This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

1

Tracking / Re: Visually pleasing videos of classic tracker modules

« on: March 24, 2016, 12:19:19 »

New version of Professional Tracker, without immediately resetted offset values:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i49fmYPH49k

New version of Space Debris, without immediately resetted offset values:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZGtlJKmGLNY

Looks a lot better now.

2

Tracking / Re: Visually pleasing videos of classic tracker modules

« on: March 21, 2016, 19:59:46 »

New version without the offset vs. instrument bugs:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UtL96zsPDOw

(I'll probably upload yet another version soon, one with a more natural waveform repaintings caused by sample offset effects. One where sample offset values are not set back to 0 on the next line, but instead at the line the note stops playing. Now it looks a little bit rediculous)

3

Tracking / Re: Visually pleasing videos of classic tracker modules

« on: March 21, 2016, 17:39:25 »

Exactly. That's the bug. I did try to define the terminology though. On the last post of page 1, I quoted the description of ptoffset from the link you gave, and in the next post I wrote: "But the question is if "Professional Tracker" exploits the protracker bug exposed in ptoffset.mod, where it adds the offset both before and after playing the sample". The other behaviors doesn't necessarily seem like bugs to me.

Guess it could have been clearer though. Glad we cleared this up.  

4

Tracking / Re: Visually pleasing videos of classic tracker modules

« on: March 21, 2016, 17:05:11 »

Thanks for the explanation, but I have no trouble understanding what happens in ptoffset.mod or "Professional Tracker".  

 I've only been asking if the protrfacker offset BUG happens in the module "Professional Tracker"?

You don't need to answer that though, because I've looked through the module and couldn't find any use of the bug, so I just assume that there's nothing wrong with latest youtube video I uploaded of "Professional Tracker" two days ago, except for the 5 known occurences of a channel vs. instrument-bug, which is irrelevant to ptoffset.mod.

EDIT: "no trouble understanding" was an exaggeration. It's a bit hairy, but I know what happens. The point for asking about whether the protracker offset bug happens in this module, is whether I need to add a note in the youtube video about it not being played back correctly, since the protracker offset bug is not supported in the module importer in radium.

5

Tracking / Re: Visually pleasing videos of classic tracker modules

« on: March 21, 2016, 13:47:47 »

The bug that is demonstrated by ptoffset.mod is exactly what is being abused in Professional Tracker,

Really? I can not find that bug being triggered in "Professional Tracker" anywhere. Can you be specific about exactly when this happens?

but the latter may not exploit all possible combinations of offset commands. ptoffset.mod tests all relevant cases.

Sure, ptoffset.mod is a fine test, and apart from the bug in protracker that it exposes, Radium plays it perfectly.

6

Tracking / Re: Visually pleasing videos of classic tracker modules

« on: March 21, 2016, 08:40:20 »

It's the same bug really. It just depends on the viewpoint.

Sorry, same bug as what?

7

Tracking / Re: Visually pleasing videos of classic tracker modules

« on: March 20, 2016, 19:27:18 »

But the question is if "Professional Tracker" exploits the protracker bug exposed in ptoffset.mod, where it adds the offset both before and after playing the sample. Otherwice, I'm relatively confident that Radium does things correctly, and I can't hear any difference between Protracker and Radium now, except for those instrument vs. channel clashes.

Edit: I've looked through the module now, and I can't find any usage of that bug. For the bug to work, the 9xx-command must be on the same line as a note and a non-null sample number, but everywhere in this module, as far as I can see, 9xx-commands have been explicitly placed on their own lines before notes with sample number 0 are used.

8

Tracking / Re: Visually pleasing videos of classic tracker modules

« on: March 20, 2016, 18:02:35 »

Seems like I didn't read the descripton for ptoffset.mod in the link you gave me:

ProTracker 1/2 has a slightly buggy offset implementation which adds the offset in two different places (according to tracker_notes.txt coming with libxmp: "once before playing this instrument (as is expected), and once again after this instrument has been played").

Does "Professional Tracker" exploit this bug? Either way, I don't think I'll support it in Radium.  

9

Tracking / Re: Visually pleasing videos of classic tracker modules

« on: March 20, 2016, 15:55:45 »

As you mentioned yourself there were some weird notes around 1:05, which is probably because you trigger the note when there's an instrument plus offset combination but no note next to it. In this case, the new sample is loaded (but not played), and the offset for the next note is memorized. This is also ProTracker-specific behaviour and I think it's part of ptoffset.mod.

Oh, yes, those weird notes are there because sample offset is set per instrument in radium, not per channel. So the offset was set on channel 3, while the same instrument was playing on channel 1. It's the same reason there is vibrato on the arpeggios in the beginning. This bug should not be so hard to fix.

ptoffset.mod, on the other hand, seems to handle some kind of bug in protracker. I would be surprised if the author(s) meant it to behave like that.

10

Tracking / Re: Visually pleasing videos of classic tracker modules

« on: March 20, 2016, 10:18:50 »

ProTracker offset is more complicated than most people assume. Here is a test case that explains what you need to change: https://wiki.openmpt.org/Development:_Test_Cases/MOD#ptoffset.mod

Thank you. Those tests seems very useful. Wish I had known about them before. I've probably rewritten everything at least twice because I had done things the wrong way.
The ptoffset.mod module is really strange though...

The vibrato effect heard in the chiptune part right at the start is too strong, too.

To me it only sounds like the vibrato oscillator is updated a lot more often than in protracker. But there is some vibrato on channel 4 (the arpeggio sounds), which is not supposed to be there.

Writing a simple mod player that will get everything sound "somewhat correct" is trivial, hence anything that doesn't get the more advanced stuff right is "completely wrong" for me, especially in this particular module where entirely wrong drum samples are heard if you don't emulate the offset quirk correctly. Not that this quirk is really specific to ProTracker, so it should not be applied in other formats.

Can you still hear if something is wrong in the new version? (The importer doesn't play the ptoffset.mod module correctly though, but does "Professional Tracker" exploit the very mysterious behavior in that module?)

Anyway, nice work. Why do some of the waveforms change their look while scrolling through the patterns (especially visible e.g. in Space Debris) - is that caused by offset effects?

Correct. Changing sample offset triggers Radium to repaint the waveforms while playing. It would have looked better if the module converter didn't add an "offset 0" commands right afterwards though, so it might seem a bit strange sometimes. (I just do this to avoid having to calculate how long the note is playing, plus to avoid having to deal with "sample offset" clash for the same instrument on different channels)