Mod Archive Forums Mod Archive Forums
Advanced search  


Please note: Your main account will not work here, you must create a forum account to post on the forums.

Show Posts

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.

Messages - DasKreestof

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6
RTF has robust enough formatting, but lacks the image compression that Word has. Saving the files in RTF format resulted in files that were 10 times larger. (which excludes them from being shared through this board.

I can email zipped versions of the files if you wish.

I think I had a Palm Vx. I can't remember the version of PsyTex. I know I had to install a hack for it to be able to "work" but still couldn't get it to run in any workable way.

I could never get psytex to run right on my Palm, and that was one of the things that motivated me to switch to Pocket PC after my Palm died.

I didn't know wordpad wouldn't load the images in the doc.  You should be able to use a free online converter to convert the document to something you can read, such as pdf. (for example

Is there a format you'd prefer that can handle the images?

MilkyTracker Community / Re: Tuning Help?
« on: May 12, 2010, 21:40:58 »
I always thought math was going to be helpful later in life, but I never imagined it would have been music where I'd wind up using it so often.

That said, you can let Milkytracker do all the math for you.

If you're interested in scientifically determining how precise the tuning is:
If you want to experiment with tuning imprecision the basic idea I want to present is that when you generate a note A square wave in the fourth octave, the length of the single cycle should be 19.0068 samples at 8363hz aka (440/8363) or 100.2272 at 44.1khz(440/44100)

If you took those two samples of the same note, but recorded with different sample rates  and brought them into Milkytracker the 44.1khz sample would automatically have it's root relative note adjusted to F6 fine tune -28. (milkytracker is doing the math for you.) If you play back the two notes one after the other and export it to wave, you can count the lengths of the square waves of both notes and determine how different they are from one another.

Musically, it's should be close enough that it doesn't matter. But if scientifically interested, this would be a good testing methodology.

I choose square waves because it's so easy to determine where the oscillator begins and ends.
Edited: replaced F#5 Fine tune +36 with F6 fine tune -28. I just did an import and that's what I got. I'm not sure where I got the F#5 Fine tune +36 from.

MilkyTracker Community / Re: Tuning Help?
« on: May 12, 2010, 14:16:49 »
Yes, the 8363 is a legacy rate based on Amiga Hardware. It's mentioned in a thread here somewhere.
You don't need to downsample your samples to 8363. Just allow to Milkytracker to automatically adjust the tuning to F6 fine tune -28 for 44.1khz samples and your samples will play back in tune.
In theory, a Middle C sampled at 44.1khz played back with a relatvie note tuning of F6 fine tune -28 should be in tune with the same middle C sampled at 8363 tuned to middle c.

You could test this with some generated Pulse waves imported into Milkytracker and then exported to Wave. "A" notes are the best for counting since they are usually whole numbers.

As for your ASIO drivers, perhaps a driver set like "ASIO4all could use work with alt sample rates.  I'm not sure, perhaps you're stuck using the WDM driver when using these rate. I'm a cooledit guy which has pretty flexible with sample rates. (perhaps it's coded to recognize that the playback rate of the sample has nothing to do with the audio rate to send to the card?
I agree that for serious sample editing, dedicated sample editors are always going to be more powerfull.

I have an sblive and haven't run into the issue you're having. Perhaps there's a setting in Soundforge you need to mess with.
I don't think the p3 500mhz pc is a factor. I think it's probably a config setting for how soundforge works with the asio driver.
Edited: replaced F#5 Fine tune +36 with F6 fine tune -28. I just did an import and that's what I got. I'm not sure where I got the F#5 Fine tune +36 from.

>is a tracker, or just MilkyTracker, a very different beast from a traditional sampler?

It’s not too different from a primitive sampler.

Some of the frustration you’re experiencing may have to do with something you’re not used to, which is working with a sound engine that is not a native multiple of 11khz, 22.05kz, 44.1, or 48 etc.  Milkytrackers native engine which is legacy based, works with a default 8363Hz. If you import a wav file sampled at 44.1khz, Milkytracker will automatically tune the relative note for you so that it will play back at the correct speed which means the relative note is F6 fine tune -28.

Your 30khz samples might need to have their root notes adjusted to play back at the correct frequency depending on how Awave is writing out the wav headers.  Awave may be adjusting root notes/frequencies during conversion. You may want to test that.

The other big difference from the samplers you’re used to, is that multi-sample instruments in Milkytracker cannot overlap layers. To layer, you must multiple tracks.
Make sure that your converted multisample instruments do not overlap layers or exceed xi specs.

I believe Milky adjusts the root note based on sample frequency in the header of a wav, so that a middle c will play back the sample at the rate indicated in the header. I could be totally wrong.  I don’t know how it interprets xi’s. I assume changes to Xi’s would be coming from awave instead of MT.

I’m not sure about the complications of multisampled instruments and tuning, but perhaps the above info will help you with trial and error to determine the behavior of MT if someone else doesn’t pipe in first.

Edited: replaced F#5 Fine tune +36 with F6 fine tune -28. I just did an import and that's what I got. I'm not sure where I got the F#5 Fine tune +36 from

The difference between real BPM and tracker BPM is explained very well here:

MilkyTracker Community / Re: Tuning Help?
« on: May 07, 2010, 19:39:35 »
My problem is with the actual tuning of the instruments.  I have one tuned to C-4, one at C-2, both were sampled that way, but my third sample, after adjusting the loop points, came out at F#-3.  I'm trying to figure out how to tune that sample to the others.  I haven't gotten any change.

Seeing the F# in this question made me wonder if perhaps the real question here was about how importing samples with a sample rate of 44.1khz changes the relative note of an instrument to F6 fine tune -28.

I admit that it took me a while to understand what was going on. It's best explained in a few other threads on this forum, such as this one:

To sum it up, most of us from non-tracking backgrounds in digital audio are used to working in 44.1khz or 48khz (or some multiple of those) environments. Milkytrackers base environment is 8363hz, so a middle C sampled at 44.1khz, must have it's relative note altered F6 fine tune -28 to play it back at 44.1khz instead of 8363hz.
The abstract idea is that the wav file is just pixelated wave data. The speed of playback is chosen by the playback system which in this case is determined by the relative note. A relative note of c4 ft0 will play back that data at the rate of 8363. If your sample was sampled at 8363hz, than c4 ft0 will be perfectly tuned. (For example, if you generated your tone in Milkytracker)

For example, say you sample A4 twice.
Sample A : recorded at 44.1khz
Sample B : recorded at 8363hz.

If you play those two samples back at their respective sample rates, you will here the correct tone of 440 cycles per second.

Now import those two samples into Milkytracker.
If you play those two samples with the same relative note, they will be very different.
Upon import Milkytracker will recognize the correct sample rate for Sample A: and will adjust the relative tuning so that Sample A will be played back at F6 fine tune -28 so that upon playback it will play at the correct rate.

I hope this is helpful.
Edited: replaced F#5 Fine tune +36 with F6 fine tune -28. I just did an import and that's what I got. I'm not sure where I got the F#5 Fine tune +36 from.

decimal 100 and 200 sample lengths would be octave 2 E and octave 1 E

midi  octave note          Frequency       Number of samples at 8363
28     1     E      -41    41.20344461     202.9684673
40     2     E      -29    82.40688923     101.4842336

I chose MS Word format for the file because it's ubiquitous. It can be opened by all Windows users even if they don’t have MS Word, and can be opened by Linux users who have OpenOffice. I suspect that Mac users can also open the format. It is ideal that the document can be modified by all users of varying technical ability to allow it reach a finished status ASAP.
Once it’s completed, I will port it to more efficient formats such as PDF, HTML, MHT, CHM. Those formats are not as easy to edit for most users, and so I chose MS Word as the base document. I broke it into two parts because it’s image laden nature made it large, and this BBoard has file size limits on attachments that I needed to consider.

I haven’t put much work into it lately because it appears my platform is being abandoned for continued development. The 0.90.80 release for Windows Mobile has some difficult bugs in the Internal Browser that make it difficult to work with on the Pocket PC. These issues were announced as fixed by Pailes, but those code changes were never compiled into a release for Windows Mobile. :(
I can’t complain because it’s a free product and I understand that Pailes has to invest his time into things that actually pay the bills. 

[Milkytracker is the main reason I value my pocketpc so highly. Without it I would probably get an android phone.  I imagine that a port to Android would be a significant undertaking, and haven’t considered whether the UI on android would even be practical for such an app.]

MilkyTracker Community / Re: MilkyTracker Wikipedia Entry
« on: May 07, 2010, 17:47:24 »
I thought the MilkyTracker article was excellent. I was really proud of the work that I and the cloud of contributers put together. I felt like someone vandalized and destroyed a treasured object when that gang of ignorant thugs deleted it.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6