so am i correct in believing that both the CT3600 + CT2960 use CQM fake OPL emulation?
or does the CT2960 have an embedded true yamaha chip?

gdjacobs wrote:

Best to see how it sounds to you.

re: finding what sounds good to me,
in every comparison ive preferred very much the yamaha opl sound over CQM
(as do most people? im guessing?)

Well, I used Google images to find out about that Vibra board. If you verify the chips, by all the wisdom we collectively possess those boards use CQM. And it's not fake emulation. You'll get sound out of those cards (unless they're broken), it just doesn't sound perfectly like an OPL3.

You basicly get the same pros and cons with the SB32 cards as you get with the AWE64 cards, the other things the SB32 has going for it is the price (~$10) and memory slots making it cheap to upgrade the memory compared to the AWE64 cards. Note that some SB32 cards can have a real discrete OPL3 solderd but not many do.

If you really need a Creative card with the EMU8000 synth and a real OPL3 get an AWE32 CT2760, CT3900, CT3980 or CT3990*

*If it has the discrete OPL3 chip, not all do.

The price premium for a real OPL3 is in this case ~$40 but the real issue is the shipping, the AWE32 is such a huge card the seller really needs to think over how he packages it.

To me a "real" OPL3 seems mostly important in earlier DOS games from 1989 - 1993 or so. Many of us have another retro computer equpped with a SB Pro or some other OPL3 equipped card for such games but I could live with CQM if I diddnt.

I have heard alot about that opl3 synth emulation cutoff for maximum profit. Before owning a sbpnp32 I had a sbpro and a adlib, I grew tired of the boring opl sound and could not care less if the sb32 had any or not opl capability when I can have emu8k hardware mixing with soundbank into the memory of the card leaving all my pentium 166 horsepower for other stuff.

I think we are drifting from the topic, I have always beleived the awe32 was so much more better than the sb32, but now thanks to your efforts I realise I was wrong. Does the awe32 was sb32 with a waveblaster daughterboard ? was all that prentended "awe32 is more noisy than the sb32" from there?

I still cannot see the point of having a daugtherboard connector for the waveblaster... I mean, was the waveblaster a way to have soundbank and a hardware mixer, just exactly like the awe32 was ? Maybe it was justified to have a waveblaster and a awe32 for some odd reasons, like having two gravis ultrasound allow you to have some kind of out of this world reverb or something like that...

Each brand/model of daughter board that went on a wave header had its unique sample set and therefore its own sound. If you wanted the sound of a Roland GS or a Yamaha XG midi module, you could get an official Roland or Yamaha daughter board. Back then (and even now for that matter), you simply could not just go download a sample set for the EMU8K that would make it sound like those modules. If you wanted a Korg module, bang, just add in the daughter board to the wave header. It was a very cheap way to have the sound features of those modules for limited at home music making or for games that took advantage of them. You could save hundreds and not have to deal with external modules and mixers, plus all the cable clutter.

Don't be confused by the name WaveBlaster. It was called a WaveBlaster Header because it was a Creative Labs (ie SoundBlaster) card and they produced a couple of different daughter boards called WaveBlaster for any sound card that had that header, but very few people bought those. The most common daughter board was the Yamaha DB50XG, and its clone by NEC called the XR385. These were based on the Yamaha XG sample set and many people really liked the sounds it produced compared to Roland's GS.

It was NOT used reproduce the same EMU8k soundset. Dont forget, loading soundfonts over the ISA bus to the sound card each time was time consuming and required the card have a fairly large amount of RAM installed for the early soundfonts. It had to be done each time the computer was reset and that was quite often back then. Nobody wanted to sit and wait three to five minutes extra each time the system started to put on some craptastic, 3rd party soundfont to try and emulate a GS or XG module. The wave header allowed a daughter board to with the correct samples stored on ROM to be available as soon as the system was up and running.

As you probably already know, the AWE32, SB32 & AWE64 requires a utility called Aweutil to be loaded in DOS in order to playback MIDI sounds via the EMU8000 synthesiser chip.

Aweutil uses Non Maskable Interrupts (NMI's) to function properly (not going into the detail of it now).
Some motherboards didn't support NMI's. So, no MIDI playback in DOS for real mode games.
Aweutil used a lot of memory when you had to load the tsr and some people had trouble freeing up enough memory.
If your protected mode games didn't natively support the AWE sound card, then also no MIDI playback.
The basic 1MB ROM of the AWE's samples are not that good (the trumpets are horrible).

This is where the Waveblaster connector comes in as this then offered a user the ability to attach a Wavetable MIDI daughterboard for any of the above reasons.
Some of these daughterboards also offered MIDI sounds that were much better than the standard sample set of the AWE.

I'm from french Canada and thanks to chrisNova777, I've learned a new expression : goldfinch.

of course I was expecting some very precise specification difference in between the sb32 and the awe32, but that thread gone to a stretch.

I'm happy to learn that the sb32 that my father bought me wasnt a cheap awe32, the awe32 was just powder to the eyes.

was it goldfinch or goldfish exactly ?

kodai : ok I wont get confused with the name "waveblaster" when I thiink about a waveblaster... the fuck ?! Yeah you are right, it was so time consuming (actualiy it was) to load a 28mb soundfount into the memory of a emu8k. But the waveblaster was 4mb rom, that was pretty fast to load, and why not load some more on demand. Your argumentation is pretty weak, my guess now is that the waveblaster was for the rich uncle who wanna be cool wihout the burden of understanding how it work

ElBrunzy wrote:

I'm from french Canada and thanks to chrisNova777, I've learned a new expression : goldfinch.

Do they wear Habs jerseys in Quebec? 😁

ElBrunzy wrote:

of course I was expecting some very precise specification difference in between the sb32 and the awe32, but that thread gone to a stretch.

I'm happy to learn that the sb32 that my father bought me wasnt a cheap awe32, the awe32 was just powder to the eyes.

Well, it's there on jesolo's post. The Awe32 had at least 512kb of onboard RAM but the SB32 didn't. The SB32 really needed SIMMs added to the upgrade slots to work with soundfonts. For Creative and their endless model numbers this is remarkably clear cut.

ElBrunzy wrote:

kodai : ok I wont get confused with the name "waveblaster" when I thiink about a waveblaster... the fuck ?! Yeah you are right, it was so time consuming (actualiy it was) to load a 28mb soundfount into the memory of a emu8k. But the waveblaster was 4mb rom, that was pretty fast to load, and why not load some more on demand. Your argumentation is pretty weak, my guess now is that the waveblaster was for the rich uncle who wanna be cool wihout the burden of understanding how it work

On a card plugged into the Waveblaster header (which may or may not be a Waveblaster card), the sound patches are loaded at the factory. It would be cool if samples could be added by the user, but that seemed to be something the big players like Roland, Korg, and Yamaha were uninterested in, at least for this market.

ROM samples aren't really loaded by the computer - they are on those chips from factory, so they have 0 load times. The WaveBlaster has no RAM at all, so you can't load anything into it - you'll have to live with the stock samples.

Also for AWEs you'll have to live with stock samples in games that support it natively unless you go the Win9x route.

ElBrunzy wrote:

kodai : ok I wont get confused with the name "waveblaster" when I thiink about a waveblaster... the fuck ?! Yeah you are right, it was so time consuming (actualiy it was) to load a 28mb soundfount into the memory of a emu8k. But the waveblaster was 4mb rom, that was pretty fast to load, and why not load some more on demand. Your argumentation is pretty weak, my guess now is that the waveblaster was for the rich uncle who wanna be cool wihout the burden of understanding how it work

No, it was not for the "rich uncle who wanna be cool wihout the burden of understanding how it work". It was for people who could not afford to spend $1000.00 or more for external modules and hookup gear. It was meant to be a cost saving option. For example: In 1995/1996 I decide I want roland GS sounds for composing and or gaming. I would have to buy a MIDI interface card and cables (which could cost more than $300 depending on brand and features), a quality external mixer and yet more cables, and maybe a pair of monitors (which are high end, accurate studio speakers) for hundreds more, and then either an external Roland sound module or instrument which could cost between $500 to $3000 depending on what I picked. Or I could get a sound card with basic GM support onboard and the option to add GS with a much cheaper Roland brand wavetable card and save many hundreds or even thousands of dollars. I could also make my own soundfonts or load any number of third party, commercial soundfonts.

In the end, the musicians decided that the AWE32 line of cards was a very poor attempt by Creative to use for making music. After that, it was pretty much used by gamers. It offered good value for its high price as it allowed the gamer to have FM for older games, the EMU8K and its ram to load different soundfonts for MIDI games under Windows, and a wavetable port for other MIDI soundfonts like XG and GS.

It seems that you dont like or at the least, dont understand the AWE32's features as well as understand the time period it came out. There were many costly limitations for the average gamer and musician back then. Anything that offered cost effective options was taken very serious by both groups, and the AWE32 did impress at first. It did very well for a while, but standards changed and the AWE line of cards died out. Nowadays you can find and load up a GS soundfont easy and free. Back then, that was not an option. If you wanted GS, you bought hardware and it cost a lot, unless you bought a wavetable card.

gdjacobs wrote:

On a card plugged into the Waveblaster header (which may or may not be a Waveblaster card), the sound patches are loaded at the factory. It would be cool if samples could be added by the user, but that seemed to be something the big players like Roland, Korg, and Yamaha were uninterested in, at least for this market.

That would also be annoyingly slow given how fast the interface works. If I remember correctly, there is at least one currently made device for Waveblaster header that can load soundfonts into Flash ROM, and loading time is massive.

RacoonRider wrote:

gdjacobs wrote:

On a card plugged into the Waveblaster header (which may or may not be a Waveblaster card), the sound patches are loaded at the factory. It would be cool if samples could be added by the user, but that seemed to be something the big players like Roland, Korg, and Yamaha were uninterested in, at least for this market.

That would also be annoyingly slow given how fast the interface works. If I remember correctly, there is at least one currently made device for Waveblaster header that can load soundfonts into Flash ROM, and loading time is massive.

At the MIDI baud rate, yes, it would be very slow. Some other method for uploading would be desirable.

Kodai wrote:

In the end, the musicians decided that the AWE32 line of cards was a very poor attempt by Creative to use for making music. After that, it was pretty much used by gamers.

I don't have any references now, but I always understood it like this:
-FM got out of fashion for PC Music, Midi was the next thing. This in the gamer perspective, which is a much larger market compared to musicians.
-In 1993, E-mu was acquired by Creative Technology. E-mu had a single chip midi synth ready. Creative needed this Chip for future cards.
-Creative made the waveblaster daughterboard with the EMU8000 + 4MB ROM. To connect with the SB16 MPU-401 (bugged or not), among others.
-Creative put the EMU8000 on the back of their SB16, for use with RAM. Added 1MB ROM and AWEutil to improve the poor real DOS compatibility.

I don't think there was much choice here, they just bought and used what was available. The only alternative choice was to make an AWE with a fixed and pre-initialized ROM set on an MPU-401 interface. This did not happen. SoundFont uploading was probably a better selling point.

Both the Awe32 and Awe64 had inferior sound quality compared to other semi-pro sound cards of the day.
Persistent sound fonts in DOS would have been great.
Full midi interpretation rather than emulation for the EMU8k would have been great. Surely a version with a small micro on board could have been created for this (Awe64 Titanium? Soundblaster Nuthatch card?)

Some of these (maybe all) are limitations of the chipset used and not easily addressed, but they are nonetheless limitations which complicated the lives of some Creative Labs customers.

gdjacobs wrote:

Some of these (maybe all) are limitations of the chipset used and not easily addressed, but they are nonetheless limitations which complicated the lives of some Creative Labs customers.

Sure. But to be realistic, keep in mind that Creative Labs showed their nature and their hurry in these anekdotes:
Stereo reversal on SB Pro / SB Pro mode is mono on SB16 / Issues with the MPU-401 Midi interface on all ISA cards (yes AWE64 too) / No in house midi synth development / Overly long process to get single chip ISA solution / No in house PCI SB16 emulation success (Ensoniq Acquisition) / Serious delays with certain PCI SB Live! Drivers.
Not to bash their products to zero, but regarding in house technical development: they showed themselves to be limited.

gerwin wrote:

Sure. But to be realistic, keep in mind that Creative Labs showed their nature and their hurry in these anekdotes:
Stereo reversal on SB Pro / SB Pro mode is mono on SB16 / Issues with the MPU-401 Midi interface on all ISA cards (yes AWE64 too) / No in house midi synth development / Overly long process to get single chip ISA solution / No in house PCI SB16 emulation success (Ensoniq Acquisition) / Serious delays with certain PCI SB Live! Drivers.
Not to bash their products to zero, but regarding in house technical development: they showed themselves to be limited.

I was trying to be charitable and constructive in case Creative wanted to release a vintage products line!

I wasn't aware of MIDI issues with the AWE64 (beyond TSR requirements to use the EMU8k). I agree, though. Creative has always been far from the most innovative company (except maybe their Zen line) and has always been... highly variable in quality.

alexanrs wrote:

Well, it's there on jesolo's post. The Awe32 had at least 512kb of onboard RAM but the SB32 didn't. The SB32 really needed SIMMs added to the upgrade slots to work with soundfonts. For Creative and their endless model numbers this is remarkably clear cut.

does that mean the sbpnp32 max out at 31256 mb instead of 28672mb like the awe32 ?

alexanrs wrote:

At the MIDI baud rate, yes, it would be very slow. Some other method for uploading would be desirable.

Slow to load ? a 28mb soundfount take some seconds, but a 4mb soundfont wasnt really noticable to load ad boot time, and you can change it anytime. I just fail to see the advantage of buying a 4mb rom when you cand have 8mb (for affordable stuff back then) or ram for about the same price?

I mostly all the time load the same soundfount, was that the wavetable was mpu401 compatible so you dont need an interface to use it ?

gdjacobs wrote:

I wasn't aware of MIDI issues with the AWE64 (beyond TSR requirements to use the EMU8k).

I pictured an awe64 and I dont see any emu8k, otherwise that card would'nt be collecting dust now http://junkskool.net/images/photos/Computer_s … we64_ct4520.jpg ... whoa ... ok it just pop up in my face .. nevermind, I see it, I think the awe64 problem is that it got very few ram and it's hard to upgrade, right ?

gdjacobs wrote:

Persistent sound fonts in DOS would have been great.

now you talk brother, problem is, we where 1996 back then 😉