First post, by Jo22
- Rank
- l33t++
Hi everyone,
There's something that makes me wonder: Why are there no Dual-OPL3 implementations?
I'm asking, because, in the past, quite a few new OPL3 designs saw the light of day.
Like that OPL3 surround card.
Wouldn't it be desirable to have an SB Pro 1.0 or PAS with two OPL3 chips?
Or something similar (the PAS had a cleaner Dual-OPL addressing scheme, IMHO).
I mean, during power-up, the OPL3 uses Bank 0 and behaves much like an OPL2 (minus the rarely used CSM feature).
So such a sound card design would be Dual-OPL2 compatible, too.
But in addition, it would allow for 4-operator mode, and independent OPL instrument registers each.
The tracker/chiptone scene (AdLibTracker II etc) would benefit from having greater polyphony or 4-OP modes, right?
It could finally compose songs with more complexity, while keep using the OPL3 core.
Any thoughts welcome. 🙂
PS: I think that ESFM was also great, it had a native mode with higher polyphony.
Unfortunately, it wasn't being accepted as a true OPL3 successor.
"Time, it seems, doesn't flow. For some it's fast, for some it's slow.
In what to one race is no time at all, another race can rise and fall..." - The Minstrel
//My video channel//