Munt 0.1.3 released \ VOGONS

Munt 0.1.3 released

Topic actions

Post a reply

First post, by KingGuppy

Posted on 2005-07-04, 00:33

KingGuppy Offline

Rank Member

Rank: Member
Posts: 117
Joined: 2004-08-07, 21:50

I finally gave up and released 0.1.3 more or less as-is. Canadacow's delicious GUI is unfortunately disabled (it's not quite ready, and we're a bit worried about trademark issues and so on).

Get it here:
http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php? … lease_id=339585

The (greatly condensed) list of changes is as follows:

Added support for most of the extended capabilities of the CM-32L/LAPC-I (more rhythm timbres, more rhythm key mappings, more PCM samples).
The control ROM is now identified by searching for matching ID strings at various locations in the file. There are now a lot of safety checks to help ensure that a bad ROM will not crash the emulator.
Three control ROM versions are now identified and mapped out - an original MT-32 control ROM, an original CM-32L ROM, and the Blue Ridge modified MT-32 ROM.
Now supports the expression controller properly.
Sustain is now turned off correctly again.
"All Notes Off" no longer stops notes held by the sustain controller.
Implemented "Reset all controllers".
Stereo pan positions are no longer inverted.
Volume, pitch, filter and envelopes are now more accurately calculated. Overall, the sound emulation is much more accurate.
Waveforms are now slightly more accurate (in terms of pitch), necessitating a regeneration.
Handling of unusual sysex messages has been improved (fixes sysex messages from Java's MIDI classes on Windows).
Fixed a reverb bug during periods of silence.
Master tuning is now properly initialised to 0x4A (442Hz).

Last edited by KingGuppy on 2005-07-04, 01:53. Edited 1 time in total.

Reply 1 of 19, by HunterZ

Posted on 2005-07-04, 01:15

HunterZ Offline

Rank l33t++

Rank: l33t++
Posts: 6171
Joined: 2003-01-31, 19:04
Location: Seattle

Thanks!

Is all of this in the current CVS, which hasn't changed since 3/19/05?

Reply 2 of 19, by KingGuppy

Posted on 2005-07-04, 01:38

KingGuppy Offline

Rank Member

Rank: Member
Posts: 117
Joined: 2004-08-07, 21:50

With only some very minor tweaks to the code for release (which won't have propagated to anonymous CVS yet), yes.

I have quite a few changes on my local machine which I didn't commit/include in the release, because I just couldn't get them right within the weekend. But this release should mark the start of a return to more active development.

What a horrible sentence. Seems it's bed time...

Reply 3 of 19, by rcblanke

Posted on 2005-07-06, 11:13

rcblanke Offline

Rank Oldbie

Rank: Oldbie
Posts: 1535
Joined: 2005-04-01, 09:44
Location: Sethanon

Hi guys,

Great job KingGuppy, Silpheed is sounding very, very cool now, with your latest release! Please keep up the good work!!

Regards,

Ronald

Reply 4 of 19, by canadacow

Posted on 2005-07-08, 02:00

canadacow Offline

Rank Member

Rank: Member
Posts: 466
Joined: 2003-05-11, 23:00
Location: United States

@Kingguppy: I see no reason why we can't release the control panel application. I just haven't gotten around to building it and prepping to duck from the complaints about .NET.

Reply 5 of 19, by static-

Posted on 2005-07-08, 02:09

static- Offline

Rank Member

Rank: Member
Posts: 109
Joined: 2005-05-26, 04:29

Very cool!! Can't wait to try it out this weekend. 😁

Reply 6 of 19, by HunterZ

Posted on 2005-07-08, 03:45

HunterZ Offline

Rank l33t++

Rank: l33t++
Posts: 6171
Joined: 2003-01-31, 19:04
Location: Seattle

I'll smack anyone around who complains about it, canadacow. We should be grateful to have something instead of nothing at all.

Reply 7 of 19, by KingGuppy

Posted on 2005-07-11, 13:26

KingGuppy Offline

Rank Member

Rank: Member
Posts: 117
Joined: 2004-08-07, 21:50

@canadacow: Ages ago, we discussed a few things that were holding up release:

- Licencing issues (we just need to GPL the control app)
- Potential trademark issues with the faceplate
- Adding a version to the network protocol
- Listening only to localhost/not broadcasting.

I think there was something else, but I don't remember. Anyway, they're all only small points. I'll try to catch up with you on AIM soon; I think you ignore/don't receive messages to MSN Messenger?

Reply 8 of 19, by robertmo

Posted on 2005-07-13, 15:06

robertmo Offline

Rank l33t++

Rank: l33t++
Posts: 6003
Joined: 2003-06-18, 10:35

KingGuppy wrote:

- Potential trademark issues with the faceplate

I just thought we can call it Ronald 😀

Reply 9 of 19, by Alkarion

Posted on 2005-07-13, 21:55

Alkarion Offline

Rank Member

Rank: Member
Posts: 230
Joined: 2003-09-21, 18:07
Location: Bonn/Germany

NS-43 Synthesizer

Reply 10 of 19, by =zum=

Posted on 2005-07-20, 15:18

=zum= Offline

Rank Newbie

Rank: Newbie
Posts: 51
Joined: 2005-04-18, 15:45
Location: Italy

i was playing a midi of mi2 ripped with ScummREV with the new munt and that give me this.
😐

with munt in conjunction with scummvm it doesn't happen...why?

anyway..fine work 😀

Attachments

Filename

mi2 midi with munt 0.1.3.mp3

File size

1.06 MiB

Downloads

509 downloads

File license

Fair use/fair dealing exception

Reply 11 of 19, by Snover

Posted on 2005-07-20, 22:47

Snover Offline

Rank l33t++

Rank: l33t++
Posts: 5475
Joined: 2002-06-30, 04:47

Ronald MC-32 😀
Slap some golden arches on that baby and we can have 2 trademark lawsuits for the price of 1 😀

Yes, it’s my fault.

Reply 12 of 19, by Alkarion

Posted on 2005-07-21, 05:04

Alkarion Offline

Rank Member

Rank: Member
Posts: 230
Joined: 2003-09-21, 18:07
Location: Bonn/Germany

I guess that lawsuit would get much nastier than that with Roland...
(I mean, they have "I'm lovin' it" under copyright - how absurd is that?)

Reply 13 of 19, by shadowfax

Posted on 2005-07-30, 14:51

shadowfax Offline

Rank Newbie

Rank: Newbie
Posts: 3
Joined: 2005-07-30, 14:19

I've just spent some time testing this last release of Munt. I've had three different MT-32 compatible sound modules (CM-32L, CM-64 and CM-500), although at now I haven't any, but I've listened to them quite enough to say that Munt is a quite good emulation, even considering its early development stage. It's a great work and, having seen how much has it improved since the last release, I've no doubt that it will reach an excellent emulation level in a not-so-far future. Please keep on working 😀

What has always surprised me, on the other hand, is Roland's attitude regarding MT-32 emulation. I just cannot understand that "Hey you sucker, what you're doing is illegal and you better stop or you'll regret it" attitude. The LA-synthesis market is totally dead for Roland from the economical point of view. All the MT-32 market is second hand and Roland simply doesn't get anything with that. It would have been (perhaps it's still not too late) a much more intelligent strategy, from my point of view, to start a collaboration project since the beginning, giving all the necessary info and support regarding MT-32's technology, in order to make a good shareware MT-32 softsynth. It's quite simple: someone (developer) does the hard work, Roland only gives info and support, and if the final product is good and the shareware fee is not very high, both developers and Roland could get some income. And we the users could benefit of a good product in lesser time. The alternative is, to my eyes, worse for everyone: for Roland, for developers (more hard work) and for users, having to wait longer and having trouble to find those ROMs. The situation is still less understandable for me when I realize that Roland themselves have already made that with their Sound Canvas (VSC). So why not the MT-32?

But it's only a comment. Anyway: great work. I just can't wait for the next Munt release 😀

Reply 14 of 19, by Kaminari

Posted on 2005-07-30, 16:19

Kaminari Offline

Rank Oldbie

Rank: Oldbie
Posts: 796
Joined: 2002-12-06, 01:54

Some companies just don't believe in the marketing power of Patronage. Which is too bad, because others do and their commercial image benefits from it (Revolution Software, Amstrad -- yes, Amstrad...!).

Reply 15 of 19, by VoodooFX

Posted on 2005-09-04, 17:54

VoodooFX Offline

Rank Newbie

Rank: Newbie
Posts: 10
Joined: 2005-09-04, 10:25
Location: Slovenia

My console outputs following errors when running Flashback with latest build of Dosbox from Datum Cafe, using mt32 as MIDI device.

Loading Control ROM
Loading PCM ROM
Initialising Rhythm Temp
Initialising Patches
MT32:Creating waveformcache-22050-441.99.raw
MT32:Detected and using SIMD (AMD 3DNow) extensions
MT32:Rhythm: Attempt to set program (0) on rhythm is invalid
MT32:Rhythm: Attempt to set program (0) on rhythm is invalid
Unknown MIDI Control code: 0x65 - vel 0x00
Unknown MIDI Control code: 0x64 - vel 0x00
Unknown MIDI Control code: 0x06 - vel 0x01
Unknown MIDI Control code: 0x26 - vel 0x00
MT32:Rhythm: Attempt to set program (115) on rhythm is invalid
Unknown MIDI Control code: 0x65 - vel 0x00
Unknown MIDI Control code: 0x64 - vel 0x00
Unknown MIDI Control code: 0x06 - vel 0x01
Unknown MIDI Control code: 0x26 - vel 0x00
Unknown MIDI Control code: 0x65 - vel 0x00
Unknown MIDI Control code: 0x64 - vel 0x00
Unknown MIDI Control code: 0x06 - vel 0x01
Unknown MIDI Control code: 0x26 - vel 0x00
Unknown MIDI Control code: 0x65 - vel 0x00
Unknown MIDI Control code: 0x64 - vel 0x00
Unknown MIDI Control code: 0x06 - vel 0x01
Unknown MIDI Control code: 0x26 - vel 0x00
Unknown MIDI Control code: 0x65 - vel 0x00
Unknown MIDI Control code: 0x64 - vel 0x00
Unknown MIDI Control code: 0x06 - vel 0x01
Unknown MIDI Control code: 0x26 - vel 0x00
MT32:Rhythm: Attempt to set program (0) on rhythm is invalid
MT32:Rhythm: Attempt to set program (0) on rhythm is invalid
MT32:Rhythm: Attempt to set program (0) on rhythm is invalid
MT32:Rhythm: Attempt to set program (0) on rhythm is invalid
MT32:Rhythm: Attempt to set program (0) on rhythm is invalid
....

The sound is still there however, but I can't tell if it sounds right. But game does sound much better with default midi.

We may have years, we may have hours but sooner or later we all push up flowers.

Reply 16 of 19, by ih8registrations

Posted on 2005-09-05, 04:50

ih8registrations Offline

Rank Oldbie

Rank: Oldbie
Posts: 931
Joined: 2003-07-25, 17:20

Install doesn't recognize mt32_control.rom(upper or lower case) file even with pointing directly at it(recognizes pcm), doesn't show up as system driver or as midi option. 98se. This only for win2k/xp?

Reply 17 of 19, by Snover

Posted on 2005-09-05, 06:42

Snover Offline

Rank l33t++

Rank: l33t++
Posts: 5475
Joined: 2002-06-30, 04:47

Why yes, yes it is only for Windows XP/2003. 😀 2000? Maaaayyyybeee...dunno.

Yes, it’s my fault.

Reply 18 of 19, by Targaff

Posted on 2005-09-05, 14:25

Targaff Offline

Rank Member

Rank: Member
Posts: 245
Joined: 2002-11-19, 17:40

Works fine in 2k, though it can be a little slow kicking into gear.

Reply 19 of 19, by Snover

Posted on 2005-09-09, 01:27

Snover Offline

Rank l33t++

Rank: l33t++
Posts: 5475
Joined: 2002-06-30, 04:47

It is that way on all systems, because it has to generate the waveform data the first time it's run on a certain master pitch.

Yes, it’s my fault.

Go to top of page Go to top of page

Back to MT-32 General

Main menu

Common searches