Dreamcast VGA

[mrbigreddog]

Got my wonderful red glowing box yesterday! Looks great!
Soul Reaver is amazing! Looks just like it did when I played it on PC with my 19" computer monitor back in '99, except BIGGER!

Couple of issues.... Can't get MKGold to work, I've seen a way to hex-edit the cdi file and fix this problem, but your also suppose to just unhook it until the game boots, then plug it back in... Doesn't work for this game anyways... And one know of a better patch?

Also for some reason my TV won't give me the "panoramic widescreen option" on the VGA input, everything else it will but not that! Kinda sucks. The panoramic option makes it keep everything in the center of the tv scaled normally but just stretches the sides of the image to fill the 16x9 screen, which is great for most 3D games, like Mario64 looks just fine!
For example...
http://www.colourlovers.com/uploads/2007/05/n64_super_mario_64_start.jpg
http://img72.imageshack.us/img72/6946/image2k.jpg
Since most 3D games have your character right in the center, they really don't look that bad, and kinda gives it a more realistic 3D feel!


It's just that the 4x3 on my VGA input seems like it's actually 3x3, but I think I can resize my screen, i'll have to check on that tonight....

Any thoughts?

Edit: Yep I resized the widescreen option and decreased the horizontal, to make it just a little wider than 4x3 more like 4.5x3 which looks just fine, actually my TV won't let me decrease the horizontal anymore than that, if I set it to normal (what it think's 4x3 is, then i try to increase the horizontal, it stretches the image, but not the boarders, keeping it within it's (3x3ish) area, weird... But at least i figured something out!

[Chilly Willy]

This is the definitive link for DC VGA: http://www.epforums.org/showthread.php?t=42182

As to the widescreen option, the DC was made before there were widescreen TVs that accepted VGA, so it assumes VGA is only 4:3. Not sure what, if anything, you can do about that.

As to the aspect ratio problem, it was common for early widescreen monitors to "goof up" the 4:3 setting. My Dell 24" widescreen shows 4:3 as 3:2 instead. That was VERY common on early widescreens from what I understand. It took Dell almost 2 years to fix that problem with their widescreens.

[mrbigreddog]

This is the definitive link for DC VGA: http://www.epforums.org/showthread.php?t=42182

As to the widescreen option, the DC was made before there were widescreen TVs that accepted VGA, so it assumes VGA is only 4:3. Not sure what, if anything, you can do about that.

As to the aspect ratio problem, it was common for early widescreen monitors to "goof up" the 4:3 setting. My Dell 24" widescreen shows 4:3 as 3:2 instead. That was VERY common on early widescreens from what I understand. It took Dell almost 2 years to fix that problem with their widescreens.

Thanks for the info and the link Chilly!

[Waterfaller]

Huh, I never tried using panoramic mode... I gotta say, Super Mario 64 looks quite nice!

[Guntz]

Panoramic SM64 looks really messed up. I can clearly see where the image turns from 4:3 to stretched. -_-;

[17daysolderthannes]

hmmm, so the VGA isn't just a good ol' plug n play alternative to standard RCA A/V cables, then? Would my DC shit itself if I had it plugged into composite and VGA at the same time and just switched the TV mode to RCA when needed? Also, how do most HDTVs get sound when using VGA or DVI connections? Do they register a set of standard audio inputs?

[kool kitty89]

hmmm, so the VGA isn't just a good ol' plug n play alternative to standard RCA A/V cables, then? Would my DC shit itself if I had it plugged into composite and VGA at the same time and just switched the TV mode to RCA when needed? Also, how do most HDTVs get sound when using VGA or DVI connections? Do they register a set of standard audio inputs?

VGA outputs what the DC does natively (well after converted to analog RGB), the DC renders everything in 480p then converts it to 480i for composite/s-video (does it have SCART RGB?). Unlike the Gamecube which has to be switched in software, so not even all games will work in 480p (a pain if you want to use a VGA monitor), I think the Xbox can be set to a fixed resolution in the menu though. (the 360 is weird, it has no specific 480i option, so I have no idea how it knows whether to output 480i or 480p via component video, unless it doesn't output 480p at all -I know it outputs 480i)

I'm not sure if every game uses 640x480 with square pixels, or if some games use 704 or 720 width. (like DVDs do)



Any HDTV should be able to display the stretched 16:9 immage, though I personally hate it when people do that, I much prefer pillarboxing or even cropping+zooming sometimes.
Note that many SDTVs have such options as well, though you'd just be getting a squished, smaller screen rather than a stretched, wider one. --My brother actually ends up playing a lot of games like that as he's to lazy to switch the SDTV out of anamorphic mode (which is how it's usually set), and my freinds and I actually gut stuck with that when I brought our little Phillips LCD SDTV over to play games on as I forgot to switch it to 4:3 first. (and unfortunately it also sets the same aspect for all video channels, so composite, s-video, component, and RF were all stuck like that -our Sany CRT won't even let you set anamorphic for broadcast/RF)

[j_factor]

A few DC games do have a widescreen option, but they're not widescreen resolution, they just give you a squished-looking image that is meant to be stretched. I think DC can only do 640 x 480.

There are a few DC games that don't work with the VGA cable. I'm not sure what is up with them. I tried to "force" Bangai-O to work in VGA, and the video did not take up the full screen area and it was really messed-up-looking.

[Waterfaller]

Panoramic SM64 looks really messed up. I can clearly see where the image turns from 4:3 to stretched. -_-;

Jeez, you're right. I tried it out on my TV and it looked like shite :daze:

[mrbigreddog]

Also, how do most HDTVs get sound when using VGA or DVI connections? Do they register a set of standard audio inputs?

My TV has the 1/8" jack input to go along with the VGA input, and the VGA Box I got for the DC has the 1/8" output... So no issues there....


A few DC games do have a widescreen option, but they're not widescreen resolution, they just give you a squished-looking image that is meant to be stretched. I think DC can only do 640 x 480.

There are a few DC games that don't work with the VGA cable. I'm not sure what is up with them. I tried to "force" Bangai-O to work in VGA, and the video did not take up the full screen area and it was really messed-up-looking.

MKGold doesn't work with VGA without patching it with a hexeditor, I'm working on that tonight and try and get that workin! Nothing too crazy.... Just search for JUE and change the numbers that follow it to something else, burn, and tada! VGA compatibility!

[Aarzak]

Dreamcast's VGA capabilities are awesome, too bad I never had an awesome enough monitor to use my VGA Box on, just a dinky 17' CRT. But even on that it looked great. Capcom's 2D fighting games of course looked pixelated as hell on it.

Speaking of VGA boxes, for those that are interested in one, why not skip over to my Awesome Sale Thread? ;)

[mrbigreddog]

Speaking of VGA boxes, for those that are interested in one, why not skip over to my Awesome Sale Thread? ;)

HEY!!! No "SALES SEGWAY" allowed on my thread!! ;)

[Chilly Willy]

One thing I noticed about my VGA box for my DC is you can't have the audio for the SVideo and the VGA out connected at the same time or the audio sounds like shit. When I switch from one to the other, I have to disconnect the audio from one and connect to the other by hand. Oh well.

[mrbigreddog]

One thing I noticed about my VGA box for my DC is you can't have the audio for the SVideo and the VGA out connected at the same time or the audio sounds like shit. When I switch from one to the other, I have to disconnect the audio from one and connect to the other by hand. Oh well.

How many unpatchable VGA DC games do you play??!!! :?

[old man]

Jeez, you're right. I tried it out on my TV and it looked like shite :daze:

No, that's just the Nintendo64.

[mrbigreddog]

No, that's just the Nintendo64.

Your probably right, one thing I didn't mention is that I running Mario 64 on the Wii with 480p and the Mario 64 VC is higher resolution than the native N64....

[Chilly Willy]

How many unpatchable VGA DC games do you play??!!! :?

Actually, I use my DC more for homebrew than commercial games. :D I have to switch back and forth to make sure my code is working right for TV or VGA.

The commercial games I tend to play on it all work on VGA (like Daytona USA).

[mrbigreddog]

Actually, I use my DC more for homebrew than commercial games. :D I have to switch back and forth to make sure my code is working right for TV or VGA.

The commercial games I tend to play on it all work on VGA (like Daytona USA).

What kinda homebrew apps you got on Dreamcast, you holding out on us?

On a slightly off topic question, anyone know if you can do local multiplayer with 2 dreamcast and 2 TV's via the modem?

[Waterfaller]

Your probably right, one thing I didn't mention is that I running Mario 64 on the Wii with 480p and the Mario 64 VC is higher resolution than the native N64....

Actually that's what I'm doing too, using the Wii's VC. I think it's just how my TV in particular displays panoramic.

[Guntz]

No, that's just the Nintendo64.

:roll:

N64 looks just fine. It's the TV that's trying to make it look panoramic that fails.

Oh wait I forgot most people here are N64 hating mongers. You people are just as bad as those punks that hate anything Sega or old. Why can't you all learn to just love ALL video games? Not just some that meet your fancy... :shame:

[17daysolderthannes]

:roll:

N64 looks just fine. It's the TV that's trying to make it look panoramic that fails.

Oh wait I forgot most people here are N64 hating mongers. You people are just as bad as those punks that hate anything Sega or old. Why can't you all learn to just love ALL video games? Not just some that meet your fancy... :shame:

N64 just did alot of things wrong, most notably the horrendously low-quality textures. The RAM expansion sorta fixed it, but it was like $30 extra and was only compatible with a few games, most of which had slowdown when it was being used. Project 64 helps alot though if you have the right filters turned on. Also, BITD, Nintendo's stubborn insistence on cartridges made the games cost astronomical prices up to $70~$80 while PSX games (and later DC) would sell for $40 all day long. Even worse, cartridges meant no FMVs (except for like 2 games with larger ROM sizes), little voice acting, no CD-quality music (rarely any non-midi music), and often even had some loading due to having to compress the ROM to fit it on the cartridge. There were some good exclusives like Mario 64, Perfect Dark, Goldeneye, Wave Race, etc., but overall it's alot of poorly ported junk and generic 3D garbage. PSX and DC created a much larger library of memorable, quality titles that still hold up today.

[Guntz]

N64 just did alot of things wrong, most notably the horrendously low-quality textures. The RAM expansion sorta fixed it, but it was like $30 extra and was only compatible with a few games, most of which had slowdown when it was being used.

I know about the low quality textures. They mean little to me. Most N64 games look great anyway. PSX had extremely pixelated textured which is even worse than blurry ones.


Also, BITD, Nintendo's stubborn insistence on cartridges made the games cost astronomical prices up to $70~$80 while PSX games (and later DC) would sell for $40 all day long.

I know N64 games were expensive. It's most likely the reason why my parents never bought one. I think they didn't buy a PSX either because of the more "mature" games that crowded the system.


Even worse, cartridges meant no FMVs (except for like 2 games with larger ROM sizes), little voice acting, no CD-quality music (rarely any non-midi music), and often even had some loading due to having to compress the ROM to fit it on the cartridge.

FMV sucks, voice acting is passable (and is often criticized. It's not always welcome in EVERY kind of game). CD quality music is great but chiptunes can be just as good. Lastly, any N64 games with loading were far and few between.


There were some good exclusives like Mario 64, Perfect Dark, Goldeneye, Wave Race, etc., but overall it's alot of poorly ported junk and generic 3D garbage. PSX and DC created a much larger library of memorable, quality titles that still hold up today.

:roll:

[Chilly Willy]

What kinda homebrew apps you got on Dreamcast, you holding out on us?

At the moment, it's just Doom, but we'll see more stuff later. :D

[17daysolderthannes]

At the moment, it's just Doom, but we'll see more stuff later. :D

but...they already have that:

http://dcisozone.com/downloads/1436/DOOM-COLLECTION-With-a-sihtload-of-mods-(Disc-1)-of-2.html

[Chilly Willy]

My version of Doom was mainly a learning project for DC homebrew. It also had some advantages over the other Doom ports for the DC. Among other things, it has a nice GUI for setting the game files and setting before starting the game. You can also use the DC mouse and keyboard with it.

[j_factor]

I know about the low quality textures. They mean little to me. Most N64 games look great anyway. PSX had extremely pixelated textured which is even worse than blurry ones.

It's not just the blur. I'm not sure if it was the texture cache specifically, or just the lack of cart space, but a lot of games used extremely repetitive textures, or textures that were practically just a solid color, if not actually reverting to non-texture-mapped polygons.

The comparison I always make is Quake. The N64 is smoother, and so, in a sense, looks "better", but everything looks so stark and clean and sanitized. The Saturn version is more pixelly, but it conveys the correct atmosphere, with appropriate textures (and the awesome original soundtrack).


FMV sucks, voice acting is passable (and is often criticized. It's not always welcome in EVERY kind of game). CD quality music is great but chiptunes can be just as good. Lastly, any N64 games with loading were far and few between.

N64 had no audio hardware with which to make chiptunes. All music on N64 is just compressed. Sometimes it was over-compressed and had terrible audio quality, sometimes a game would simply not use too much music in order to maintain a higher quality, occasionally a game might devote a large amount of its space to music, and often they simply used carefully-chosen sounds that would survive high levels of compression. Alternatively, they could have used some sort of software synthesizer to generate music, but I'm not aware of any games that did that.

[Guntz]

It's not just the blur. I'm not sure if it was the texture cache specifically, or just the lack of cart space, but a lot of games used extremely repetitive textures, or textures that were practically just a solid color, if not actually reverting to non-texture-mapped polygons.

Alright, I admit that's a legitimate complaint. Even then that usually happens with the shoddy ports. Games made more or less only for the N64 had better textures.


The comparison I always make is Quake. The N64 is smoother, and so, in a sense, looks "better", but everything looks so stark and clean and sanitized. The Saturn version is more pixelly, but it conveys the correct atmosphere, with appropriate textures (and the awesome original soundtrack).

That sounds more like an art direction rather than a hardware limitation.


N64 had no audio hardware with which to make chiptunes. All music on N64 is just compressed. Sometimes it was over-compressed and had terrible audio quality, sometimes a game would simply not use too much music in order to maintain a higher quality, occasionally a game might devote a large amount of its space to music, and often they simply used carefully-chosen sounds that would survive high levels of compression. Alternatively, they could have used some sort of software synthesizer to generate music, but I'm not aware of any games that did that.

... *ahem*, excuse me for that. That's something I never heard too much of on the N64, it's "sound hardware". So all sound was like pre-recorded midi that was run by the CPU? I guess that'd explain why Wipeout 64 and Episode 1 Racer had absolutely AWFUL sound.

[Chilly Willy]

N64 had no audio hardware with which to make chiptunes. All music on N64 is just compressed. Sometimes it was over-compressed and had terrible audio quality, sometimes a game would simply not use too much music in order to maintain a higher quality, occasionally a game might devote a large amount of its space to music, and often they simply used carefully-chosen sounds that would survive high levels of compression. Alternatively, they could have used some sort of software synthesizer to generate music, but I'm not aware of any games that did that.

Actually, Nintendo provided code for an RSP player, a bank of MIDI instruments, and their own format similar to MIDI for playing music. So most N64 music is basically wavetable audio handled by the RSP. They had a few different sizes for the instruments so that developers could choose between quality and size.

[Waterfaller]

I dunno about you guys but Killer Instinct Gold always had some pretty awesome tunes for being cartridge based.

[old man]

No one ever said the Nintendo 64 was a bad system. It was a great system with some great games, but it still looked like grainy shit. And I don't need the internet to tell me that. I can just go and plug the thing in like I did the other day. Using S-Video or higher helps, but it's still in the hardware.

[Scooter]

That sounds more like an art direction rather than a hardware limitation.


More than likely art direction dictated by a hardware limitation.

I really like my N64, but try Beetle Adventure Racing sometime. It really is a fun game, but it is quite often very difficult to tell what's going on on the screen. I'm sure there are others.

Even Perfect Dark which makes use of the Expansion Pack has really bland and fuzzy textures which make even finding a door in a wall sometimes difficult to do. As a comparison, I never had that problem with Syphon Filter.

[kool kitty89]

Jeez, you're right. I tried it out on my TV and it looked like shite :daze:
You know you can switch the TV from anamorphic 16:9 to normal 4:3 resolution, right? (or at least you should be able to...)


N64 just did alot of things wrong, most notably the horrendously low-quality textures. The RAM expansion sorta fixed it, but it was like $30 extra and was only compatible with a few games, most of which had slowdown when it was being used. Project 64 helps alot though if you have the right filters turned on. Also, BITD, Nintendo's stubborn insistence on cartridges made the games cost astronomical prices up to $70~$80 while PSX games (and later DC) would sell for $40 all day long. Not really defendign the whole cartridge issue (which happened for a couple reasons -especially propritary format, and had a number of repercussons for Nintendo -losing Square probably the biggest in Japan)

Anyway, the texture cache was quite limiting, but no more so than the PSX's was. (when using mip-mapping the 4kB cache is effectively the same size as the PSX's 2 kB cache iirc)
They didn't have to use filtering, it was a chioce, and soem textures are indeed unfiltered. (soem DS ports have blocky graphics by comparison)

The repeated textures is another issue though, that would be related to texture cache and ROM space I think. The ROM issue is double edged though, it may limit overall storage capacity (at practical cost ranges), but also allowed soem exploits liek Factor 5 did to work around th elimited cache by streaming texture data from ROM.

The RAM expansion was worth it if you got one of the games that absolutely required it, like Perfect Dark (sort of) or Majora's Mask. (I know the latter isn't your kind of game, but it's the main reason we got our expansion pak) Plus, you could get one for cheaper later on, from 3rd parties, sales, or used. (I think we paid full price though)
In the case of the Lucas Arts games, most were available in even higher resolution, and better draw distance, texture res, and fraemrate on PC anyway. (plus they were cheaper -if you had a decent PC at least)

There were other unfortunate limitations imposed by nintendo though, like poor and even intentionally restrictive support of the programmeable RSP microcode. (they were late to distribute any decent tools and withheld the "turbo 3D" code they had available already) That could have made for more optimized game einghines with better trade-offs, liek more polygons/s (more polys on-screen and/or higher framerate) at less features for textues (perspective correction and filtering), Z-buffering, antialiasing, more emphesis on 2D, etc. SO they could have had PSX style 2D games (in terms of 3D rendering type) but with much higher framerates and/or poly-count, or soem compromise in-between; not to mention the possibility of optimized 2D games and interesting possibilities for non-polygon based rendering. (raycasting, height maps, voxels, etc)
All on top of the decision not to go with optical media. (I'm not sure why a propritary optical format wasn't considered or hefty security system, maybe they didn't have the time -though I'd have thought using a custom form factor for standard CDs might have been a simple route)



N64 had no audio hardware with which to make chiptunes. All music on N64 is just compressed. Sometimes it was over-compressed and had terrible audio quality, sometimes a game would simply not use too much music in order to maintain a higher quality, occasionally a game might devote a large amount of its space to music, and often they simply used carefully-chosen sounds that would survive high levels of compression. Alternatively, they could have used some sort of software synthesizer to generate music, but I'm not aware of any games that did that.
What the hell are you talking about? The N64 either used the CPU or RSP to generate audio. In a few cases they used streaming, compressed audio, but most of the time it was sample based music. (midi, mod players, or trackers)
It could get chip tuny sounds better than the SNES, Amiga, and some contemporary PC soundcards if they wanted to. (just use samples of the desired sounds)

[j_factor]

What the hell are you talking about? The N64 either used the CPU or RSP to generate audio. In a few cases they used streaming, compressed audio, but most of the time it was sample based music. (midi, mod players, or trackers)

I didn't say it was streaming audio, I just said it was compressed. Samples are also compressed. The CPU and RSP are both processors, not audio chips; they do not generate audio, they merely play it.


It could get chip tuny sounds better than the SNES, Amiga, and some contemporary PC soundcards if they wanted to. (just use samples of the desired sounds)

So could any computer, but it's not actually a chiptune anymore. [I guess you could argue that it's a chiptune if it's composed of samples of real chip sounds, but it's certainly not an N64 chiptune.]

[Chilly Willy]

The CPU and RSP are both processors, not audio chips; they do not generate audio, they merely play it.

No, the CPU or the RSP are indeed the source that generates the audio. The only thing the audio hardware does is play a 16 bit stereo buffer at a speed the CPU sets. The CPU or RSP has to create the data that fills the buffer. It's usually wavetable synthesized audio done by the RSP or the CPU. Think of it like a PC with only an audio codec - the codec merely converts the data in memory from digital to analog, but it cannot create the data in the first place. The PC's CPU does.

[j_factor]

No, the CPU or the RSP are indeed the source that generates the audio. The only thing the audio hardware does is play a 16 bit stereo buffer at a speed the CPU sets. The CPU or RSP has to create the data that fills the buffer. It's usually wavetable synthesized audio done by the RSP or the CPU.

I'm hearing contradictory statements here. You're gonna have to be more specific than "wavetable synthesis" because that can mean multiple different things. And what audio hardware are you referring to? I've not seen any documentation that states that any piece of the N64's hardware is devoted to audio.


Think of it like a PC with only an audio codec - the codec merely converts the data in memory from digital to analog, but it cannot create the data in the first place. The PC's CPU does.

This analogy makes no sense to me. Neither the codec nor the CPU should create the data, the data would come in the form of pre-existing files, and the CPU just processes it. The only situation I'm familiar with where a CPU creates audio data is in either emulation or physical modeling synthesis, in which case the sound is algorithmically generated. But that's still not exactly a chiptune.

[kool kitty89]

I didn't say it was streaming audio, I just said it was compressed. Samples are also compressed. The CPU and RSP are both processors, not audio chips; they do not generate audio, they merely play it.
Just like the SNES... or Amiga. (albeit Amiga samples aren't very compressed) In fact, that would make the Genesis, the last major console released which was capable of "real" chiptunes...



I'm hearing contradictory statements here. You're gonna have to be more specific than "wavetable synthesis" because that can mean multiple different things. And what audio hardware are you referring to? I've not seen any documentation that states that any piece of the N64's hardware is devoted to audio. It's "wavetable systhesis" in the sense of sample based synthesis, that's sampled instruments and sounds played back and manipulated to "synthesize" music. Similar principals apply to the Amiga, SNES, various PC sound cards, roland's sound canvas (which has become the baseline standard and MS's generic software generated general midi for windows), the Apple IIgs's Ensoniq chip, Sega CD's Ricoh chip, software mod players in the Genesis (Toy Story intro, maybe Earth Worm Jim 2) or 32x, etc. (different formats and such, but same basic principal -note that soem are fixed to samples in ROM, while others can add samples in RAM -or are strictly limited to RAM -I think the SNES, Amiga, and IIgs are in the latter category)

The Roland MT-32 would not be an example though, as it's a bit of a different animal, though samples are part of what it does, it also can generate it's own waveforms (I think), but also works in a number of ways that common sample based synthesis does not. (Roland uses the term "linear arethmetic synthesis")



This analogy makes no sense to me. Neither the codec nor the CPU should create the data, the data would come in the form of pre-existing files, and the CPU just processes it. The only situation I'm familiar with where a CPU creates audio data is in either emulation or physical modeling synthesis, in which case the sound is algorithmically generated. But that's still not exactly a chiptune.
Well that makes sense in the same contxt that the CPU or RSP has to process data fromt he cartridge from soem compressed format into a linear 16-bit PCM stream. Now, it could be as aimple as decoding an audio stream or more complex, as in using samples (probably compressed) and some kind of list for playing music (be a tracker, or midi) using those samples played at varying pitches for certain lenghts of time and with other effects to create the desired final musical arrangement. (still an oversimplification)

[tomaitheous]

No, the CPU or the RSP are indeed the source that generates the audio. The only thing the audio hardware does is play a 16 bit stereo buffer at a speed the CPU sets. The CPU or RSP has to create the data that fills the buffer. It's usually wavetable synthesized audio done by the RSP or the CPU. Think of it like a PC with only an audio codec - the codec merely converts the data in memory from digital to analog, but it cannot create the data in the first place. The PC's CPU does.

So it only has a 16bit stereo audio buffer system? That's it? No multiple channels and such with their own dividers?

[Chilly Willy]

Seems some folks have the wrong idea about the N64 audio. The only audio hardware the N64 has is a set of ports. These include: the address of the buffer to play, the number of samples in the buffer, a control register, a status register, the sample rate, and the sample size. The address and length registers are actually FIFOs, so you can set them multiple times to queue up multiple buffers that play one after the other. The DMA channel for the audio pulls the length and size from the FIFOs, then DMAs the data to the DAC (digital to analog converter) at the rate and sample size currently set in the registers. So you really only have one (stereo) channel that can be played at a set rate and sample size.

The CPU or RSP has to create the data that is in the buffers. It may be as straightforward as just pointing to PCM data loaded from the rom into ram (everything has to be in ram for audio and video - there is a dedicated DMA channel just for transferring rom to ram). That would be used for things like sound effects, like gunshots. If those samples are compressed, the CPU has to decompress them.

Music could also be stored in rom in a compressed form, then decompressed in ram to play. That uses a lot of rom space, and cpu power, so it's rarely done (unless on a PC or modern console). Most music is in some kind of MIDI/tracker format, where you have a set of prerecorded instruments and a score that describes the music. The CPU (or RSP in the case of good N64 players) then generates the audio data from the instruments using the music score. I suggest j_factor go look into how timidity or mikmod works since he seems to be unfamiliar with how most music is done on PCs and consoles.

[j_factor]

Just like the SNES... or Amiga. (albeit Amiga samples aren't very compressed) In fact, that would make the Genesis, the last major console released which was capable of "real" chiptunes...

Well, I'm under the impression that most people today that make music on/for the Amiga probably wouldn't consider themselves chiptune artists. They would consider mod music to be a separate thing. I don't know that I've seen any SNES stuff.

And either way, it's still at least a little different with Amiga and SNES, in that both of those systems have a dedicated sound chip. Even ignoring every other technical detail about how the music is created and played, how can you call something a chiptune, if it's not coming from an audio chip?


It's "wavetable systhesis" in the sense of sample based synthesis, that's sampled instruments and sounds played back and manipulated to "synthesize" music.

That's exactly what I thought it was. It plays/alters samples. It's not generating wave forms.


Most music is in some kind of MIDI/tracker format, where you have a set of prerecorded instruments and a score that describes the music. The CPU (or RSP in the case of good N64 players) then generates the audio data from the instruments using the music score.

That's not the same thing. It generates the audio data in the sense of creating the finalized audio track, but it's not generating audio, meaning the processor is not the original source of the actual sounds. Nothing you said in this post contradicts my original statement.

[Chilly Willy]

That's not the same thing. It generates the audio data in the sense of creating the finalized audio track, but it's not generating audio, meaning the processor is not the original source of the actual sounds. Nothing you said in this post contradicts my original statement.

Got it - so the source of art is in the paints, not the artist... :confused:

You've got a very odd way of thinking there. Suppose the CPU generated the instruments (like a simple sine or square wave) - is it still not the source of the audio? You need to study the subject more, then come back when you have a leg to stand on. ;)

[j_factor]

Got it - so the source of art is in the paints, not the artist... :confused:

The source of pigment is in the paints, not the artist.


You've got a very odd way of thinking there. Suppose the CPU generated the instruments (like a simple sine or square wave) - is it still not the source of the audio? You need to study the subject more, then come back when you have a leg to stand on. ;)

You keep telling me to study the subject, but you still haven't actually said anything that refutes what I originally said. If you're going to argue, have an argument.

[Chilly Willy]

The source of pigment is in the paints, not the artist.

But pigments are not art, and waveforms are not music.



You keep telling me to study the subject, but you still haven't actually said anything that refutes what I originally said. If you're going to argue, have an argument.

No, you keep IGNORING the points made because you have no valid answer. You're clearly ignorant of the subject, but try to step around the argument by repeating the same thing over and over. It doesn't matter how many times you state the instrument is the music - it doesn't make it true. Try again after you've studied a little more on the subject. Then maybe you'll be able to make a coherent defense.

[TmEE]

so from what I understand here, basically all sound done one N64 is software generated since there's no dedicated mixing or waveform generation in hardware other than the playback buffer and that DMA channel to transfer sound data. The CPU reads some sample, messes with it, mixes it with the buffer, repeat for one more channel.... the more you want the more CPU you got to use. Things go like on PC most of the time where the sound card can only play single channel, you got to mix and do all kinds of other fun in expense of CPU power to get what you want....

[j_factor]

But pigments are not art, and waveforms are not music.

I didn't say the word "music". I said audio. There is a difference.


No, you keep IGNORING the points made because you have no valid answer.

I haven't ignored anything. You've made no points. I said "N64 had no audio hardware with which to make chiptunes." You have not said anything that refutes this in any way. "You need to study the subject more" isn't making a valid point, it's just being smarmy.


You're clearly ignorant of the subject, but try to step around the argument by repeating the same thing over and over. It doesn't matter how many times you state the instrument is the music - it doesn't make it true.

What the hell are you even talking about? I never once said that. You're just making up completely random things.


Try again after you've studied a little more on the subject. Then maybe you'll be able to make a coherent defense.

There's no need to take such an arrogant attitude. If you have an argument, argue it, instead of telling the other person to study. That's not an argument.

And for what it's worth, I've been into the chiptune scene for years. I know damn well what they are.

[Guntz]

I haven't ignored anything. You've made no points. I said "N64 had no audio hardware with which to make chiptunes." You have not said anything that refutes this in any way. "You need to study the subject more" isn't making a valid point, it's just being smarmy.

You just did ignore an argument:


But pigments are not art, and waveforms are not music.

It doesn't matter how many times you state the instrument is the music - it doesn't make it true. Try again after you've studied a little more on the subject. Then maybe you'll be able to make a coherent defense.

To repeat what Chilly was trying to say which you oh so conveniently avoided, the instrument only makes sounds. The artist arranges the sounds into music.

EDIT: *sees that j_factor just edited his post to include the arguments he missed*

http://www.dahmus.org/blogimg/fry-see-what-you-did-there.jpg

[j_factor]

You just did ignore an argument:



To repeat what Chilly was trying to say which you oh so conveniently avoided, the instrument only makes sounds. The artist arranges the sounds into music.

I didn't ignore that. But how is that at all relevant to what I said?

[Guntz]

I was trying to clarify what Chilly initially said.

[j_factor]

I understand what he said. I just don't see how that contradicts, or even pertains to, what I said.

[Guntz]

Well let's take a look at what's been said so far. You say that the N64 has no dedicated sound hardware. Chilly, KoolKitty and somebody else tried to point out that the N64 does have sound hardware with factual information. You deny their claims by saying that there is no dedicated sound chip. Now it's just bickering between both sides that the other is incorrect.

I say that somebody here is looking too far into the definitions rather than the simple meanings. Sound and music is stored on the cartridge anyway, either in the form of instructions for the sound chip or actual sound files to be played by a chip. N64 seems to do a bit of both.

[j_factor]

Well let's take a look at what's been said so far. You say that the N64 has no dedicated sound hardware. Chilly, KoolKitty and somebody else tried to point out that the N64 does have sound hardware with factual information. You deny their claims by saying that there is no dedicated sound chip. Now it's just bickering between both sides that the other is incorrect.

Show me where they said N64 does, in fact, have a dedicated sound chip...?

Obviously in the most basic sense of the term, some type of "sound hardware" is required for any piece of electronics to emit sound. But, that's not what I was ever talking about.

[Guntz]

Show me where they said N64 does, in fact, have a dedicated sound chip...?

You read my post too hard. When I mentioned Chilly and KoolKitty's argument of there being sound hardware in the N64, I never said dedicated, yet I did so whenever I mentioned you.

[j_factor]

You read my post too hard. When I mentioned Chilly and KoolKitty's argument of there being sound hardware in the N64, I never said dedicated, yet I did so whenever I mentioned you.

So you did. However, that would mean they're talking about something else, and not actually arguing against what I'd said.

[Guntz]

Well then yes, given everything said on page 3 including this one, you are correct. The N64 doesn't have a dedicated sound chip that generates actual sounds. Or at least that isn't what it exclusively performs (like I said from what I gather it's a mix of chiptune and music player).

Still, I'm going to wait for Chilly and KoolKitty to sign back on tomorrow to finish this once and for all.

[j_factor]

Well I just looked back at where this originally started.

A: "N64 had no audio hardware with which to make chiptunes. All music on N64 is just compressed."

B: "Actually, Nintendo provided code for an RSP player, a bank of MIDI instruments, and their own format similar to MIDI for playing music."

Not only does that not contradict what I said, it actually supports what I said. A software player using a MIDI-esque format and a MIDI bank is definitely not making chiptunes. In fact I didn't even reply to that post, because I couldn't tell he was disagreeing.

[kool kitty89]

Seems some folks have the wrong idea about the N64 audio. The only audio hardware the N64 has is a set of ports. These include: the address of the buffer to play, the number of samples in the buffer, a control register, a status register, the sample rate, and the sample size. The address and length registers are actually FIFOs, so you can set them multiple times to queue up multiple buffers that play one after the other. The DMA channel for the audio pulls the length and size from the FIFOs, then DMAs the data to the DAC (digital to analog converter) at the rate and sample size currently set in the registers. So you really only have one (stereo) channel that can be played at a set rate and sample size.

The CPU or RSP has to create the data that is in the buffers. It may be as straightforward as just pointing to PCM data loaded from the rom into ram (everything has to be in ram for audio and video - there is a dedicated DMA channel just for transferring rom to ram). That would be used for things like sound effects, like gunshots. If those samples are compressed, the CPU has to decompress them.

That sounds a bit like the set-up in the Jaguar as I understand it (though I think it might be able to pull samples from ROM directly -though that might not be preferred anyway). Just a pair of 16-bit DACs wired as stero in conjunction with some control and I/O hardware built into the JERRY Asic and controlled by the RISC core also onboard that ASIC -plus a small sample set in onboard ROM. (all software/CPU driven, and I think there are some examples of software driven FM Synthesis too -even one included in th estandard dev kit -possibly used in Suppercross 3D)


Got it - so the source of art is in the paints, not the artist... :confused:

You've got a very odd way of thinking there. Suppose the CPU generated the instruments (like a simple sine or square wave) - is it still not the source of the audio? You need to study the subject more, then come back when you have a leg to stand on. ;)
so from what I understand here, basically all sound done one N64 is software generated since there's no dedicated mixing or waveform generation in hardware other than the playback buffer and that DMA channel to transfer sound data. The CPU reads some sample, messes with it, mixes it with the buffer, repeat for one more channel.... the more you want the more CPU you got to use. Things go like on PC most of the time where the sound card can only play single channel, you got to mix and do all kinds of other fun in expense of CPU power to get what you want....

Yeah, it could even generate the waveforms itsself (no samples), with software FM synthesis and/or simple waveforms, but that's a lot of resourse for pretty much no gain other than being able to call it "real synthesis" of music.


As for chiptunes, that can even be considered a style of music, whether it's actually generated by PSGs, FM synth chips, ASICs, or in software, it's the same genre (depending on the context), even digitized recordings of such could be included as such.
As for non-dedicated audio hardware and finicky use of terms, the RSP and CPU in the N64 are still microchips, and if they're creating the audio signals sent to the DAC for external output, then I think the term "chiptune" could even fit there too. :p

And I'm pretty such the SNES's audio chipset (multiple chips in its audio subsystem) and Amiga's PAULA are included under chiptunes, though general MIDI tracks were also included in some chiptune competitons as well, so I'm not sure how that fits together. (but I suppose general mid could even be interpreted to play as FM intruments on an FM sound card -but I don't think that's the intention -and I'm not even sure how well that would work for General Midi -I'm talking of the general midi format and not midi in general of course)




A: "N64 had no audio hardware with which to make chiptunes. All music on N64 is just compressed."

B: "Actually, Nintendo provided code for an RSP player, a bank of MIDI instruments, and their own format similar to MIDI for playing music."
How does that not contradict your statement, you imply by "all music is just compressed" that the music itsself is compressed, ie compressed audio which is simply streamed like PCM froma wav file, red book, or mp3, not a group of compressed (or uncompressed) samples which are manipulated by the processors according to the music generating software (midi, tracker, etc), mixed to 16-bit stereo and output to the DACs.

Arranged music files are no more compressed audio files than flash animation files are compressed video or realtime cutsenes in video games are streaming video -because the textures are compressed or loaded from RAM or such. (I don't mean flash video of course, but actual flash animations whaich get rendered in real time -vector too graphics I think, hence no pixelization when zoomed in, just like vector text)


Not only does that not contradict what I said, it actually supports what I said. A software player using a MIDI-esque format and a MIDI bank is definitely not making chiptunes. In fact I didn't even reply to that post, because I couldn't tell he was disagreeing. I suppose any sound driver/engines usin midi formats for Adlib/SB FM synthesis cards (OPL2/3) or the Genesis (I think some games did use actual midi) wouldn't be chiptunes then. :roll:
Don't confuse the General Midi standard with the broad term midi.



Edit: I was going to say that hardware had gotten to the point that the N64 wouldn't have really benfitted from having a dedicated, integrated sound chip (perhaps a dedicated sound chipset, but that would likely involve a similar, less integrated set-up of what it does have, but at much higher cost and less flexibility -dedicated to sound). However, I then thought of something else, even prior to that, perhaps even by the tiem the SNES or Genesis was released, you could have a pretty decent sound system that used no "sound chip" in general, say a chunk of RAM (possibly in addition to a sample ROM) a pair or bank of DACs, an da decent microprocessor to drive them, even if that wasn't a dedicated microprocessor. (possibly acting as the main CPU as well) The Tandy CoCo is an early example of this, but it was a bit resourse starved (CPU had to drive graphics as well), so it's not the best example. (some pretty impressive demos in that context though)

Just because the hardware doesn;t generate raw waveforms (though it often manipulates them), most certainly doesn't mean the music isn't generated by harcware, it's not just streamed or decompressed and streamed, plus the possibility is there to generate the waveforms as well, it's just not worth it. (and one wouldn't be able to distingusih such from samples anyway -depending on compression)

Now, the formal definition of "chiptune" may apply specifically to PSG type chips, so that would exclude a lot of actual sound chips in general, so in that sense, it might not apply, but in a lot of definitions, sampel based music using a chiptune style (samples from such PSGs, analog synthesizers, etc) might apply. --Technically analog synthesizers, multi-chip+discrete hardware synthesizers, etc, shoudln't technically apply either...

[Chilly Willy]

I'm just going to ignore j_factor here - the CPU or RSP is the source of the audio, using software to generate the buffers that are played by the hardware.

Tiido got it right off:


so from what I understand here, basically all sound done one N64 is software generated since there's no dedicated mixing or waveform generation in hardware other than the playback buffer and that DMA channel to transfer sound data. The CPU reads some sample, messes with it, mixes it with the buffer, repeat for one more channel.... the more you want the more CPU you got to use. Things go like on PC most of the time where the sound card can only play single channel, you got to mix and do all kinds of other fun in expense of CPU power to get what you want....

Is it really so hard to understand? Maybe for people who aren't very technically inclined.

[j_factor]

How does that not contradict your statement, you imply by "all music is just compressed" that the music itsself is compressed, ie compressed audio which is simply streamed like PCM froma wav file, red book, or mp3, not a group of compressed (or uncompressed) samples which are manipulated by the processors according to the music generating software (midi, tracker, etc), mixed to 16-bit stereo and output to the DACs.

That was not what I meant, and I apologize if you interpreted it that way. However, I did say in the very next post that I was including samples in that statement, so that should've been clear from then on.

I don't know why you're insisting that samples somehow "don't count" as compressed or something. Uncompressed samples would be huge, so of course they're compressed.

In any case, the actual point I was making was "N64 had no audio hardware with which to make chiptunes." The following sentences were just elaboration. If my phrasing there wasn't to your liking, I'm sorry. But in your second post on page 3, you gave a more detailed description of N64 audio, to which I replied, "that's exactly what I thought it was". There was no misunderstanding or disagreement on my end as to how N64's audio functions. We were all in agreement as to how it worked. I don't understand why that point continued to be argued when nobody was saying it worked any differently.


Now, the formal definition of "chiptune" may apply specifically to PSG type chips, so that would exclude a lot of actual sound chips in general, so in that sense, it might not apply, but in a lot of definitions, sampel based music using a chiptune style (samples from such PSGs, analog synthesizers, etc) might apply. --Technically analog synthesizers, multi-chip+discrete hardware synthesizers, etc, shoudln't technically apply either...

The definition of chiptune doesn't mean specifically PSG chips, no. The majority of chiptunes, however, are created with Game Boy, NES, or Commodore 64.

I'm going to say this again, hopefully in a way that makes myself more clear. Chiptunes are music derived from dedicated audio chips on old computers and game systems. Sample-based software synthesis is not chiptunes, unless you're using samples of chip sounds (and even then it's arguable). You wouldn't call an eJay track a chiptune, would you? A CPU is a chip, yes, but if you use that as a basis to call things chiptunes, then it ceases to be a distinguishing term, as the vast majority of electronic music (in recent times) is created on computers.

You said chiptunes could be considered just a style of music that doesn't depend on how you create it, but I don't agree with that at all. ANY music from NES, Game Boy, C64, etc., ALL of them are chiptunes. It's not really a genre, it's just a categorization. Genres of electronic music are usually classified by things like tempo, percussion patterns, stuff like that. Chiptunes can be all sorts of different styles.

[kool kitty89]

I don't know why you're insisting that samples somehow "don't count" as compressed or something. Uncompressed samples would be huge, so of course they're compressed.[/qupte] Uncompressed samples don't have to be huge... most digitized stuff ont he Genesis and 32x was uncompressed, though also usually low resolution and sample rate. (on top of the artifacts induced by PWM and the YM2612's sloppy arrangement with the DAC -no interupt line connected for either CPU)

However, you're right, most samples, if not all, are likely to be compressed, at very least in ROM (some might be stored uncompressed in RAM). It really doesn't matter though as the end result is basicly indistinguishable. (or superios if low quality uncompressed samples are compared)

[QUOTE]In any case, the actual point I was making was "N64 had no audio hardware with which to make chiptunes." It has not dedicated, audio-only hardware with which to make chiptunes, yes, this is true, but it does have hardware facilitating th ecreation of chiptunes if manipulated as such. This could be doen using samples of the desired waveforms (square, various width of pulse, saw, sine, triangle, etc), or simple waveforms could even be generated in software/CPU/RSP alone, or even software driven synthesizers (again, the Jaguar seems to have even don that in practice), but in most cases it's far more work than it's worth to do such rather than simply using samples.
The SNES for example used a TON of sampled FM synthesis instruments and PSG chip sounds (though for 6-op FM instuments of professional synthesizers, that wouldn't be possible on the 4-op of the Genesis or most arcade boards). In fact, there seem to be quite a few game to use motly sampled percussion instruments, with mostly synth sounds for the lead instruments. (Capcom especially, a lot of Mega Man X and their Disney games seem to be like that)



The definition of chiptune doesn't mean specifically PSG chips, no. The majority of chiptunes, however, are created with Game Boy, NES, or Commodore 64. Don't leave out the AY-3-8910/YM2149 or SN76489, let alone POKEY. (there's a fair bit of TIA and VIC stuff even) POKEY might be my favoite though, SID is hit or miss at times, as is NES. (actually, some of my favorite NES stuff makes good use of sampel playback -especially soem Konami stuff) I've got a soft spot for Codemasters music though, especialy on the NES, evne though it seem like they were going for a SID-ish sound, it's got a crisper sound that a lot of SID stuff lacks. (but could have if the artists had chosen to avoid the filter effects, or minimize them -a bit reason why I find POKEY interesting)


A CPU is a chip, yes, but if you use that as a basis to call things chiptunes, then it ceases to be a distinguishing term, as the vast majority of electronic music (in recent times) is created on computers.
People have been doing arrangements of music on computers for over 2 decades, albit it may have been more recently that the entire thing was on a computer and in software rather than connected to external hardware (often via a midi interface) or with a high-end profecssional sound card onboard. The Atari ST was know for its use among musitions. (the onboard midi interface was a big contributor to this)


You said chiptunes could be considered just a style of music that doesn't depend on how you create it, but I don't agree with that at all. ANY music from NES, Game Boy, C64, etc., ALL of them are chiptunes. It's not really a genre, it's just a categorization. Genres of electronic music are usually classified by things like tempo, percussion patterns, stuff like that. Chiptunes can be all sorts of different styles.
OK, but here's something, if the output is identical such that the human ear, even trained ears cannot differentiate it from real hardware, is it a chiptune or not? If it's an emulator playing it, is it a chip tune? Haow about a clone system, or a clone system using an ASIC opposed to software emulation?

I'll concede to the difference between a hardware system using a sedicated sound board or single chip to produce sound rather than a gerneral purpose microprocessor otputting to a DAC, but I'm not entirely soure what you were aming at with your original N64 comment.

The problem I had with it, is that you seemed to be makign a claim that the N64 couldn't generate it's own music (didn't and coundign are different things, albeit neither are true here). I mean, if you gave an example of something like the ST's Starglider intro, Star War's Arcade's title sequence, etc (or various examples from HDD or optical disc), those are valid examples of simple streaming audio. However, manipulating audio samples in real time is a dubstancially different matter an dwhile not the same thing as generating and manipulating raw waveforms (perhaps not ture sound synthesis), it most definitely is creating music in realtime. (not just streaming or decompressing and streaming)
It seemed like you were critisizing the consoel for not haveing dedicated sound hardware, or rather, a dedicated sound controller as the SNES does. (though in you context, soemthign bypassing the buggy audio DSP in the saturn an using the 68EC000 alone to drive the DACs wouldn't be utilzing a sound chip either) Generally speaking, the PSX's sound hardware wasn't all that impressive either, and while the Saturn's might have been a bit moreso, it had its own set of problems. (the 32x and GBA's used of PWM DACs also resulted in relatively poor sound quality -I'm not sure if the 32x's PWM worked with DMA either rather than being CPU drivem -I seem to recal it featuring such a mechanism, but also someting about problems using it)

The N64's method of audio production (or GBA, 32x, etc) is just as valid as any other, and it really doesn't matter so long as the desired results are acheived. I don't see anything wrong with the route the designers took for audio in the N64... (or even the Jaguar, all things considdered, but that's a far more complex issue with its own set of problems -hardware and otherwise)

-However, actually composing withing th elimitations of given hardware is another context entirely, which is why I find that interesting and impressive. But that's a different issue from simply having the music for games; Sega probably would have opted for a sample based sound system had it been cheap enough at the time of release. (the Ricoh chip int he Sega CD and Systen 18/32 and FM Towns for example -or a bank of DACs, a dedicated block of RAM and a CPU driving sound, or have a faster main CPU driving it -or a DMA driven system like the Amiga)


Maybe we're just talking past eachother. My point was that most sound/music in the N64 is NOT comperable to streaming audio, be it MP3, linear PCM, streaming ADPCM, etc, etc. Simple PSGs and FM synthesis chips are indeed different beasts in their own right (albeit some include sample playback/decompression hardware as well -like NES, YM2610, or YM2608), but just because something doesn't have a dedicated sound chip, or doesn't use said chip directly (software mod players on ST or MD for example), I don't see what the big deal is.
Perhaps I misread you tone, but the comment seemed odd since the industry had been pushing more and more twards sample based "synthesis" since the late 80s, and several previous consoel srelied heavily or exclusively on it, PC sound cards shifted to such as did MIDI modules by the early 90s, same for arcade games. Then CD-DA came in on consoles as well as streams from HDD and such.

[j_factor]

It has not dedicated, audio-only hardware with which to make chiptunes, yes, this is true, but it does have hardware facilitating th ecreation of chiptunes if manipulated as such. This could be doen using samples of the desired waveforms (square, various width of pulse, saw, sine, triangle, etc), or simple waveforms could even be generated in software/CPU/RSP alone, or even software driven synthesizers (again, the Jaguar seems to have even don that in practice), but in most cases it's far more work than it's worth to do such rather than simply using samples.

Yes, it could make chiptunes in that way, but so could any sufficiently powerful system, and I'm not aware of that having been done in practice on N64.


OK, but here's something, if the output is identical such that the human ear, even trained ears cannot differentiate it from real hardware, is it a chiptune or not? If it's an emulator playing it, is it a chip tune? Haow about a clone system, or a clone system using an ASIC opposed to software emulation?

That's a good question. If I use a synthesizer to make organ music, is it really organ music? If I use a software program to make a tune comprised of a bunch of record scratching sounds, is it turntablism? I think these are open to interpretation.


I'll concede to the difference between a hardware system using a sedicated sound board or single chip to produce sound rather than a gerneral purpose microprocessor otputting to a DAC, but I'm not entirely soure what you were aming at with your original N64 comment.

What I was aiming at was simply that the music in N64 games isn't chiptunes. Not that chiptunes are better or worse.


The problem I had with it, is that you seemed to be makign a claim that the N64 couldn't generate it's own music (didn't and coundign are different things, albeit neither are true here). I mean, if you gave an example of something like the ST's Starglider intro, Star War's Arcade's title sequence, etc (or various examples from HDD or optical disc), those are valid examples of simple streaming audio. However, manipulating audio samples in real time is a dubstancially different matter an dwhile not the same thing as generating and manipulating raw waveforms (perhaps not ture sound synthesis), it most definitely is creating music in realtime. (not just streaming or decompressing and streaming)

Yeah but I mean... all sorts of things do what you just described. If those are chiptunes, then so are tracks created with MTV Music Generator.


It seemed like you were critisizing the consoel for not haveing dedicated sound hardware, or rather, a dedicated sound controller as the SNES does. (though in you context, soemthign bypassing the buggy audio DSP in the saturn an using the 68EC000 alone to drive the DACs wouldn't be utilzing a sound chip either) Generally speaking, the PSX's sound hardware wasn't all that impressive either, and while the Saturn's might have been a bit moreso, it had its own set of problems. (the 32x and GBA's used of PWM DACs also resulted in relatively poor sound quality -I'm not sure if the 32x's PWM worked with DMA either rather than being CPU drivem -I seem to recal it featuring such a mechanism, but also someting about problems using it)

The original comment I replied to was, in reference to N64 versus PSX, on the merits of discs versus cartridges: "CD quality music is great but chiptunes can be just as good." He seemed to think that, because it uses cartridges, it must be chiptunes. Although the N64 uses cartridge media, it has no audio chip -- which a lot of people don't realize. People tend to assume it's the same as Genesis or SNES but with a higher-quality chip. And although N64 music "can be just as good", it usually isn't. I think on its own, the N64's audio method works fine. But it often runs into problems due to being allocated a limited amount of cart space. Some N64 games' music was carefully designed around the system's limitations and it sounds great. Ports are usually the worst. Would it have been better with "proper" audio hardware? I don't know, maybe. It definitely would've been better with a higher capacity format.

And hey, the GBA was capable of excellent sound. :p


Maybe we're just talking past eachother. My point was that most sound/music in the N64 is NOT comperable to streaming audio, be it MP3, linear PCM, streaming ADPCM, etc, etc. Simple PSGs and FM synthesis chips are indeed different beasts in their own right (albeit some include sample playback/decompression hardware as well -like NES, YM2610, or YM2608), but just because something doesn't have a dedicated sound chip, or doesn't use said chip directly (software mod players on ST or MD for example), I don't see what the big deal is.

It really wasn't a big deal, it just became one. :S

[Elusive]

I hate to break this up, but I noticed that my HDTV has a VGA input - is the it worth paying for the VGA adapter considering I've already got it hooked up via SCART at the moment?

[j_factor]

I hate to break this up, but I noticed that my HDTV has a VGA input - is the it worth paying for the VGA adapter considering I've already got it hooked up via SCART at the moment?

I'm not quite sure how it is for you in PAL land. VGA is 640x480p. I'm pretty sure the DC can't do 576p. So, if I understand it correctly, you sacrifice a little resolution in order to get progressive scan. But maybe Dreamcast doesn't do PAL resolution very well to begin with, or something.

[Devil N]

I hate to break this up, but I noticed that my HDTV has a VGA input - is the it worth paying for the VGA adapter considering I've already got it hooked up via SCART at the moment?
Yes, definitely. Not only is VGA sharper than RGB SCART because of it being progressive instead of interlaced, but also because HDTV's won't apply any meddling filters on the image coming from a VGA source, such as noise reduction or artificial sharpening. It results in the sharpest and most natural image you could ever wish to get from your DC.

The only downside is that some DC games don't support VGA. Fortunately those games are in the minority and some can be patched. If you want to be sure, there's a VGA compatibility list right here (http://www.epforums.org/showthread.php?t=42182).


I'm not quite sure how it is for you in PAL land. VGA is 640x480p. I'm pretty sure the DC can't do 576p. So, if I understand it correctly, you sacrifice a little resolution in order to get progressive scan. But maybe Dreamcast doesn't do PAL resolution very well to begin with, or something.
Most PAL Dreamcast games are best played in 60 Hz anyway, so you practically don't lose anything. And whether 576i is sharper than 480p is up for debate.

[kool kitty89]

The original comment I replied to was, in reference to N64 versus PSX, on the merits of discs versus cartridges: "CD quality music is great but chiptunes can be just as good." He seemed to think that, because it uses cartridges, it must be chiptunes. Although the N64 uses cartridge media, it has no audio chip -- which a lot of people don't realize. People tend to assume it's the same as Genesis or SNES but with a higher-quality chip. And although N64 music "can be just as good", it usually isn't. I think on its own, the N64's audio method works fine. But it often runs into problems due to being allocated a limited amount of cart space. Some N64 games' music was carefully designed around the system's limitations and it sounds great. Ports are usually the worst. Would it have been better with "proper" audio hardware? I don't know, maybe. It definitely would've been better with a higher capacity format. Yeah, that makes sense, I wouldn't considder it chiptunes, and neither would I consider it equal to the possbilities of CD-DA, though in many cases, it may be fairly equivelent. And the N64's musical capabilities were decent enough. (some made better use than others, of course)
The whole choice of cartidges goes way beyond music though, the streaming video (multimedia), cost, etc had huge connotations, and I'm not entirely sure why nintendo didn't opt for creating a propritary optical format and/or heft security system. (the simplest would have been custom size/shade CDs, with a drive too small to fit full CDs, but a capacity far larger than mini CDs, so imposing difficulties for piracy, and they could add further protection later on if they lacked time initially)



And hey, the GBA was capable of excellent sound. :p
OF course, it had the GB sound hardware to fall back on too. ;)


It really wasn't a big deal, it just became one. :S
:D