VOGONS


First post, by Axatax

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie

I think some games composed for GM (presumably an SC-55) tend to sound better on an MT-32.

Two games that come to mind, are Duke Nukem 3D and Quest for Glory IV . What I mean by this, is selecting GM in the games setup, and then running it with an MT-32. If you have both devices, try this out and let me know what you think...

Reply 1 of 14, by Axatax

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie
Axatax wrote on 2021-01-04, 06:05:

I think some games composed for GM (presumably an SC-55) tend to sound better on an MT-32.

Two games that come to mind, are Duke Nukem 3D and Quest for Glory IV . What I mean by this, is selecting GM in the games setup, and then running it with an MT-32. If you have both devices, try this out and let me know what you think...

Obviously completely subjective... And I would even put Doom (original) in this category as a game that sounds better on an MT-32 when selecting GM.

Reply 3 of 14, by Pierre32

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
Axatax wrote on 2021-01-04, 06:10:
Axatax wrote on 2021-01-04, 06:05:

I think some games composed for GM (presumably an SC-55) tend to sound better on an MT-32.

Two games that come to mind, are Duke Nukem 3D and Quest for Glory IV . What I mean by this, is selecting GM in the games setup, and then running it with an MT-32. If you have both devices, try this out and let me know what you think...

Obviously completely subjective... And I would even put Doom (original) in this category as a game that sounds better on an MT-32 when selecting GM.

Well this is extremely controversial, and I need to go and find out for myself!

Reply 4 of 14, by Tiido

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

Many games put bass on the first channel and by default, MT32 etc. do not listen to that channel. There's certainly some setup needed prior to such a stunt, channels can be remapped with sysexes, and I imagine game specific things would be necessary too to get most out of it.

T-04YBSC, a new YMF71x based sound card & Official VOGONS thread about it
Newly made 4MB 60ns 30pin SIMMs ~
mida sa loed ? nagunii aru ei saa 😜

Reply 5 of 14, by Pierre32

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

Are you doing this to change the default channels, OP?

https://www.sweetwater.com/sweetcare/articles … ceive-channels/

Use the following procedure to change the default receive channels of the MT-32 from channels 2-9 and 10 to channels 1-8 and 10:

1) While holding down MASTER VOLUME, press PART 5.

2) Press PART 1.

Reply 6 of 14, by Axatax

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie
Pierre32 wrote on 2021-01-04, 22:09:

Are you doing this to change the default channels, OP?

https://www.sweetwater.com/sweetcare/articles … ceive-channels/

Use the following procedure to change the default receive channels of the MT-32 from channels 2-9 and 10 to channels 1-8 and 10:

1) While holding down MASTER VOLUME, press PART 5.

2) Press PART 1.

No, I'm not doing anything other than switching between the analog output on either sound module.

Reply 8 of 14, by Spikey

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

I can tell you that no Sierra GM game will sound better on a MT-32 than the SC-55. And with what you're describing, using the GM driver, many times this will make it even worse (incompatible instruments, not enough polyphony, etc).
To even do this for Sierra games you'd need to load a good GM patch bank for the MT-32, and I don't know of any, though one could certainly be made I guess. The Sierra one itself would not work for this purpose, as it doesn't have various GM instruments (eg Pan Flute).

The only game I would even consider doing this for would be King's Quest 6, and you can play that game with the MT-32 driver fine.

For Quest for Glory 4, I agree, you would actually get potentially better results with the GM driver than the MT-32 driver, using a MT-32. But the SC-55 sound would blow it out of the water. There's simply too many problems that would arise, assuming you used the Sierra GM SysEx (wrong instruments, polyphony dropouts, etc). You'd also lose all the MT-32 sound effects, one of the few reasons to play with an MT-32.

Reply 9 of 14, by CrossBow777

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

I've played around a bit with this using the old Roland utility to patch the Mt-32 to GM compatible mode. It does work and in some cases can sound pretty cool, but I've yet to hear it sound overall 'better' than an actual GS module does.

g883j7-2.png
Midi Modules: MT-32 (OLD), MT-200, MT-90, SD-20

Reply 11 of 14, by lordskylark

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie

Some of it probably depends on if it was quick convert from GM to MT-32, or whether or not the original composer themselves (or good sound programmer) optimized the soundtrack to sound good on multiple soundcards or flat out composed it almost from scratch for more than one from the ground up.

Reply 12 of 14, by Shreddoc

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

In music generally : songs still sound good if you assign parts to Different Instruments. Especially if you personally love those Different Instruments.

That's because the music theory, the 'rules and conventions' under which almost all western music is written, is the thing which makes a composition "work" to our ears.

The specific /instruments/ that are assigned to the composition absolutely can be changed, and it will still be the same coherent piece of music which adheres to all the same rules in the same ways.

To put yourself in the composer's shoes and say, "well I believe *I* know better than the original composer, and believe if I changed this instrument or that, and took that one out entirely, and so on and so forth.... then I end up with something even better-sounding", then that is perfectly valid, for you.

It's the same as somebody obsessed by Hammond Organs might say "well, I far prefer Black Sabbath's music when all of the guitars are instead changed into Hammond Organs", and yes, for a person who loves Hammond Organs to Excess, then that undoubtedly would be true, for them.

But I believe a certain respect is also necessary, recognising that the decisions made by the original composer are part of what defines that composer's work, and once you start mucking around with that, then you are not "making that person's work better" in any objective sense.

Rather, you have forked (in programming terms) off into your own microcosm.

Reply 13 of 14, by Axatax

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie
Shreddoc wrote on 2021-01-12, 03:48:

To put yourself in the composer's shoes and say, "well I believe *I* know better than the original composer, and believe if I changed this instrument or that, and took that one out entirely, and so on and so forth.... then I end up with something even better-sounding", then that is perfectly valid, for you.

That makes me sound really arrogant and that's not where I'm trying to come from. I'm saying, try to switch back and forth between these two devices and report a preference. I have no agenda WRT an MT-32 vs an SC-55. 😀 Intuitively, an SC-55 should sound better with music composed for that device. I don't think that's always the case, however, at least with the selection of software I've mentioned.

Reply 14 of 14, by Shreddoc

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
Axatax wrote on 2021-01-15, 02:42:
Shreddoc wrote on 2021-01-12, 03:48:

To put yourself in the composer's shoes and say, "well I believe *I* know better than the original composer, and believe if I changed this instrument or that, and took that one out entirely, and so on and so forth.... then I end up with something even better-sounding", then that is perfectly valid, for you.

That makes me sound really arrogant and that's not where I'm trying to come from. I'm saying, try to switch back and forth between these two devices and report a preference. I have no agenda WRT an MT-32 vs an SC-55. 😀 Intuitively, an SC-55 should sound better with music composed for that device. I don't think that's always the case, however, at least with the selection of software I've mentioned.

I didn't intend to make it seem like those words were actually coming out of your mouth. 😀 Merely exaggerating for effect to try to get my point across, and being my usual overly-verbose self. I do get where you're coming from.