imi wrote on 2021-02-12, 12:19:

is there any listening example of the differences between the old old one and the old rev.1?

Here you can hear the difference with the credits track of Dune II.

Hmm, to re-iterate, CM-32L has nothing to do with "old rev.1".

yeah let me repeat that to be more clear ^^
I was wondering about the difference between:
OLD Roland MT-32 up to serial number 851399
OLD Roland MT-32 revision 1 serial numbers 851400 - 950499

I believe there are none. As long as the control ROM version is exactly the same, no audible differences should be observable. But of course, each and every unit sounds uniquely having been aged 😀

I believe the best combination is a Roland MT32 (old unit) and a Roland CM32L / CM64 / LAPC-I.

NewRisingSun wrote on 2021-02-12, 19:36:

OP is asking about two versions of "old-type" MT-32 (ASSY 7937731000 vs. ASSY 793741000), not about "old-type" vs. "new-type" (ASSY 7937731001) MT-32.

All that the later "old-type" MT-32 changes is to consolidate the circuit board design by changing the package type of the LA32 chip and by replacing EPROMs with mask ROMs. Control and sample ROM content are identical by all accounts. See the MT-32 Service Notes Second Edition.

These ASSY numbers are not too intuitive with the MT-32s it seems. I have one with ASSY 7937731001 which supposed to be the "new-type" MT-32, however it is missing the headphone jack, and the PCB layout looks exactly like the "old-type", except it already has the QFP type LA32 chip. Also, it has the old v1.7 ROM version instead of v2.0.
Indeed, per Service Notes 3rd edition :

https://i.imgur.com/qhkI36B.png

So it seems the real differentiator between the "old-type" and "new-type" MT-32 is the existence of the headphone jack (i.e. completely redesigned PCB), rather than the ASSY number itself.

I find the "old type" MT-32 most suitable as well.

Although I have both the MT-32 as well as a CM-32 (and a CM-500 for that matter), all of those are stored away for years to come probably, I must admit I am more than happy to use serdaco's MT-32 Pi HAT with MT32Pi. Saves a lot of deskspace as well and even with a half decent SC-55 soundfont I find this one little device sufficient to cover all my DOS gaming needs for the time being.

Spikey wrote on 2018-07-15, 07:34:

I'd be surprised if any game released after 1989 would specifically require a MT-32 just because the composer prefered the way it sounded on it, or because he wanted to exploit some quirks that were not available on the CM-32. Economically speaking, that wouldn't have made any sense. Although it's perfectly possible that the composer was working on a MT-32 and ignoring that there were actual differences between the two synths.

To paraphrase Rob Atesalp, who composed PQ1VGA in 1991, and tracks for SQ4 the same year- "What's a CM-32?" Most Sierra guys I've talked to have never heard of it, although Craig Safan seemed to have one. I would guess it was not that commonly used in American games. Was it even available commonly for American gamers to buy?

"What's a CM-32?" was a joke to the person that Rob was speaking with. It was a joke just as the device was never directly supported. Sierra did have one and Rob remembers receiving it and opening the box on the first one that the Sierra music department ever received. It was the first in the USA as it was made to look like a generic colored computer of the time. When it was first brought in, Rob hooked it up to his A-80 Roland controller keyboard and checked out all the variation of sounds that were included on it. The unit was then sent to the QA department for testing. The first game it was used on for testing was Leisure Suit Larry 3. The first thing that was noticed by testing within the differences of the units was the electric shock sound that was created by Rob for Larry 3 would not play on the CM-32. It also was not kept in the music department because it was thought more as a playback machine not anything to compose with due to the lack of the front screen LCD and extra buttons for the different parts and parameters. That's the story behind the comment of , "What's a CM-32?" It was a joke because it couldn't keep up with the original sound effects created on Rob's MT-32.

7retro2000 wrote on 2018-02-10, 22:49:

You are better with an MT-32 instead of none. Just get one and play with it.
People recommend the old one as a standard. Just a personal opinion - when you deal with sound, there is no perfect choice.

I agree. Sometimes we go deeply into details and we confuse our minds. A great combination is an old Roland MT-32 with a Roland CM-32L (or CM-64 or LAPC-I). You have the correct sound with some old games that work 100% correctly only with an old Roland MT-32, and with the Roland CM32L you solve the buffer overflow bug (my Cyrix 6x86 has this bug on some games with the old Roland MT-32) and you have extra sound effects on some games (Lure of the Temptress, Ultima Underworld, Beneath a Steel Sky, Hook, etc.)

Midirok wrote on 2023-10-03, 06:20:

Spikey wrote on 2018-07-15, 07:34:

I'd be surprised if any game released after 1989 would specifically require a MT-32 just because the composer prefered the way it sounded on it, or because he wanted to exploit some quirks that were not available on the CM-32. Economically speaking, that wouldn't have made any sense. Although it's perfectly possible that the composer was working on a MT-32 and ignoring that there were actual differences between the two synths.

To paraphrase Rob Atesalp, who composed PQ1VGA in 1991, and tracks for SQ4 the same year- "What's a CM-32?" Most Sierra guys I've talked to have never heard of it, although Craig Safan seemed to have one. I would guess it was not that commonly used in American games. Was it even available commonly for American gamers to buy?

"What's a CM-32?" was a joke to the person that Rob was speaking with. It was a joke just as the device was never directly supported. Sierra did have one and Rob remembers receiving it and opening the box on the first one that the Sierra music department ever received. It was the first in the USA as it was made to look like a generic colored computer of the time. When it was first brought in, Rob hooked it up to his A-80 Roland controller keyboard and checked out all the variation of sounds that were included on it. The unit was then sent to the QA department for testing. The first game it was used on for testing was Leisure Suit Larry 3. The first thing that was noticed by testing within the differences of the units was the electric shock sound that was created by Rob for Larry 3 would not play on the CM-32. It also was not kept in the music department because it was thought more as a playback machine not anything to compose with due to the lack of the front screen LCD and extra buttons for the different parts and parameters. That's the story behind the comment of , "What's a CM-32?" It was a joke because it couldn't keep up with the original sound effects created on Rob's MT-32.

Hey, Rob! Good to see you here. This is Alistair, by the way. Thanks for the clarification 😀

And awesome story.

imi wrote on 2021-02-12, 15:54:

yeah but that's only a comparison between "old" and "new", not between "old" and "old rev.1" ^^
I don't think rev.1 is ever mentioned, and it's not even entirely clear which revision his "old" is.

MT-32 is often distinguished by using rev0 and rev1. Old and new is often distinguished by serial number. Old and new is easily distinguished by the headphone jack in the rear. I am not sure if buffer overflow only affects rev0 or if that occurs on rev1 as well, but I've had games run into that when not using softMPU and /delaysysex on a rev0. Running a unit that hits buffer overflow will surely affect how things sound.