| |
Karmic
Registered: Apr 2015
Posts: 66 |
What do you look for in a music-routine?
Not sure if this should go in C64 Composing subforum.
So, I'm working on a player-routine for a new music editor I'll make. What I ask you (coders & musicians) is, what would you like changed or added to it?
Currently I've got:
- Standard wave/arp/pulse/filtertable functions.
- Frequency-slides and vibrato that can be enabled in pattern as well as in arp-table. Also toneportamentos and tied notes in pattern.
- There's no limit to the number of patterns. The only thing limiting you is C64's memory :) Also about 85 max subtunes possible.
- Multiple effects are possible on one pattern-line.
- Transposing patterns, to save memory.
- Coders, the player used $16 max rasterlines in my testing. Of course if the musician uses a whole ton of effects on one pattern-line it will increase...
Thanks,
-karmic |
|
... 22 posts hidden. Click here to view all posts....
|
| |
Mixer
Registered: Apr 2008
Posts: 452 |
Create LFO and other signal generators and have them modulate frq, pwm, cutoff, resonance and volume. Then have tables or pattern data for controlling wveform, amplitude and frequency of the generators. |
| |
GH
Registered: Sep 2014
Posts: 77 |
Thank you for using the Karmic music Editor.
Would you like to use:
<Viruose> <GT> <DMC> or <JCH> Filter/Pulse WF/WV tables today?
:D |
| |
Hein
Registered: Apr 2004
Posts: 954 |
Quote: Create LFO and other signal generators and have them modulate frq, pwm, cutoff, resonance and volume. Then have tables or pattern data for controlling wveform, amplitude and frequency of the generators.
I've played with this idea as well, to have generic LFO generators for all. But the on-the-fly conversion to 16, 12, 11, 8 or 4 (high/low) bits would make the player slow, I think. But if rastertime is not an issue, it's very user-friendly and flexible, it can be used for BPM as well or for selecting waveforms depending on amplitude thresholds. |
| |
Isildur
Registered: Sep 2006
Posts: 275 |
Automatic filter freq/resonance slide up/down (sin/square/saw etc.) would be nice. Also clear non overloaded UI.
Use 100% rasterlines if needed :D |
| |
Frantic
Registered: Mar 2003
Posts: 1648 |
Quote: I've played with this idea as well, to have generic LFO generators for all. But the on-the-fly conversion to 16, 12, 11, 8 or 4 (high/low) bits would make the player slow, I think. But if rastertime is not an issue, it's very user-friendly and flexible, it can be used for BPM as well or for selecting waveforms depending on amplitude thresholds.
LFO for BPM? |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11386 |
i tried that generic LFO thing in a player years ago...... not well suited for a generic player ppl should use in demo/game imho :) |
| |
Scarzix
Registered: Aug 2010
Posts: 143 |
I use CheeseCutter, but I am sad to see how much CPU time the current player utilizes - when thinking of high CPU demo parts.
I also know that Abaddon is working on an optimized player, so it will change in the future of course.
So for me, whats a great music player:
Something that has multiple "versions/functionality" which in return gives me either awesome functionality OR low CPU usage OR low memory usage.
I wouldn't mind if the exporter/cruncher whatever handled the actual feature selection, like assembling the best possible output based on my tune - or if I could set some switches in my tune file that "enabled/disabled" certain parts of the players functionality aka reaching the above purpose.
Another purpose of a great music player would be to be able to have a low memory impact and still allow for SFX routine - or at least have a "functionality" where its able to pick up the sound in a channel after the SFX releases the channel.
So some sort of "extra API" where I can dynamically "allocate" a channel/voice for myself - handling it using my own SFX routine and once I am done, just de-allocate the channel or re-enable it for the player by setting a bit or something.
....
The breaking point though would also be, the editor itself.
I actually prefer composing on crossplatform editors as I can much faster save and backup my tunes + the editor is not confined in a 320x200 resolution + bordersprites.
I know that hardcore composers needs the "metal" to really push the SID to its maximum, but I still find the ease of working on more modern platforms as source to be much efficient and that enables me to be able to deliver more.
Lastly, support for dual SID composing.. 6 channels...
The key here would be "modularity" of the player. Either let me load the player version I need (and its functionality) - as we did with JCH editor back then.
or let me somehow enable/disable functionality for a tune and the only export the parts in use...
CheeseCutter actually assembles the player based on which effects you used in your tune when you export it for SID. |
| |
Hein
Registered: Apr 2004
Posts: 954 |
Quote: LFO for BPM?
Well, maybe it's not strictly an LFO anymore, dunno. But it could add a bit of swing to the music. :) |
| |
Digger
Registered: Mar 2005
Posts: 437 |
Hi Karmic, finally my teenage dreams are going to materialise ;-D
My 2 questions:
1. Are you planning the editor for the hardware (C64) or perhaps web or native Win/OSX?
2. If it's not for C64, I'd love to finally see an editor with parameter graphical automation, piano roll (why not), track grouping etc.
Have you seen Renoise? It's like FT2 but on steroids.
https://www.renoise.com/products/renoise
 |
| |
Isildur
Registered: Sep 2006
Posts: 275 |
@Scarzix, so SidWizard is best for you (but it's not crossplatform). Personally I can't use SidWizard because it's overloaded UI. |
| Previous - 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 - Next |
