home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!batcomputer!reed!pdxgate!rigel!idr
- From: idr@rigel.cs.pdx.edu (Ian D Romanick)
- Newsgroups: alt.sys.amiga.demos
- Subject: Re: Criti!
- Message-ID: <6569@pdxgate.UUCP>
- Date: 15 Dec 92 01:49:59 GMT
- References: <crystal.723693722@glia> <MKNIP.92Dec7131340@bulldozer.hut.fi> <10227@cbmger.de.so.commodore.com> <Bz0yG8.3o1@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> <crystal.724095118@glia>
- Sender: news@pdxgate.UUCP
- Organization: /etc/organization
- Lines: 28
-
- In article <crystal.724095118@glia> crystal@glia.biostr.washington.edu (Crystal) writes:
- >>He's right. Even if you manualy build the sample (waveform, sound ... )
- >>it's still a sample, here's a C def for a sinewave:
- >
- >>BYTE chip sinewave[8] ={0,90,127,90,0,-90,-127,-90};
- >>(dc.b 0,90,127,90,0,-90,-127,-90 in Assembly)
- >
- >So it *IS* programming! Just like I originally thought! Just like we had
-
- What? Let me tell you something:
- programming != data
- That (up above) is data, just like an iff picture or a mod or a spreadsheet.
- This piece of data just happens to be a sample. It is not programming!
- The fact is, no matter how you put your values into the sound chip, they have
- to come from somewhere. This 'somewhere' is your magical sample. Doesn't
- matter what it is, it's a sample just the same.
-
- - Ian Romanick
- Dancing Fool of Epsilon
-
- []--------------------------------------------------------------------[]
- | |
- | My opinions are exactly the same as PSU's. NOT! |
- | Mail at: idr@cs.pdx.edu Epsilon, for the best in NTSC |
- | demos! :^) |
- | |
- []--------------------------------------------------------------------[]
-
-