Ultrasound Daily Digest     Sat,  5 Dec 92       Volume 1 : Issue  39 

Today's Topics:
						 GUS and Modplayers 
					  Lucasarts and GUS support
						Lucasfilm's ignorance
						  midi under windows
						   MT-32 patch map
					 New Software From Gravis!!!!
		 ReL GUS sounds great! Here's why I'm returning it...
				  SBOS not playing digitized sounds.
					Ultrasound Daily Digest V1 #32
					Ultrasound Daily Digest V1 #36
					Ultrasound Daily Digest V1 #37

Digest Address:           ultrasound@dsd.es.com
			  To post to tomorrow's digest.

Request Server Address:   ultrasound-request@dsd.es.com
						  To subscribe, unsubscribe, and request files.

Owner Address:            ultrasound-owner@dsd.es.com
						  To contact a human if the server has troubles.

FTP Site #1:              ftp epas.utoronto.ca (/pub/pc/ultrasound)
						  Digest back issues, mirror of request server

People responsible:       David DeBry, Adam Iles, Thomas Wong, Chris Yuzik,
			  and many others who should be thanked often. :)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 04 Dec 92 13:04:34 -0500
From: "It's your hand, Buckaroo" <dantonio@magick.tay2.dec.com>
Message-Id: <9212041804.AA01505@magick.tay2.dec.com>
Subject: GUS and Modplayers 
To: Ultrasound Daily Digest <ultrasound@dsd.es.com>

twong@civil.ubc.ca (Thomas Wong) writes:

> Well, I have both MODEDIT and WOWII working fine on my machine.
> For plain MOD playback, I'd use WOWII cause it looks much fancier
> and you can see each channel which doesn't do much but looks "neat".
> 
> So try the above. Remember to load SBOS first.
> No options needed. In fact, I just use a batch file that loads SBOS,
> then the mod program, and unloads it when done. Very nice that SBOS has
> an option to remove itself from memory. I use batch files for all my
> games and anything that needs SBOS.

Please, when giving info about what SBOS settings work with what, let us
know what memory manager, if any, what OS, version, etc. For example, I use
QEMM, DR DOS 6.0 and SBOS won't cooperate at all with WOWII or MODPLAY.
Total silence and then WOWII freezes after the first buffer...

DDA

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

Date: Fri, 4 Dec 92 20:32:29 EET
From: Lasse Hero <larry@mdata.fi>
Message-Id: <199212041832.AA04466@mdata.fi>
Subject: Lucasarts and GUS support
To: Ultrasound Daily Digest <ultrasound@dsd.es.com>

Phat H Tran <ptran@sciborg.uwaterloo.ca> wrote:

>Sorry, but I don't think that William did more than run some
>games with  SBOS when he tested the GUS.  The Ultrasound is
>definitely one of the best sounding cards out there.  About the
>only cards that sound better than it at the moment is the
>Roland Sound Canvas and the Turtle Beach Multisound, and
>anything more expensive than these two.  If you can divulge
>William's email address to the net of GUS fanatics, I think we
>can get him to give the GUS a second look.

That'd be great, the address for Lucasgames/arts/whatever is
75300.454@compuserve.com. 

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

Date: Thu, 03 Dec 92 19:30:08 EST
From: moddan@bowker.com (Daniel Nicholson  )
Message-Id: <X9e9uB1w164w@bowker.com>
Subject: Lucasfilm's ignorance
To: Ultrasound Daily Digest <ultrasound@dsd.es.com>

If comments such as those seen in yesterday's Digest are actually the 
official position of Lucasfilms it doesn't surprise me. Large companies such 
as Sierra and Lucasfilm are very slow to act and very ignorant of new 
technologies. The company doesn't focus on innovation, it focuses on 
marketing. Companies like that are not going to be around too long with 
today's more and more selective customer. 
  As for "the speech sucks" (another brilliant, sophisticated statement from 
Lucasfilms Soft); this guy must think that CD sounds terrible. What does he 
want, Vulcan mindmelding? The GUS can produce true to life sound as good as 
any other soundcard or CD player. My suggestion to GUS owners: invest in the 
people who support you, and screw those that don't. They'll wise up sooner 
or later.

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

Date: Fri, 4 Dec 92 14:24:44 -0800
From: cliff@trifid.astro.ucla.edu (cliff UCLA Astronomy)
Message-Id: <9212042224.AA03880@trifid.astro.ucla.edu>
Subject: midi under windows
To: Ultrasound Daily Digest <ultrasound@dsd.es.com>

 I just got my GUS yesterday from Compubility and I like it already.  I
 found that I had conflict with DMA channels 5 (UltraStor 14F bus mastering
 scsi controller) and 7 (I think this is my Diamond SpeedStar 24X since it
 messes up my screen).  DMA 6 works great and my roommate (whose ear is
 better than mine) claims the midiplay tocatta sounds deeper and richer than
 DMA 3.  Now for my questions:

 I had to do some editing of my system.ini files to remove the PAS16 stuff
 that stayed behind after removing the PAS driver from the control drivers
 applet.  After restarting windows, I went to the driver applet to install
 the gus driver ( I also copied the midimap.cfg file from ultrasnd/windows
 to windows/system), when I specified the ultrasnd/windows directory, it
 came up with two drivers--I install the first one.  Should I also
 install the second one-it didn't say anything about that in the readme.bat
 or instruction manuals????  Secondly, I went to the media player and
 loaded tocatta.mid and tried to play it---I immediately got an error
 message stating that the media player would not work reliably--I ignored
 the message click ok and played the midi file and it sounds great.  Why
 do I get this error message??  I also have been following the pc soundcard
 news feed and I'm puzzled by the discussion about patch files, could someone
 explain this to me simply (I'm very new to this stuff but I really like
 what I've heard so far).  Thanks for the info.

 cliff
 cliff@trifid.astro.ucla.edu

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

Date: Fri, 4 Dec 92 17:40:14 PST
From: ee52fgh@sdcc15.UCSD.EDU (Anthony Tang)
Message-Id: <9212050140.AA24383@sdcc15.UCSD.EDU>
Subject: MT-32 patch map
To: Ultrasound Daily Digest <ultrasound@dsd.es.com>

I've uploaded my attempt at an MT-32 patch map to epas.utoronto.ca.
Unfortunately, I couldn't test it very well, becasue I keep running
out of memory on my GUS (gotta upgrade to 1MB).  I've included a
MIDI file configured for the MT-32 in the zip (mt32.zip).  The midi
file is called "Mountain Music"  It sounds pretty good on my mt-32.
Please e-mail me if there are any problems.


Anthony Tang
aktang@sdcc13.ucsd.edu   <--please use this address.  Thanks

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

Date: 4 Dec 92  9:50 -0800
From: Thomas Wong <twong@civil.ubc.ca>
Message-Id: <2532*twong@civil.ubc.ca>
Subject: New Software From Gravis!!!!
To: Ultrasound Daily Digest <ultrasound@dsd.es.com>

Well... I was on the Gravis BBS last night and notice that they had a
few more software upgrades available in the file area. I anxiously
downloaded them and was going to put it in the Ultrasound ftp archive 
and tell everyone. But it looks like someone beat me to it. :(
BUT, the person who uploaded it did annouce it anywhere (same as the
person who uploaded the latest version of the Ultrasound installed
disks. Didn't tell anyone about it). So I'd do the announcing.... :)

First of all, if there are those who still doesn't know yet, the ftp
site is epas.utoronto.ca and the directory is pub/pc/ultrasound.

And in case you don't have it yet, the latest version of the Ultrasound
setup disks are also available there, version 1.21. Look under the
gravis-disks directory to get the latest and greatest version.

Now for the new stuff, released to the Gravis BBS just yesterday (Dec 2)
and already uploaded by someone else....

There is a new SETUP program for those who've been having problems with
the SETUP on their computer. The file is in the submit directory still 
called gus0007.exe. This is a self extracting archived file and will
probabluy be renamed to something better by the time it is verified by
the admin of the ftp site and released in the gravis-disk directory.

There is also a BETA version of the new SBOS program. It is also in the
submit directory and is called gus0008.exe. Again it will probably be
renamed when released to gravis-disk directory.

For those who have been having problems with the SBOS program, give this
one a try. And remember, this is a beta testing version so Gravis is
looking for feedback. Tell them all that doesn't work and let's get SBOS
fixed for a clean release.

To contact Gravis with your bug report....

Their Fax number is (604) 434-5155 and their tech line is (604) 431-1807.

Their CompuServe address is 75300,733.
Their internet email address is 75300.733@compuserve.com.

Their BBS phone number is (604) 431-5927.


These are just more evidences to reinforce why we think the Ultrasound 
is a great produce, even after sales. Gravis is listening and
making changes. And since a number of things are done in software, like
the SBOS, SB emulation, we can download upgrades and fixes as they are
released. And make them available via their BBS or on internet. Keep the
feedback rolling to Gravis. Let's make this product the best that it can
be!

Thomas.

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

Date: 4 Dec 92 10:08 -0800
From: Thomas Wong <twong@civil.ubc.ca>
Message-Id: <2533*twong@civil.ubc.ca>
Subject: ReL GUS sounds great! Here's why I'm returning it...
To: Ultrasound Daily Digest <ultrasound@dsd.es.com>

You're returning it because you can't get SBOS to work? But I think you
did the right thing by posting here first cause someone maybe able to
find something you might be over looking since you are the first of this
case I've heard of. Anyways, have you check your SB IRQ to make sure you
don't have a conflict? Change the SB IRQ to test it out? SB itself is
limiting and only have 4 IRQ choices or so. After you do SETUP. Make
sure you read the messages when you get out. If you're using something
that is not compatible with SB, it will tell you that it won't work. I
had a problem cause I didn't read the screen after I exited SETUP. And I
couldn't get SB emulation to work either. I reSETUP a couple of times
and couldn't get it to work. So I walked away, came back and I still had
the "exit from SETUP" messages on the screen and decided to read it.
That's when I figured out that I was using the wrong IRQ.

And you already said that you have already played around with the base
address so that shouldn't be the problem?!?

Notice that there are new software from Gravis available (including a
new SETUP program and a new SBOS) Look for my other message called
"New Software..." for more info. Since these things are software, your
problems can be fixed by replacing the program. This is one good feature
of Ultrasound and hopefully, we can get this fixed without you having to
returnt he card. And we do get new software as they are released by
Gravis.

Lastly, did you try contacting Gravis? You can email them you know...
email address => 75300.733@compuserve.com


Thomas.

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

Date: Fri, 4 Dec 1992 09:36:25 -0800 (PST)
From: Mark Harrison <harrison@lclark.edu>
Message-Id: <Pine.3.03.9212040925.A22127-c100000@sun>
Subject: SBOS not playing digitized sounds.
To: Ultrasound Daily Digest <ultrasound@dsd.es.com>

I didn't want to bore everyone with my GUS horror stories, but since I've
been seeing more posts about the subject, I'll tell all.

My problem was that the GUS played great.  Everything was perfect.  SBOS
played great.  Everything that is except digitized sounds.  I went through
the whole ordeal of changing jumpers, IRQ's, DMA's, etc.  Didn't work.  I
changed slots in the computer.  Didn't work.  I removed every other non
vital card from my computer.  Didn't work.  I stripped my AUTOEXEC and
CONFIG files done to the bone.  Didn't work.  I called tech support at
Gravis.  Tried everything they suggested including setting CMOS to boot up
with power on defaults.  Guess what?  Didn't work.  After Gravis said they
would call back and never did, I started thing about other causes.

Let me digress a moment here.  About 6 months ago, I picked up CJPEG and
DJPEG.  That was version 3 that was compiled for a 386 or better.  I took
it home and tried it out on my computer.  I didn't work.  I sent e-mail to
Tom Lane and tried everything he suggested, but nothing worked.  It did
work on every other computer I tried it on, but not mine.  We finally gave
up and I used the 286 version.  Now when I started having problems with
SBOS, I remembered these two programs.  I sent more mail to Tom and he
told me noone has had problems like mine since that version was released
in April.

So I now found myself with two pieces of software that SHOULD work, but
wouldn't.  No one else had any problems with these two programs, so I
suspected maybe a bad motherboard.  It was a longshot, but I thought "What
the hell.  I've tried everything else."  Lucky for me, my one year
warrenty had a few weeks left, so I took it into the shop.  I had a few
minor problems there.  First of all, I had a GUS.  The tech guy couldn't
figure out why I wouldn't buy a SB or SB Pro.  He was totally baffled by
all the specs.  Then when I told him I only paid $99 for it, it finally
clicked in his brain.  I was a moron.  Oh well.  Then he bitched because
the programs that I gave him to show that there were problems were the
JPEG stuff and Wolfenstien.  The first is freeware and the other is
shareware!!!  "Well, you can't trust this stuff.  It's just cheap games
written by high school kids."  It kind of made me laugh, but I finally got
him to check it out.

Well, to keep a long story from getting longer, when I picked my computer
up, the work order said a new motherboard had been installed and
everything worked now.  I couldn't really believe it, but that's what it
said.  When I finally got it home, to my amazement, everything DID work. 
I my new motherboard has a 128k cache (instead of 64k) to boot!!!  I was
totally shocked even though I had suspected it all along.

So if anyone else has problems with digitized sounds and SBOS, you might
want to keep this in mind.

If you've had the patience to listen to this long boring story, you
deserve a reward.  How about some programmer out there putting some kind
of menu together for playing MIDI files.  I've collected so many now, that
I can't see them all on the screen to test them out.  PLAYMIDI whatever...
DIR... PLAYMIDI whatever... DIR...  Sound familiar?  If no one comes up
with something, I'll give it a try, but I don't have much time and I'll be
leaving for a week tomorrow.  Any takers?

=============================================================================
Mark Harrison           |  "We are the Priests, of the Temples of Syrinx
harrison@sun.lclark.edu |   Our great computers fill the hallowed halls."
			  -- Me     |                                    -- Rush
=============================================================================

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

Date: Fri, 4 Dec 92 21:25:35 EST
From: Etienne Mayrand <etienne@osd.ulaval.ca>
Message-Id: <9212050225.AA03502@lac_tonnerre.osd.ulaval.ca>
Subject: Ultrasound Daily Digest V1 #32
To: Ultrasound Daily Digest <ultrasound@dsd.es.com>

Hi everybody,

As many of you who purchased an Ultrasound, I know that its the best
soundcard available for less than 200$ on the market today. Period.
I also know how great it sounds. Sure, I've had my share of problems
and anxiety attacks, but I knew I was taking a risk when I bought this
new product only one week after its release, back in October. After all,
you don't get at the cutting edge of technology without some bruises. But,
in the end, I'm a very satisfied customer.

What worries me, though, is the increasing number of game companies
announcing that they won't support this great new soundcard, for this or
that reason. Just to remind you of the reasons invoked so far, I have 
compiled the following list: 

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

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

Date: Fri, 4 Dec 92 11:01:23 CST
From: jasper@cae.wisc.edu
Message-Id: <9212041701.AA01558@hprisc-1.cae.wisc.edu>
Subject: Ultrasound Daily Digest V1 #36
To: Ultrasound Daily Digest <ultrasound@dsd.es.com>

Please remove me from the list.

Thanks

jasper@cae.wisc.edu

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

Date: Fri, 4 Dec 92 11:00:23 CST
From: jasper@cae.wisc.edu
Message-Id: <9212041700.AA01543@hprisc-1.cae.wisc.edu>
Subject: Ultrasound Daily Digest V1 #37
To: Ultrasound Daily Digest <ultrasound@dsd.es.com>

Please remove me from the list.

Thanks. 


Jasper Yue 

jasper@cae.wisc.edu

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

Date: (null)
From: (null)
To: Ultrasound Daily Digest <ultrasound@dsd.es.com>

Sorry, but the way we create our sound files and the lack of RAM on
the Ultrasound card make it almost impossible for us to support it.

Anonymous Sysop

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

Date: (null)
From: (null)
To: Ultrasound Daily Digest <ultrasound@dsd.es.com>

I am head of development at Spectrum HoloByte and also worked on
Accolade Star Control I and II products.  I have been VERY involved with
Gravis on various projects incuding the Ultrasound.  It has been our 
experience that the UltraSound is significantly more difficult to support 
than competing sound cards.  This is partly due to it being flakely in
different machines (something they know about and are fixing), and the 
fact that they only supply object modules for developer's to be compatible
with. This severely limits software developer's access to the board.  A 
third noteworthy reason that it is more difficult to support is that
it has some capabilities that surpass existing sound cards.

Here at Spectrum we are working with next generation sound cards just 
around the corner that far outperform all cards on the market today. 
Consumers are in for a lot of wondeful choices.

AJ Redmer
Executive Director, R & D
Spectrum HoloByte, Inc.
ajredmer@netcom.com

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

Date: (null)
From: (null)
To: Ultrasound Daily Digest <ultrasound@dsd.es.com>

At this time, nope. I've listened to many cards, all with the same
machine, same speakers, just different cards. And with so many new 
developers coming out with new cards it's difficult to find ones that
will stay any sort of distance. When some of the dust settles, we may
look into it. Just not at this time. 
 
And on a side note, when I tested the cards, Gravis is actually pretty
bland compared to most. And it's speech truly sucks...
Still 99% of it is the amp and speakers that you hook it through...

William.

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


This looks pretty discouraging, doesn't it? If it's not the lack of RAM,
it's these capabilities that surpass any other card (!). If it's not the
incredible number (hundreds, probably ;) ) of developers who are touting
their own soundcard, it's the next generation of sound cards that will 
be released real soon now (yeah, sure).

In fact, there is a common thread here. It's the fact that nobody is giving
their real reason: economics!

Let's be frank, would you invest thousands of dollars in development cost
for a product that was just released in the US, has software and hardware
bugs, nonexistent support and no mass-marketing worth mentionning? Further-
more, would you make that decision if you didn't even really know what
it sounds like, or had no knowledge of its technology? Probably not.

What matters here is return on investment. These guys are out there to
make a profit. They have to be convinced that they will sell a lot more games
(thousands more, not just a few hundreds) before they commit to anything 
(CD-ROM, GUS, Super VGA, no matter, it's all the same).

What we are witnessing here is a game of wait and see. Game developers
are waiting for GUS sales reports. Gravis is waiting for bug reports
and new software (BTW, where are those new patches I've been waiting for?).
Customers are waiting for game support and bug free cards.

This may look like a vicious circle, but it's not. Why? Because of
customers who want to get the best and latest technology, no
matter what. People like us, actually.

It is a well known fact in mass marketing that a small percentage 
of all customers go bonkers when they see a new technology and that
they "got to have it". If it were not for this segment of the population,
there would be no VCRs, HDTV, home computers...

There is also this much bigger segment who will buy when it feels that
the risks are lower. I think that game developers are waiting for the 
signal that these people are buying. If you say that you are a 
computer hacker whiz kid (the simple fact that you use e-mail 
is a dead give away) who just got his GUS and wants games support NOW
for this great technology, they will not be impressed. But if you say
you are a middle-aged worker who bought this Ultrathing card at K-Mart,
they will at their keyboards faster than you can say "Let's configure 
your Gravis Ultrasound"!



On an up note, here's what someone has to say about programming for
the GUS:

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

Date: (null)
From: (null)
To: Ultrasound Daily Digest <ultrasound@dsd.es.com>

Programming for the GUS is the absolute hands down 
easiest sound programming I have done, and I'm not even the programmer here. 
Furthermore, due to the design of the card very little overhead is 
necessary.

- Dan Nicholson (PCkS Associates) moddan@bowker.com



Etienne Mayrand
Laval University
Quebec, Canada

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

End of Ultrasound Daily Digest V1 #39
******************************

