods can Play VST only in modplug, not any Mod player.