| | Hermit
Registered: May 2008
Posts: 208 |
Ideas for a NEW TRACKER
Hi, Guyz
I have the same problem as others have nowadays in this fast industrial world: Not too much of FreeTime...
I only would like to compose SID music, leave the programming & gfx.
Only one problem is still in my way: Need for a reliable, full featured music editor.
There are a lot of great tools, I think the best are: XSID, SDI, JCH, SID-Factory, DMC5, Goattracker, (BullSID coming?)
I made a lot of comparisons among them, and Goattracker get the most point in regards of functionality (but not in all).
I like the tracker, but don't like emulated sound. Through
PC64 cable or HardSID you can use real SID, but just under the buggy Windows. I don't know about Linux drivers for these. And don't want hangs/losses anymore while composing.
(BTW I had issue with GT2 in Linux, I couldn't save, maybe the Linux wasn't configured well or the GT2 package was compiled wrong...). A MAC is expensive for me, and I even can't say that MACOSx is as safe as C64..
There are some missing functions from the native C64 trackers, first of all, e.g. a simple function: saving an instrument, that you may made for an hour or so...
(DMC has this function if I know well.)
Other important things that are useful: keyjazz (hear note when typing), instrument-detune, MMC/IDE64 compatibility, multispeed, mute/solo tracks, definable HR-type & timer for all instruments....
Most of even the best trackers lacks one or more of these functions. Some have special keymappings to learn..
All in all, I decided to spend my freetime for writing a native C64 tracker that may have everything that a SID-composer needs.
Tha player routine is in half way, an now this is the point when you can come up with ideas your actual tracker is lacking.
Then in this forum we can discuss if it's possible and useful, and logical, etc...
E.g. let me to share my feature-ideas and the actual plans for the player and editor. These are not the usual features (as e.g. funktempo) but some special things:
PLAYER:
-------
-The player will handle the average maximums, 32 subtunes,
255 long orderlists, max.127 of 255 long patterns, 32 instruments.
-The patterns will basically contain only the notes, and
Instruments+FX-es+values only stored if they're there
(this way we have 4 columns per track in memory virtually,
the player can handle this format already.)
-Orderlists will contain data in similar way, so we have
a 2nd 'virtual' column for
transpose/repeat/jump/end and SUBTUNE-CHANGE commands
-I will implement 'Keyboard-track' command as I did in my
3SID tracker. Cutoff freq. can depend on note-pitch..
-Will try to logarythmize the Pulsewidth & Cutoff freq..
sweeps, making bass-filtering more detailed, and maybe
same table could be used for calculated vibrato/slide.
-There will be wavetable/pw/ctf programs/pointers also for
GATE-off, not only for note-on...
-Some compression could be achieved with signing long empty
places (zeros) with a number...
-Should we still use WF/PW/FI/HR tables, or own tables for
every instruments? (At least from editor view.)
EDITOR:
-INSTRUMENT SAVE function
-MMC64 & IDE64 compatibility (e.g. Sid Factory / SDI have)
-Waveform-displayer for instrument editor, filter/PW bars..
-Any ideas to make arpeggios easier? e.g. note based arps.
-Unused player code/pattern/instrument optimization (GT2)
-Possibility to save directly into SID format (as GT2 can)
-High resolution/interlaced characters or using borders to
have more columns and rows..
-Rewind-back/ loop-play function like in my 3SID tracker
-Memory usage displayer bar / counter / out of memo sign..
-Orderlist: long patterns' numbers displayed longer, so no skew when playing...
-Some help for ringmodulation (sign tracks, calculate f1+f2)
....
As you could see, these would be sophisticated features that could make SID-composing easier...and IMO, they're realizable, it's only question of time ...
Tell me bravely, if you have anything new to mention...
Hermit Software HungaryHermit Software Hungary |
|
... 63 posts hidden. Click here to view all posts....
|
| | Dane
Account closed
Registered: May 2002
Posts: 421 |
Release tracker first, start csdb thread after? |
| | Soren
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 547 |
Ice00: It's nice to be able to do more commands per tick.
Fortunately for me, my latest player has several commands that can do more than just one thing... apart from that I have an instrument subtable where you can do a lot of things aswell, either with delays inbetween or at the same time.
Still I have tried to keep everything as simple as possible, as to me it gets painfull to work with, if there's too much to remember and so.
Still one doesn't need a lot of features to do a nice tune, but "only" some skills :-) |
| | abaddon
Account closed
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 28 |
If I were to make a new editor, I'd take the GoatTracker route and make it run on PC. It's relatively simple to link reSID to a C64 player engine running on 6502 emulator. Take a peek inside the GT source to see how it's done. Making a complete editor in machine language is very time consuming. This way, one gets all the goodies and comfort of modern high level languages and the extra processing power that PC has. I got a crude self-made editor working like this. Nowhere near the GoatTracker level, and never will be, but the interface suits me better. |
| | SIDWAVE
Account closed
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 2238 |
First you should spend enough time, to exploit all possibilities in the editors you have now - learn to use them properly.
The whole process how to make things easier, or combine things, is a very long one. Ask Geir and Jeff :D they could have coded and relesed a new editor in 1 month, but it takes a lot longer, because getting the new ideas transformed into something sensible to use, just takes time, as there is lots of considerations.
Hermit: have you checked Asterion SID tracker ?
it has some macro tables, so you can make funny stuff. But it's very longhaired to master this editor..
|
| | Conrad
Registered: Nov 2006
Posts: 847 |
It's amazing how complicated players and editors have got... it's all good having an editor with EVERYTHING a general composer can wish for (as SDI does according to most of you), but if you're a coder too, nothing can beat your own creation, coz you are its master anyway. So quit arguing and start coding!... Actions talk more than words. |
| | SIDWAVE
Account closed
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 2238 |
No need to invent the wheel 20 times.. |
| | Soren
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 547 |
Jan: well, sometimes I wish I had more sparetime, as I prefer doing longer coding sessions... it's much easier to work that way for me. :-) Anyways, I got a good deal done in my summer holiday, so I just need to find some time again... Been boozing+partying a bit too much lately.
I always found it nice to code one's own music tools and I guess many more feel the same way. So probably the wheel has been reinvented quite a few times. :-) |
| | Hermit
Registered: May 2008
Posts: 208 |
I opened this thread, because I would like to do it as an "open project"...
Of course, I started doing my new player first for my demanding wishes, but I also got a lot of ideas from people at this thread... and I can start doing it by knowing what musicians generally need...
I also read through the help of all best tools, and collected every function..and now I'm around continuing the player with more knowledge..
Still waiting for wishes, and will try to implement...if it's logical and won't use extreme rastertime..
Hermit Software Hungary |
| | Hermit
Registered: May 2008
Posts: 208 |
E.g what do you think about GT2's capability to have tempo settings for each tracks individually..is it useful? do composers use this function?
And would the speedtable be more steps, or is Funktempo (2 tempos swinging) enough usually? BTW, it's not hard to implement more tempo steps ..
Hermit Software Hungary |
| | cadaver
Registered: Feb 2002
Posts: 1160 |
I'd actually prefer explicitly specified note durations :) but then I guess it's not a tracker anymore.
If the player can manage "tempo 1" ie. each pattern tick can be even only 1 frame long, then need for individual channel tempo can be circumvented, and you could go with a global speedtable. Still, speedtable for each channel would offer most flexibility. Think for example a triplet lead passage while rest of channels plays a 8/8 beat.
In any case, would not recommend limiting to 2-step tempo only.
But still, the most motivating system is always the one which has exactly the features *you* need, so I don't know how useful it's really to ask for suggestions here. A player only is easy to code, but one definitely needs motivation for a whole editor :)
|
| Previous - 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 - Next | |
