| |
Bamu®
Account closed
Registered: May 2005
Posts: 1332 |
Jch-Editor Improvements?
Which Jch-Editor version has THE BEST 3th-party improvements? (only the editor not the player)
I have seen that different groups/composers released improved versions, but unfortunately I don't know what they improved... any idea?
---
Btw.
IMHO the way of entering instruments/notes into the blocks is quite boring.
Instead, why not use real tracker behaviour. (instrument-number is created automatically if the user writes a note down.) |
|
| |
DRAX
Registered: Oct 2004
Posts: 225 |
Well, maybe you're right in some ways. But if you have to change instrument it's easier just to write it instead of having to find the exact instrument in a list.
Maybe it's a matter of preference. |
| |
Dane
Registered: May 2002
Posts: 423 |
In fact there is a point to why instrument is not auto-set when you enter a new note. Setting an instrument with Ixx resets the ADSR you might have modified with supercommands.
As for the question about which editor version rocks the most I have no idea. I use the original one by JCH simply because I've never had enough energy to do any fixes to anything but the player.
And of course, the best fix is the one you do yourself where you simply remove stuff you never use and add stuff you always wanted. Like a tune playing in a Koala-editor. Simply irresistible |
| |
Twoflower
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 434 |
In the case you decide to use a tune in a koala-editor, the tune of choice will ofcourse be something by Deek. |
| |
_V_
Account closed
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 124 |
Weird thing about JCH is that once you get used to the editor, you wouldn't want it any other way. Its simplicity in functionality compared to modern trackers and machines is apparent, but I feel that that's its strength - the SID doesn't need all that fancy stuff. Just look at Aleksi Eeben's digi-editor - it pales in comparison to something like FT2 on PC, but actually the functionality coded in there is all you'll ever need (unless someone can code some realtime effects on those samples). Only improvements I'd want is a better player/instrument routine with more goodies in the supertable and more filter control (v21 is doing a great job there).
Another interesting player is the one with StereoSID support by Samar (not sure if you can 'upload' v20 or v21 into it). Definitely something to fiddle on. |
| |
Bamu®
Account closed
Registered: May 2005
Posts: 1332 |
IMHO the Super-Table is quite confusing. Everything is controlled by the same S-command. So it's quite difficult to detect if there is used a slide, vibrato or something else. :(
btw. Is there a way for no pulse-restart, no filter restart? |
| |
Dane
Registered: May 2002
Posts: 423 |
You will only find no-pulse or no-filter restart in modified players.
However, there is a cheap trick you can use by making an identical instrument with pulse- or filter-pointer straight into the 'loop' instead of the place where you init for the illusion of no restart. |
| |
Laxity
Registered: Aug 2005
Posts: 459 |
Except for np21, which does have that particular feature, but ofcourse it's not one of the "original" JCH players.
The super commands aren't the most elegant solution for effect control as there are only 64 of'em available, which is not very much once the super commands table is used for more stuff than just slides and vibratos. And as you point out, Nata, it's a bit of a hastle to keep track of which super command is what effect. It gets better over time, but it's not nearly as convinient as the per-tick-in-track-command value of mod trackers (and Goat too I guess!.. but that's not a c64 editor anyway, so comparing is not really fair!) |
| |
cadaver
Registered: Feb 2002
Posts: 1160 |
If I understand right, each supercommand takes only 1 byte in the pattern to invoke, so that's definitely more efficient than in tracker-like systems (1 byte for command and another for parameter) if you need the same command multiple times, as is likely |
| |
Bamu®
Account closed
Registered: May 2005
Posts: 1332 |
but, wouldn't it be more comfortable to use f.ex for slides a - S -, for vibrato a - V - .....? |
| |
Steppe
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 1510 |
I think it's not always about making it comfortable. "One command for all needs" does have its merits, especially from a coders point of view. :-) |
... 23 posts hidden. Click here to view all posts....
|
| Previous - 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 - Next |
