Experimental BBS Explossion 3/Experimental BBS Explossion III.iso/gus/digestv6.zip/V6N22.TXT

Text File | 1993-09-23 | 32KB | 728 lines

Ultrasound Daily Digest     Thu, 23 Sep 93  0:47 MDT     Volume 6: Issue  22

Today's Topics:
                           Crack to Mega-Em
                           EZSOUND problem
                                 faq
                       GUS gets great review!!!
                          GUS under WinOS/2?
                      Just to let you know  5/7
                      Just to let you know  6/7
                      Just to let you know  7/7
                              RAM chips
                               The Card
               Ultrasound Daily Digest V6 #21 (2 msgs)
                             unsubscribe

Standard Info:
    - Meta-info about the GUS can be found at the end of the Digest.
    - Before you ask a question, please READ THE FAQ.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 23 Sep 1993 09:12:15 +0800 (WST)
From: Jayeson Lee-Steere <[e-mail]>
Subject: Crack to Mega-Em
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Someone has just informed me of a crack to Mega-Em's registration system
being uploaded to epas. As you might guess I'm not too thrilled about
this. I ask that anyone who finds it anywhere else remove it, or asked to
have it removed. I realise many people are against cripple ware, but
please remember this is my program and my desired choice of
distribution/marketing method.

Jayeson Lee-Steere
[e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 22 Sep 93 01:58:36 PDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: EZSOUND problem
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

hi

i have got EZSOUND 2.0 for Windows

i have installed it on my pc 386DX25 mhz (all works ok with my GUS)

and i have choose MULTIMEDIA WINDOWS DRIVER 3.1 because it hasn't a GUS

driver.

I don't work properly and hangs my computer, if someone can help me

(i have GUS 206 L install disks).

thanks

i'm in the list but if you want can email direct to me to

[e-mail]

bye

claudio

NOTE: i have yet asked if someone know how use the 808drums e 707 or 727

      i don't know how use it in my default.cfg file

NOTE2: how can i use the files sbos-ult.zip it has only a file and not a .exe

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 22 Sep 93 17:10:19 EST
From: [e-mail] (Candra Korompis)
Subject: faq
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>



------------------------------

Date: Wed, 22 Sep 93 10:17:23 EDT
From: Christophe M Williams <[e-mail]>
Subject: GUS gets great review!!!
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

This is the first time I've posted so bear with me...

I don't know how many read Computer Shopper...but the latest issue
does a ranking of sound cards and the GUS was ranked one of the BEST!
I've only heard this last night (from a friend) and have yet to read
the article.  It was ranked 2nd only to Turtle Beach.

If anyone has a chance to look at it...let me know a bit more about
the article with some specifics.

Happy Gussing!!!!


                    Loves, Hugs and Tugs...
                        -Socrates

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 22 Sep 93 9:12:36 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Robert Wiegand)
Subject: Re: GUS under WinOS/2?
Message-ID: <9309221412@midnight1>

> Date: Wed, 22 Sep 1993 02:49:32 +1000
> From: [e-mail] (KWT Wong)
> Subject: GUS under WinOS2 ??
> Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
>
> Hi.
> I am not sure if this is a FAQ but I haven't read anything about it
> for a long long time. Is there anyway to get the GUS to run under
> WinOS2 in OS/2 2.1 ?? I can get the GUS working under a DOS session
> but when I try to run the GUS in a WinOS2 enhanced mode session. I get
> the error that the GUS needs to be working under Enhanced mode but
> the session is already under Enhanced mode ! Any help appreciated

Sorry, but there is no way to get this to work.
The Gravis Windows drivers can't work under WinOS2.

> Gravis come out with the OS/2 drivers quick !! A brand new market
> just waiting to be tapped !!

We've been telling them that for a year and a half now.

Bob Wiegand

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 22 Sep 93 16:08:15
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Just to let you know  5/7
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

(Continued from previous message)

engineering--the 30-ton machine contained 17,468 vacuum tubes linked by
500 miles (800 kilometers) of wiring.

Since then, we have seen numerous revolutions in the computer industry.
Gone are the cumbersome and vociferous vacuum tubes and transistors. In
its place - the microchip. The revolution in microchip technology
occurred in 1971 when the American engineer Marcian E. Hoff combined
the basic elements of a computer on one tiny silicon chip, which he
called a microprocessor. This microprocessor, the Intel 4004, helped
set the foundation for the future.

With all of the progress we have made in computing power, unfortunately
the progression of computer generated music has not been so dramatic.
Quality music and sound have long been lacking in programs and
applications, so it comes as no surprise that only now, in 1993,
developers and consumers are looking for alternate ways to generate
music and effects without using the internal speakers.  The prehistoric
and archaic beeps of 7 years ago are now thankfully a distant memory
due to the success of Frequency Modulation, but once again, as is the
case with any technological industry, evolution breed obsolescence.
With the focus on realism and CD quality reproduction, Frequency
Modulation has been pushed aside to herald in a new dawn of Wave
Table Synthesis. However, before we can discuss the attributes
associated with both forms of synthesis, it is important that we have
a basic understanding of how sound is produced and broadcast.

Sounds can take on a variety of distinctions, but the one variable
they all contain is that all are caused by some sort of vibration.  The
acoustic vibrations disturb the air in such a way that sound waves are
produced. These waves travel out in all directions, expanding outwards
from the source of the sound, until it reaches a destination.  Sound
relies on three things: a vibrating source to create the sound wave, a
medium (such as air) to carry the wave, and a receiver (human ear or
electronic equipment) to detect them. Sound waves cannot travel through
a vacuum.

Sound cards are made up of three principal portions:

(1)The digital portion
(2)The analog portion
(3)The method of synthesis

For playback, electronic components such as computers or CD players do
not transmit an acoustic sound, but rather they transmit a sequence of
numbers, more commonly known as a digital signal. However, before this
digital signal (or series of numbers) can be heard, it must first be
converted from its existing form, to an electronic signal.  This
process is performed by the Digital to Analog Converter, or DAC, for
short. This converted signal is then received by the speaker, thus
causing a vibration in the air, resulting in a sound wave.

Electronic components can also record original sounds for playback.
This is known as sampling.  This process is performed by the Analog to
Digital Converter, or ADC, for short.  This function is opposite to the
DAC, in that it takes an incoming signal, and converts it to a series
of numbers.  The resulting digital signal is then stored either in DRAM
or on the hard disk.  To playback this digital signal, it is then re-
converted back into an electronic signal by the DAC.

When sampling, another factor to consider is that of the sampling rate.
This relates to how often the ADC reads an incoming signal, and
generates a number sequence.  Sampling rates are measured in kHz.  For
comparison, the sampling rate of a CD player is 44.1 kHz.  In other
words, the ADC samples the incoming signal 44,100 times per second, and
generates 44,100 digital values per second.  The result would be a
clear, realistic digital signal.

An important aspect to remember when dealing with electronic playback,
is the final resolution. The bit resolution directly affects the
dynamic range of the sound.  Dynamic range can be defined as the
difference between the softest and loudest sounds generated.  If the
bit resolution is high, then the sound wave generated will be more
natural and realistic than ones generated with a lower resolution.
(see example)

As stated, there are currently two main forms of synthesis - Frequency
Modulation (FM) and Wave Table Synthesis.  While the methods to do so
are different, both utilize vibrations and wave forms to generate the
sounds.

The synthesizer portion on FM based sound cards is comprised of a
series of modulators or operators.  To generate a sound, the electronic
signal is routed through the DAC (as explained above.) However, if the
original operator was routed to another, instead of the loudspeaker,
then the signal from the first operator (called a modulator), would
alter the signal of the second operator (called a carrier). In effect,
the frequency of the carrier would be altered (modulated) at a speed
equivalent to the frequency of the modulator.  This would produce what
is known as a secondary frequency or overtone.  Overtones give sound
waves its tonal quality, also known as timbre.  Each instrument would
have distinctively different overtones.  By altering the frequencies
and amplitudes, you can create an infinite array of timbres.  You can
further alter the effect, when you designate different settings for the
envelope, which includes such parameters as attack, sustain and decay.

Wave table synthesis produces its sounds in a radically different way.
It does not use modulators or operators to create, in essence,
artificial sounds like the FM synthesizers.  Instead, wave table
synthesis produces sounds by sampling real instruments.  Digital

(Continued to next message)
---
 ~ QMPro 1.50 05-8925 ~ He does the work of 3 Men...Moe, Larry & Curly

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 22 Sep 93 16:08:18
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Just to let you know  6/7
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

(Continued from previous message)

samples of real instruments are recorded (usually at 44.1 kHz) and then
stored either in the read only memory (ROM), random access memory or
directly as a file on the hard drive.  These digital samples are more
commonly referred to as patches. When needing to access the audio patch,
the operating system on the sound card downloads the individual patches
into the sound card's DRAM, and then the sound is generated through the
wave table synthesizer.

Wave table synthesizers can also modify the attack, sustain and decay
in a sound wave. For example, a snare drum, has a very quick attack,
short sustain and very quick decay.  By taking the original sampled
instrument and modifying the envelope, you can end up with endless
variations of an original instrument. Wave table synthesis manipulates
the sound waves depending on your requirements or as per the
applications you are using. For example, a Midi application might send
commands to the synthesizer telling it to  play the sounds in a certain
manner, at a certain time, and then shut off the output at a certain
point.

The difference between FM synthesis and Wave Table Synthesis, is of
course, how the resulting sound waves are received at the destination.
In basic terms, this simply relates to how we like the sound!  FM
synthesizers recreate sound by modulating sound waves. It modulates the
wave until a predetermined sound is achieved. Wave table synthesis on
the other hand, takes a recording of a sampled instrument, and alters
the attack, decay, and sustain to achieve the final result. For example,
it might take a sample of a saxophone.  By playing the patch with a
shallower attack, and lower volume, it would become a tenor sax.  If
you made it sharper and crisper, the it would change into a alto sex.
Because you are always working from the original digital sample, the
end result would end up sounding like the real instrument.  FM
synthesis tries to recreate sounds from scratch. FM synthesis could
potentially recreate any instrument, but the problem is, the end result
will be close, but never match up exactly to the wave form of the
original instrument.  If you were to compare the wave forms that were
generated by both forms of synthesis to the original sampled wave form,
the FM wave form would be skewed while the Wave table wave form would
be an exact match of the sampled instrument.

Another concept to look at while comparing sound cards, is how the
individual patches (sampled instruments) are stored. Many wave table
sound cards allow for storage only in the ROM.  The Gravis UltraSound
however, allows users to store the individuals patches in the RAM. The
Gravis UltraSound allows users the flexibility to create their own
instruments in addition to the standard MIDI (Musical Instrument Digital
Interface) set of 128 sound patches and 64 drum patches.  The only
limitation to this is the size of free space on the hard drive.  For
comparison, the standard 192 patch set takes up approximately 5-6 megs
on a hard drive. Storing the patches in RAM is a tradeoff in hard space
compared to using the ROM only.  However, most developers and musicians
would welcome the opportunity to create and utilize new instruments.
Remember, instruments (or patches), do not necessarily refer to musical
devices. A patch could contain a digital sample of a chainsaw, a
tractor, or a dentists drill!  Many musicians are frustrated by the
limitation imposed with ROM based samples.  By using RAM, the
instruments sampled would be limited only to the boundaries of your
imagination.   With FM you will never have the realism or the naturalism
of the original sampled instrument. There will always be some distortion
of the original wave.

Some criticisms of wave table sounds cards have been levied against the
lack of a midi-coprocessor on board.  They claim that without an on-
board processor, the sound card depends on inordinate amounts of CPU
time (20%-40%)to perform their functions.  However, this is a major
misconception.  Based on the design by FORTE of the GF1 chip and the
operating system, the correct amount would be from 1-3% of the CPU time.
In comparison, a popular FM based sound card takes approximately 25-30%
of the CPU time to play a mixed audio file, while the Gravis UltraSound
can do so without any delays whatsoever!  Again, this is in conjunction
with the design of the GF1 wave table chip, the DRAM, and the operating
system, and not on the method of synthesis the sound card utilizes.

Wave table synthesis does not strive to emulate FM based sound boards.
The reason behind this is that wave table synthesis provides more
natural and realistic sounds than its FM based counterparts.  The only
reason to emulate an FM sound board, would be to provide the end user
the compatibility to use their sound card with past (not present or
future) products.

Another feature of the Gravis UltraSound, is its ability to offer
virtual reality along with a vastly superior method of music synthesis.
Utilizing Focal Point technology, UltraSound's holographic sound
processes audio signals through a technique called convolution.  Right
and left audio signals are generated that create wraparound sound
effects to the human ear.  The sound signal is actually an electronic
signal shaped so that the listener hears the sound as a three
dimensional psychoacoustic effect.

Why do people purchase sound cards?  The number one reason would be for
music and sound quality.  FM synthesis provided a good product for the
time based on consumer demands. Consumers are now requesting CD quality
reproduction, along with a natural and honest synthesis method,
something unfortunately FM based sound cards cannot provide.

The Gravis UltraSound provides CD quality reproduction, backwards
compatibility, and is forging ahead with its new Focal Point 3-D
development.  This combined with economically sensible pricing, makes
the UltraSound an unusually attractive product.  Other products on the
market offer wave table synthesis, but at four (4) or five (5) times the

(Continued to next message)
---
 ~ QMPro 1.50 05-8925 ~ He does the work of 3 Men...Moe, Larry & Curly

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 22 Sep 93 16:08:21
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Just to let you know  7/7
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

(Continued from previous message)

cost!  Other FM based sound cards  offer add- on wave table modules, but
for exorbitant prices!  While these add- ons will sound comparable, you
must also compare the price structures of the products.  The Gravis
UltraSound wins at all levels of comparison:  price, performance,
development, sound quality, synthesis method and is technologically
advanced compared to any FM based sound card, with or without wave table
add-ons.

<THE END>

If you made it this far you must be commited. ;-)

I'm sure this bulletin is going to stir things up <grin>, take care.

John

PS: Here are my favorite quotes:

"FM synthesis is sucking my will to live, the Gravis is possibly my
 only chance to survive..." or "Nice card, doesn't sound like a kazoo
 from H??L"
                                Ralph Thomas, Music Producer
                                Strategic Simulations Inc.

---
 ~ QMPro 1.50 05-8925 ~ He does the work of 3 Men...Moe, Larry & Curly

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 22 Sep 1993 11:36:50 +0100 (BST)
From: "Reidar J. Husmo"  <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: RAM chips
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

>From: "ALEXANDER MAJAREK"  <[e-mail]>
>Subject: GUS-Shopping
>Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
>
>Hi Guys!
Yo.
>
>Sorry for a very long report, but - yes - there's a point. I knew the Risk
>with RAM-upgrades,

I know about the RAM-upgrade problems, too, so when I ordered my 1M upgrade
for my GUS I ordered _8_ chips - planning to rip out the two old ones.
So I got the chips, opened up my computer, and guess what? The chips were of
*exactly* the same make, speed, production year, colour (if you count black
as a colour, that is! not that there are non-black chips out there!), you
name it. Oh well. The one time I *do* show remarkable foresight it's not
needed.

Radar

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 22 Sep 93 22:14 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Marius)
Subject: The Card
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Ok guys. Here's the story: this weekend we're having Computerfest here
in Toronto and I was planning to get the Ultrasound, but recently when I
have been listening and looking around I'm starting to be unsure. A
number of questions have crept up in my mind that keep me from deciding:

1)How 'Soundblaster'-compatible is the Gus? (i.e. What percentage of IBM
soundblaster games can run under Gravis??)

2)I hear of newer and newer drivers being released and of the terrible
long time it takes to get them. Are these drivers also available
anywhere on the Internet so I could just get them overnight/in-a-week?

3)How responsive is Gravis to new software/games? If a game comes out
that the Ultrasound has problems emulating Soundblaster, does Gravis
eventually release fix/patch to make it work?

4)Should I get 256k or should I go all the way and get 1M?

5)What's this that I heard about a new version/board coming out once the
Soundblaster emulator get good enough?

   Any help with these would be EXTREMELY USEFUL. I'd prefer if any
answered where emailed straight to me (pressed for time, don't want to
wait till the next issue of the digest comes out the next day).

---
 ~ QMPro 1.0 12-1234 ~ Misspelled?  Impossible.  My modem is error correcting.


------------------------------

Date: Wed, 22 Sep 1993 08:29:19 -0400 (EDT)
From: Phat H Tran <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Ultrasound Daily Digest V6 #21
Message-ID: <Pine.3.05.9309220818.B21295-c100000@sciborg>

> Date: Tue, 21 Sep 93 04:24:34 EDT
> From: [e-mail]
> Subject: Dagger of Amon Ra and MegaEm
> Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
>
> When I play Dagger of Amon Ra with MegaEm the sound used for the typewriters is
> not like any typewriter I ever heard.  It is more like musical notes.  Sierra
> downloads its own data to the Roland/GUS so I would guess that I cannot change
> the sound ...... am I correct?
>

There might be a chance that the game is trying to use the gunshot patch
for the hammering of the typewriter.  Since the GUS ships with a ring whistle
for a gunshot, many games will sound a little funny (the gunshot is widely
used for many sound effects, from thunder to a smack).  What you can do, if
you haven't already done so, is download Francois' GUNS patches and use
pistol2.pat for patch number 127.  Copy pistol2.pat into your patches directory
and edit the 127=ringwhsl line in ultrasnd.ini to read 127=pistol2.  You might
also want to edit ultramid.ini accordingly if you play games using the AIL
drivers.

> Date: Tue, 21 Sep 93 13:31:27 BST
> From: [e-mail]
> Subject: large .wav files under windows?
> Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
>
> To play a .wav file under windows does the whole thing have to be loaded
> into RAM or something?  I've been experiencing very odd results with
>
> perc,
> the media player,
> cool, version 105
> & even a registered version of noisemaster
> Trying to get a 2 meg 16bit/44.1 khz wav file to load.
>
> The best Ive had is that the file loads, it can be played once through and then
> I get a GPF.  That was with cool, and its inconsistent.
> This is on a 486sx with 4megs of RAM.
>

The WAVE portion of the GUS Windows driver seems to be generating GPFs for
many people, though I have no idea why.  It has never happened to me.

For WAVE playback, an 8k buffer is setup in GUS RAM and used to hold chunks
of the sample being played.  Fresh chunks from the sample stream are uploaded
to "fill" the buffer whenever it gets half-"empty".  (At least, that's my
understanding of it.)  So you don't need all that much RAM on GUS (assuming
that you meant THAT RAM, not the PC's, but if you did mean the PC RAM, my
guess is that the WAVE doesn't get loaded in its entirety into memory there
either for playback [perhaps for editing]).  I can play a 2+ meg 8 bit sample
on my GUS in Windows just fine.  I haven't any large 16-bit samples to test.

> Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1993 10:47:30 -0400
> From: Gregory Chung <[e-mail]>
> Subject: Re: Ultrasound Daily Digest V6 #20
> Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
>
> I've heard all the fanfare over the Mega-EM program, so I finally went out and got it.  Problem is I can't get it working, because it either tells me my
> ultrasnd.ini is corrupt or it can't find the patches in the directory.  The
> documentation isn't very clear on this point, but I assume is uses the
> ULTRADIR environment var?
>
> What I have here is this:  UltraSound directory = C:\ULTRASND, while the
> patches are located in E:\SOUND\MIDI.  I've tried the ultrasnd.ini from my
> windows directory, which works (with Windows) to no avail.
>

I'm not sure how Mega-Em locates the patches, but from your problems, my
hunch is that it first looks in the directory in ULTRADIR for ultrasnd.ini,
and then looks in (ULTRADIR)/MIDI for the patches.  Ideally, it should do
like the Windows driver and read the patch directory from ultrasnd.ini
and locate the patches from that information.

I'd suggest you move all your patches to (ULTRADIR)/MIDI because many
programs expect the patches to be there.

Phat.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 22 Sep 93 9:04:12 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Mike Batchelor)
Subject: Re: Ultrasound Daily Digest V6 #21
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Not the Ultrasound Server once wrote...
$
$  ------------------------------
$
$  Date: Tue, 21 Sep 93 04:24:34 EDT
$  From: [e-mail]
$  Subject: Dagger of Amon Ra and MegaEm
$  Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
$
$  When I play Dagger of Amon Ra with MegaEm the sound used for the typewriters is
$  not like any typewriter I ever heard.  It is more like musical notes.  Sierra
$  downloads its own data to the Roland/GUS so I would guess that I cannot change
$  the sound ...... am I correct?

You probably need to replace patch #127 (ringwhsl) with one of the pistol
patches on epas (I use pistol1, because it is about the same size as
ringwhsl).  The ultrasnd.ini deviates from General Midi by including the
ring whistle where a pistol shot should be, and games often use the pistol
as a base sound for percussive sound effects - like typewriters!

$  ------------------------------
$
$  Date: (null)
$  From: "ALEXANDER MAJAREK"  <[e-mail]>
$  Subject: GUS-Shopping
$  Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
$
$  Hi Guys!

Hi!

$  [...long report deleted...]
$
$  Sorry for a very long report, but - yes - there's a point. I knew the Risk
$  with RAM-upgrades, I knew about faulty DMA-controlers, I knew that
$  SBOS isn't perfect and I have Internet access for e-mail and FTP, so I
$  *chose* to give it a try. And after all the troubles I'm really satisfied
$  with that piece of hardware which is NOW in my PC (I just can't put
$  that SOUND (quality) in words).

My experience with my first sound card was pretty bad, too.  It was a SB
Pro, and I never did get the hum in the line out to go away, even with
headphones, or table top speakers.  I got rid of it, got a GUS instead,
and have had no hardware problems at all - upgraded to 1Mb using 60ns
Toshiba DRAMs, and it all checks out and works fine.  Only a very few
programs have Ultraclicks anymore, and with Mega-Em, I get great music
with every game I have.  I'm busy trying to figure out how to build GUS
support into the Linux kernel now.  I have several songs (669 and MOD)
that are too large to fit in 640K, and PMP doesn't support the GUS yet, so
I hope I'll be able to play them in 32-bit protected mode under Linux!

Next - the DOS Emulator, so I can play games without booting DOS!
hehehe...

$  FLAME ON ***********
$
$  Without Internet-access (or a modem) you can FORGET the idea of
$  having fun with a GUS!
$
$  FLAME OFF **********

This is, unfortunately, part of the problem with getting GUS support.
It's perceived as a difficult card to use, and so not as many "mainstream"
sound users will buy, so there is less incentive to support it, so lack of
support scares more mainstream buyers away, while the hackers and sound
devotees cook up wonders like Mega-Em to fill in the gap, which in turn
makes native support less urgent, and round and round it goes.  But it
looks like thingsare finally taking a turn for the better, with native
support announced by a few, and upgrade patches announced by many.

$  I really want the GUS (I love it by now) to become *the* standard
$  soundcard and maybe these problems are solved in the newer
$  revisions of the cards. The only reason (apart from superior sound)
$  for me to buy the GUS (although there are troubles) is the GOOD
$  WORK from GRAVIS I can see every day on the Internet (new drivers,
$  customer support, etc.) and the possibility to implement nearly
$  everything new simply via software(-changes).

I think your experience was unusual.  Perhaps my experience with the SB
Pro was unusual, too.  But we both now have cards we are delighted with,
so more power to us! :)

$  ------------------------------
$
$  Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1993 10:47:30 -0400
$  From: Gregory Chung <[e-mail]>
$  Subject: Re: Ultrasound Daily Digest V6 #20
$  Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
$
$  I've heard all the fanfare over the Mega-EM program, so I finally went out and got it.  Problem is I can't get it working, because it either tells me my
$  ultrasnd.ini is corrupt or it can't find the patches in the directory.  The
$  documentation isn't very clear on this point, but I assume is uses the
$  ULTRADIR environment var?
$
$  What I have here is this:  UltraSound directory = C:\ULTRASND, while the
$  patches are located in E:\SOUND\MIDI.  I've tried the ultrasnd.ini from my
$  windows directory, which works (with Windows) to no avail.
$
$  Any advice for the clueless?

Mega-Em looks for the ULTRADIR environment variables, and reads the
Ultrasnd.ini it finds there.  In the Ultrasnd.ini, you need to put the
directory where the patches are found in the header, like this:

[Ultrasound]
PatchDir=C:\ULTRASND\midi\

[Melodic Patches]
0=acpiano
1=britepno
2=synpiano
...etc...

So in your case, you need to set an environment variable
ULTRADIR=C:\ULTRASND, or ULTRADIR=E:\SOUND, and put the Ultrasnd.ini
there.  Then change the PatchDir=E:\SOUND\MIDI, and you should be all set.

Phat wrote...
$
$  > From: [e-mail] (Mike Batchelor)
$  > Subject: Ultramid -c vs. neat
$  > Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
$  >
$  > What's the diff between -c and not using that switch?  -c loads a GM patch
$  > set right?  Does this imply that not using the switch will let the game
$  > load its own patch set?
$  >
$
$  No. The -c switch just forces Ultramid to load a subset of the GM patches
$  into the GUS' RAM, and then only use those samples, instead of caching
$  on the fly in the game.  But whether Ultramid caches on the fly or not,
$  it's still limited to the patches laid out in ultramid.ini.  A game can
$  use its own custom patches if it includes its own ultramid.ini.

I have yet to get any sound from any game without using the -c switch.  Is
this to be expected?


--
Mike Batchelor      |
[e-mail]  |                  This space for rent
[e-mail]   |

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 22 Sep 1993 09:42:51 -0400
From: [e-mail] (Dave Butler)
Subject: unsubscribe
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>



------------------------------

End of Ultrasound Daily Digest V6 #22
*************************************

To post to tomorrow's digest:                        <[e-mail]>
To (un)subscribe or get help:                <[e-mail]>
To contact a human (last resort):              <[e-mail]>

FTP sites:                archive.epas.utoronto.ca         pub/pc/ultrasound
                          wuarchive.wustl.edu       systems/msdos/ultrasound
                          archive.orst.edu               pub/packages/gravis
FTP mail server:          [e-mail]

Hints:
      - Get the FAQ from the FTP sites or the request server.
      - Mail to <[e-mail]> for info about other GUS
        related mailing lists (UNIX, OS/2, GUS-MIDI, etc.)