GUS. What does it have?
John K Bunk
hardware wise? I keep getting raves about this card, but no specifics
about why it's better than PAS-16, etc.
I keep getting hints of how the card has sample playback capabilities,
but I'd like some specifics. If it does, how many notes can it play
at once? How much RAM does the card have for waveforms? Can the
RAM be expanded for larger waveforms? Does the card have any digital
signal processing? Real-time envelope processing? What?
I already have a Roland SCC-1 card, but I'd like to add a card which
has the ability to load waveforms into a synthesizer and play them
back (sample playback machine.)
Also, exactly what compatibility does this card have with existing
games, etc?
All info would be deeply appreciated. Thanks in advance!
John Bunk
--
John Bunk, Code 4G13, NSWC-PHD
j...@suned1.nswses.navy.mil
Any statements / opinions made here are mine, alone, not the Navy's.
But that's OK, the Navy is usually wrong anyhow.
david cole
I don't have one of these cards, but I can provide some general info and make
some remarks about the technology and competition.
First off, everyone should know that there are some STANDARDS here. You can
answer alot of these questions by asking just one question: is card X MPC
compliant? MPC sets various standards for the synthesizer capability,
including 16 midi channels, 24 polyphonic, 128 timbres plus percussion, etc.
The GUS is MPC compliant, as are lots of other cards. The SCC-1 is not
because it lacks the required SCSI, joystick and DAC support. But it is
compliant with the synth part of the specs. Those are General Midi
requirements.
Second, the GUS exceeds the MPC requirements by being 32 note polyphonic.
(although it has not been clear whether this is 32 STEREO notes or not; I
assume so because as I remember the MPC spec, it requires 24 stereo).
Now, some remarks: I think the popularity or should I say enthusiasm by a
small number of first-owners is based largely on price/performance. The main
attraction of the GUS was its low price and SB compatibility, with superior
sound, at least potentially. I doubt that it sounds as good as the SCC-1 --
how could it, with so much less sample storage? And as far as I know it has
no effects section, so the sound would have to be lifeless compared to a
synth with effects. But the price is hard to beat. Note also that it is
simply unknown ( by me, at least!) how much this card loads the cpu. The
Roland cards have their own dedicated cpu's and don't load the computer they
reside in (much). If a card slows a game down when all it is doing is
playing music, it is forcing the host to do some of its work. I hope the GUS
is a true independent synth, but until it is clearer why it sometimes slows
games down, one can't be confident of this without seeing a good functional
explanation of exactly how the card works.
Second, the GUS seems not to be the only RAM-based sample player available.
At first, I thought it was, but now it seems that the Omni Audio Master card
is also a RAM based sample player, and it has more RAM (384K) standard. It
is also MPC compliant. It SEEMS (again, it is hard to get reliable info
about these things) that it is the same card as is sold by DAK as the Media
Master (for $199). The Omni card has a RAM upgrade available. The DAK blurb
on their card says something like it has Roland Sound Canvas quality. One
suspects that this may be because it has the actual Sound Canvas samples --
they can't be copyrighted.
So there may be two or three sample players. But their sample memory is
quite small by standalone synth standards (the GUS has a 1 meg max, but I
can't understand why it uses 256k chips). But the specs I have seen on all
these are completely uninformative about what their sample manipulation
ability is, so one can only guess as to what they can sound like. I gather
that the GUS has a VCA envelope and some kind of a filter, maybe a low freq
oscillator that can be used to control the main osc -- but who knows! So far
the actual replies I have seen posted here that were allegedly from people at
Gravis suggested THEY didn't know the specs of their own card! And I have
seen much less on the Omni Labs and DAK cards.
My advice: switch to a cheaper brand of whiskey, and buy one as an
experiment. (I'd take my own advice, but that's how I got my LAPC and now I
am drinking the cheapest whiskey that it is legal to sell).
Cheers,
Dave Cole
dc...@ua.d.umn.edu
A
A
A
A
A
A
Kevin Dangoor
>
>Now, some remarks: I think the popularity or should I say enthusiasm by a
>small number of first-owners is based largely on price/performance. The main
>attraction of the GUS was its low price and SB compatibility, with superior
>sound, at least potentially. I doubt that it sounds as good as the SCC-1 --
>how could it, with so much less sample storage? And as far as I know it has
The sample storage is a very important aspect of the GUS. The SCC-1 includes
4MB (right? that's a pretty normal number, but I'm guessing) of sample ROM.
The GUS can have up to 1MB of sample RAM (I think basically everyone upgrades).
How often will you be playing a piece of music that uses ALL of the patches
on the Canvas? Not very. The GUS loads its sounds off disk and is theoretically
limited by disk space.
>no effects section, so the sound would have to be lifeless compared to a
>synth with effects. But the price is hard to beat. Note also that it is
Agreed... effects help quite a bit (that's why my EPS-16+ sampler still
sounds better than the GUS). Just curious, does the Multisound or
Canvas include effects? Also, if someone really wanted effects, you can
just plug the GUS into an outside processor.
>simply unknown ( by me, at least!) how much this card loads the cpu. The
>Roland cards have their own dedicated cpu's and don't load the computer they
>reside in (much). If a card slows a game down when all it is doing is
>playing music, it is forcing the host to do some of its work. I hope the GUS
>is a true independent synth, but until it is clearer why it sometimes slows
>games down, one can't be confident of this without seeing a good functional
>explanation of exactly how the card works.
The speed trouble that people have with the card has nothing to do with the
workings of the card. The only loadthat its synth places on the system beyond
a SoundBlaster's FM is the loading of patches, and that is insignificant.
The games are slowed down because of the GUS' SoundBlaster emulation software.
Star Control II, which supports the GUS in its native mode, is probably
FASTER on a machine with a GUS because it uses MOD type music. This means
it has to mix 4 channels down to the SB's 2 channel DAC in real time while
running the game. On a GUS, it will actually load the proper patches and
play them like any other patch.
>
>Second, the GUS seems not to be the only RAM-based sample player available.
>At first, I thought it was, but now it seems that the Omni Audio Master card
>is also a RAM based sample player, and it has more RAM (384K) standard. It
>is also MPC compliant. It SEEMS (again, it is hard to get reliable info
>about these things) that it is the same card as is sold by DAK as the Media
>Master (for $199). The Omni card has a RAM upgrade available. The DAK blurb
>on their card says something like it has Roland Sound Canvas quality. One
>suspects that this may be because it has the actual Sound Canvas samples --
>they can't be copyrighted.
I don't know much about these cards. They have similar specs to the GUS,
but for some reason it's the GUS that people are talking about (and buying).
One other thing about quality of the samples: Gravis will send all GUS
owners a complete General MIDI patch set when they register (and when it's
ready :). They have contracted an outside company to make these patches (I
believe the company is known for EPS samples and such). Remember, these
patches are limited only by disk space and no single patch can be over 1MB.
There is definitely an opportunity to make EXCELLENT sounding stuff.
>
...kev
--
Kevin (Tazzzzz) Dangoor \ Locomotive (adj): powered by insanity.
University of Michigan /
Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA \ This ultraDeluxe powerpack sig has 50% less
internet: taz...@eecs.umich.edu / saturated sponge than the competing brands!
david cole
>In article <1f1jbv...@ua.d.umn.edu> dc...@ua.d.umn.edu (david cole) writes:
>>
>>Now, some remarks: I think the popularity or should I say enthusiasm by a
>>small number of first-owners is based largely on price/performance. The main
>>attraction of the GUS was its low price and SB compatibility, with superior
>>sound, at least potentially. I doubt that it sounds as good as the SCC-1 --
>>how could it, with so much less sample storage? And as far as I know it has
>
>The sample storage is a very important aspect of the GUS. The SCC-1 includes
>4MB (right? that's a pretty normal number, but I'm guessing) of sample ROM.
>The GUS can have up to 1MB of sample RAM (I think basically everyone upgrades).
>How often will you be playing a piece of music that uses ALL of the patches
>on the Canvas? Not very. The GUS loads its sounds off disk and is theoretically
>limited by disk space.
>
This is a good point, one that I thought of but was too tired/lazy to make at
the time. It is hard to tell what the real typical requirements will be,
when one will hits limits, etc. But I note that if a good piano sample takes
1 meg (reportedly the size on Ensoniq SQ synths), you aren't going to get
much of an orchestra into the 256K on the GUS. Also, as I understand it the
ROM based sample players typically compress their samples. Again, not much
information has been given out on how the GUS actually works, but there is no
evidence it uses compressed samples. If it doesn't, the little bit of RAM it
has will go even less far. Seems to me a much better way to make a soundcard
is to include 3-4 meg of compressed sample ROM, with a Meg or two of Ram.
The hardware cost for this would be about the same as the list price of a
single game....
>>no effects section, so the sound would have to be lifeless compared to a
>>synth with effects. But the price is hard to beat. Note also that it is
>Agreed... effects help quite a bit (that's why my EPS-16+ sampler still
>sounds better than the GUS). Just curious, does the Multisound or
>Canvas include effects? Also, if someone really wanted effects, you can
>just plug the GUS into an outside processor.
>
Using outboard effects is the most expensive way to get them. It makes sense
to have a DSP on the board do the effects along with every thing else. The
Roland cards have always had effects. On the LAPC, it may require some chips
but on the SCC1 it appears to be handled by the processor. As for the
Multisound, who knows? I have their spec sheet in front of me and they're
not letting out any information. My guess is "no", but it is just a guess.
The Proteus did not have effects.
>patches are limited only by disk space and no single patch can be over 1MB.
>There is definitely an opportunity to make EXCELLENT sounding stuff.
>
>>
>...kev
>
I think the GUS and Audio Master are interesting cards. They may be great
cards. Won't know until I can work with them over some time. I do not think
that the only important thing is the samples. The raw samples in most synths
sound LOUSY. They are not meant to be listened to raw. The key to a good
synth (and good sound) is what it can do with those samples. And it remains
very unclear just what the capabilities of the GUS are, and how it achieves
its capabilities (i.e. how it works). Second, it seems to me that the best
way to get SB compatibility is just the way Media Vision (and the Audio
Master) do it -- stick the cheap Yamaha chips on the board and have a
hardware clone of the SB. Fussing with drivers and near (and far) misses on
the sounds doees not seem to me the way to make something SB compatible.
What I do tink is great is the variety of boards that are appearing, each
exploring technology in various ways. In the long run, there may not be a
single best solution. But my suggestion of a combo of ROM and RAM for
samples sounds pretty swell to me!
Cheers,
Yuri Lee
>way to get SB compatibility is just the way Media Vision (and the Audio
>Master) do it -- stick the cheap Yamaha chips on the board and have a
>hardware clone of the SB. Fussing with drivers and near (and far) misses on
I heard MV agreed to pay CL a non-disclosed amount of money for using CL's
technology ( SB DAC ) which means you can't really get hardware SB compatibilitywithout paying CL for it.
>exploring technology in various ways. In the long run, there may not be a
>single best solution. But my suggestion of a combo of ROM and RAM for
>samples sounds pretty swell to me!
Agreed.
- Yuri
Phat H Tran
>hardware wise? I keep getting raves about this card, but no specifics
>about why it's better than PAS-16, etc.
>
>I keep getting hints of how the card has sample playback capabilities,
>but I'd like some specifics. If it does, how many notes can it play
>at once? How much RAM does the card have for waveforms? Can the
>RAM be expanded for larger waveforms? Does the card have any digital
>signal processing? Real-time envelope processing? What?
>
I only know what has been repeated many times over. The GUS can play
32 notes at once in mono, 16 in stereo. It comes with standard 256k of
RAM, which is expandable to 1 Meg. As for DSP and envelope modulation
capabilities, I'd love to find out more.
Phat.
Phat H Tran
>
>has will go even less far. Seems to me a much better way to make a soundcard
>is to include 3-4 meg of compressed sample ROM, with a Meg or two of Ram.
>The hardware cost for this would be about the same as the list price of a
>single game....
>
To add more memory would require a wider address bus, which would add much
more to the price than that of a single game.
Phat.