GUS Daily Digest            Tue, 10 May 94  9:37 PST     Volume 13: Issue  10 

Today's Topics:
							   Ahem...
			  Analog-in-a-Window project - count me in!
						 Any sort of upgrade?
					 AWE32 message, but really...
								Codemo
						  Digi & MIDI in BAK
			   File size problem with FTP'ing Pro Pats
				   GUS Daily Digest V13 #9 (3 msgs)
							GUS MAX PANIC
						  GUS MAX too early?
				   Help with ominous error message!
					   IDEA FOR NEW DB (2 msgs)
						Megaem/ protected mode
							  mega race
						  Samplers for demos
						 server help - thanks

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

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

Date: Mon, 9 May 94 17:48:03 -0500
From: jfulmer@databank.com (John Fulmer)
Subject: Ahem...

>i there people!
>
> ................. Why have Gravis released the MAX so soon?
>
> Surely if the same manufacturer release too many different sound 
>cards, they will not get a 'sound standard'

All the GusMax is is a GUS with the daughterboard built in, CD-ROM 
controllers and more agressivly marketed. If you have a 3.7 card with a 
daughterboard (when they get the one that works with it going) then you 
basicly have a GUSMax. It is not a new 'standard'. We with older Gus's can 
have the same functionality by just buying the daughterboard.

Calm yourselves...

jf
*--------------------------------------------------------------------*
|John Fulmer(jfulmer@databank.com)|      "I find it in-ter-es-ting,  *
|Micom Computer Systems           |       A noun's a person, place,  *
|Lawrence, Ks.                    |              or thing..."        *
*--------------------------------------------------------------------*

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

Date: Tue, 10 May 94 12:11:54 +0300
From: Yossi Oren <LIOREN1@WEIZMANN.weizmann.ac.il>
Subject: Analog-in-a-Window project - count me in!

Hiya folks.
I've watched with interest the idea for new GUS apps, and the analog synth
sound like something nice to do. The biggest problem with that analog is,
IMHO, the interface.  Well, I'd like to help.
If anybody could encapsulate the whole creation and loading of patches in
an exported DLL function, I'd write a nice front end, given the description
of what the screen should look like.  What's best is that I understand that
BPDOS can also read .DLL functions so a DOS front-end could be written by
somebody else.
If anybody wants to do this, mail me direct and we'll work out a STRUCT to
put the info in.  I'll do my best to turn the display into a nice, beveled
beauty with smooth control and a nice glitzy feel.  I could also handle file
ops and some rudimentary passes, but I don't really know what goes on
inside these analogs.
Let's do it!
Yossi.
PS I'm only on the general and music lists, so don't reply to the programmer's
   digest!

+---+-----------------------------------------------------------+---+---+
| = | Yossi Oren, Al-Daf Technological Mercenaries. [diet .sig] | v | ^ |
+---+-----------------------------------------------++----------+---+--+|
|LIOREN1@weizmann.weizmann.ac.il (or just @weizmann)||GUS-sound that's ||
|The people are with the Golan Heights!             ||worth hearing!   ||
+===================================================++=================++

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

Date: Mon,  9 May 94 17:12:00 -0800
From: chris.campbell@mag-net.com (Chris Campbell)
Subject: Any sort of upgrade?

>Is there some sort of upgrade offer from Gravis to send in your GUS
>for a GUS MAX?  I am really interested in the Max, but I know that I
>would have a hard time selling my Rev. 2.2 card...Come on, Gravis,
[...]

Why can't you just buy whatever daughter boards you need to add to your 
GUS?  I'm not going to go for anything, I don't need any of the added 
features of the GUS max, I'm just eagerly awaiting the GF2, and more 
immediatly, Protected mode mega-em

Internet: chris.campbell@mag-net.com
			  
---
* CMPQwk #1.4* UNREGISTERED EVALUATION COPY

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

Date: Mon, 9 May 1994 15:07:40 -0500 (CDT)
From: vic@cd.com (Vic Serbe x237)
Subject: Re: AWE32 message, but really...

Michael Writes:
> I can't say that I would have been as happy as I have been with my GUS 
> for all this time if I hadn't had the support of this Digest and the 
> various other resources of the Internet to help me figure out what was 
> going wrong.  Joe Blow doesn't HAVE access to the Internet.  At least not
> yet.

HERE, HERE!

I for one, am very convenience oriented and will settle for less if it's
less hassle to deal with.  I probably would not be a happy GUS'er if it
weren't for this digest.  I'm sure I'd be using the SB16 otherwise.

-- 
Vic Serbe (vic@cd.com), Applications Engineer
Central Data Corp. - Makers of the scsiTerminal Server
800/482-0315 or (+1) 217/359-8010 (FAX-6904)

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

Date: Tue, 10 May 94 10:07:31 METDST
From: Herman Dullink <csg669@wing.rug.nl>
Subject: Codemo

Sorry if this isn't topic related,
but could the maker of the 'codemo' please contact me.

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

Date: Mon, 9 May 1994 13:06:29 -0500
From: vader@mermaid.micro.umn.edu (Vader)
Subject: Digi & MIDI in BAK

		I'm sure this has been asked before, but I was not interested in the 
topic before, therefore I ignored it before (Got that?)  Anyway, I was 
wondering if it is possible to have both digital sound and music in Betrayal 
at Krondor without SBOS.  I read the G-List and it said MegaEm, but the way 
the game is configured, you can either have General MIDI or SoundBlaster, 
not both.  Is it possible that it has been patched so that it works with 
both?  How about that version of MegaEm that will capture SB FM music as 
well as sound?  Anytime soon?

		The music sounds great with MegaEm and I refuse to give it up just 
for digitized sound, but I'd hate to play the game without sound.  So the 
game is just sitting there, not being played, until I can "fully" experience it.

		Thanks for any replies,
				- Mike Hobbs

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

Date: Mon, 9 May 1994 15:45:00 -0700 (PDT)
From: KOZARD@uvphys.phys.UVic.CA
Subject: File size problem with FTP'ing Pro Pats

After clearing all the junk out of my account the (un)friendly VAX/VMS
says that I have 1944 blocks free (how big is a block anyways ?) but I
don't have enough space to FTP the 1-1.3 MB Pro Pats (2) ZIP files. Since the
nasty Bastard Operator From Hell will not give me more disk space I was
wondering if anyone out there could tell me how to get these files. Does
anyone have a FTP address for an archive with the Pro Pats (2) files, but
split into smaller .ZIP's ?

Any ideas ?

Ken

KOZARD@UVPHYS.PHYS.UVIC.CA

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

Date: Mon, 9 May 1994 18:17:42 -0700 (PDT)
From: Public Image <scall@ccnet.com>
Subject: Re: GUS Daily Digest V13 #9

>  ................. Why have Gravis released the MAX so soon?   Surely 
if 
> the same manufacturer release too many different sound cards, they will 
not 
> get a 'sound standard'   When the Sound blaster was released, it became 
the 
> standard, because Creative labs did not produce a better sound card 
> immediately after it. They waited until it became the standard.   Look 
at 
> Creative labs SB's now. Due to the release of the SB-16, PAS, etc in a 
> relatively short period of time, there is no real 16-bit   71  Look at 
> Creative labs SB's now. Due to the release of the SB-16, PAS, etc in a 
> relatively short period of time, there is no real 16-bit standard; 
there 
> are too many different cards for the public to buy.   Software 
companies 
> have just started producing native sound drivers for the GUS. By 
releasing 
> the MAX, ordinary GUS'ers feel a bit cheated... Does it mean that 
software 
> companies will produce drivers for the GUS only or the MAX only?  
> Personally I can't really see software companies producing too many 
> separate sound drivers, they much prefer to produce drivers to a 'sound 
> standard'. If they stick to producing GUS drivers, the MAX's 
{expensive} 
> capabilities will not be used.  Perhaps Gravis should have waited a 
little 
> longer, until full recognition and software support was made for the GUS.

The GUS and MAX are compatable.

Besides, the GUS isn't brand new, it's been out almost 3 years?


Look at SBOS, (c) 1991,1992,1993 Forte Technologies.

-Scott

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

Date: Tue, 10 May 94 1:19:55 EDT
From: dmcintyr@muselab.ac.runet.edu
Subject: Re: GUS Daily Digest V13 #9

> dmcintyr@muselab.ac.runet.edu writes ....
> >I've been waiting patiently for a year now to see the GUS take root and become 
> >popular.
> 
> Oh ye of little patience, the SB took ages to become popular, but then the GUS 
> will never compete as a games card - it's far too versatile. But think on this, 

While the SB did take about two years before people supported those 
features unique to the card (ie the capability of adding digitized sound 
effects) virtually all commercial games released around the time I got 
my Sound Blaster supported it in Adlib mode without any drivers or TSR's.

While it could be argued that support for the GUS in "SB mode" was 
already around when I bought it, it's not really the same at all.  The 
Sound Blaster emulated an Adlib with no TSR's or other hacked kludges.  
It WAS an Adlib with some DAC stuff thrown on top.  (And actually a Game 
Blaster too, as the original Sound Blaster included the CMS chipset, so 
it had support from those games supporting the CMS Game Blaster as well.

For that matter, my FIRST soundcard was a Game Blaster.  I had that for a 
year before the Sound Blaster came out.)

> there are probably as many, if not more GUS cards than MT32/LAPC/SCC1. I own a 
> MT32 but it still gets limited support for games even though it's been around 
> longer than the Adlib. And even the PAS doesn't have full support as many games 
> have to be patched judging from the patches posted.

It gets limited support now that GM has taken over.  More games supported 
the MT-32 in its heyday than support the GUS now.  In fact, the vast 
majority of games I want to play that don't support the GUS (meaning 
support it without hacks or kludges) STILL support the MT-32.

>I'm probably going to have to cave in and get a Sound Canvas. > 
> Don't bother if it's only for games, the SC only is supported as a GM synth and 
> the GUS already does this as well for a 1/4 of the cost.

No it doesn't.  The GUS is NOT GM-compatible in the sense that the public
at large understands it.  I realize that GM is really just a specification
for what to name your patches and really little else, but for me GM
support means GM patchset+MPU-401+hardware/firmware capable of
UNDERSTANDING MIDI.  The GUS only works as a GM synth in Windows or with
hacks, kludges, and a very VERY few programs that support it completely in
native mode. 

With a Sound Canvas and an MPU-401 card (or one of the card versions of 
the Sound Canvas) then I would have the sound module that the game 
developers use to create the games in the first place.

My only interest in having a soundcard is to play games.  I don't really 
care that much about composing music, and if I did I have played with 
synths so much better than the GUS or even the Sound Canvas that I would 
consider it little more than a toy for doing anything serious.

The only thing the GUS is truly excellent at is manipulating digital 
sound data, and I really don't need, want, or care about doing this.

> Everyone should remember that the GUS is a versatile card not a SB mono clone 
> which is the most supported card by far. Hardly any games support even the SBPRO 
> in stereo years on, as for the SB16.....

Yes, but what good is a versatile card that lacks support?

As I've stated, I recognize the "advantages" of the GUS and do not 
consider them to be advantages at all for what *I* want a soundcard for.

Don't preach to ME about what people should and should not think about the
GUS.  I know about as much about it as anyone except maybe Phat Tran,
certainly more than any joe blow user is likely to ever find out without
the resources of the internet.  I have been following the development of
soundcards for PC's since that day in 1987 when I heard Sierra's famous
"Does your computer sound like this?" demo tape.  I used to be a gung-ho
pro-GUS bash-the-Sound-Blaster-people person for a good while, but I
eventually ran out of reasons to be gung-ho.

If the GUS does get the mythical support which has been over a year in 
coming--the level of support where, like with my original Sound Blaster 
when I bought it, I can buy any game on the market and play it with no 
trouble--then I will be quite happy with it.  I, personally, have given 
up any hope of that ever happening.  The GUS missed its window of 
opportunity.  But IF that future should ever actually come true, then I'm 
still ahead because I will have my GUS.  It might be worth something one 
day, as might my first revision original hand-solder-bridged Sound Blaster.

I'm not bashing the GUS.  I'm simply no longer happy with it, as it has 
NEVER met my original expecations.  I was one of those people who got 
sucked in by proud proclamations and blatantly false information.  I'm 
tired of not being happy with my soundcard, and I've finally decided to 
buy something else.  Enough said.


--Michael-- << dmcintyr@muselab.ac.runet.edu >> <<dmcintyr@vt.edu>>

-----

> It also seems apparent that Advanced Gravis could have maybe avoided some of
> these problems by whacking on an OPL3, and a seperate DAC for SB emulation. 
> Why didn't they do this?  Maybe, 1. They wanted to keep this cost down?  2.
> They -really- thought sbos would work, or(and?)  3. It's not possible.  My
> point is, If it is possible to create a daughterboard for hardware SB
> emulation, maybe it could save the gus, and maybe we could all avoid having to
> buy a new soundcard when the gus FINALLY dies...

They didn't do this because they really thought people would be jumping 
on the GUS bandwagon and support the GUS natively.  They expected SB 
emulation to be unimportant, and only a very temporary solution to the 
support problem.

I would take a different approach to saving the GUS.  My point of 
contention with the GUS has NEVER been its Sound Blaster support.  I 
don't give a damn about Sound Blaster support.  If I have to use FM in a 
game, I still have the original Sound Blaster to fall back on.

If the GUS had an MPU-401 on-board and whatever firmware necessary to 
translate the MIDI data into useful instructions to the card, as well as 
the capability of addressing enough RAM to contain the entire patch set, 
THEN it would be a wonderful card.


--Michael-- << dmcintyr@muselab.ac.runet.edu >> <<dmcintyr@vt.edu>>

----
> Nope.  You still must load a 386 memory manager, with or without the
> memory manager's NOEMS switch.  MegaEm's NOEMS switch tells it your memory
> manager is also using the equivalent NOEMS switch, and so to use an
> alternative method for installing itself.  The primary method requires
> your memory manager to supply EMS and a page frame, and uses standard VCPI
> calls.  The alternative method uses clever programming. :)

Oh.  OK.

> Protected mode games wipe out MegaEm's modifications to the memory
> manager's tables of I/O permissions and exception handlers. They set up
> their own for the duration of the game, and when they exit, they restore
> the original tables that MegaEm installed.  This is just how 386s work in
> protected mode, with programs passing control of the machine back and
> forth (hopefully, with grace! :).

Oh.  OK.  From none other than the QEMM king! *grin* 

I never knew exactly how that worked, obvsiously.  Mega-Em is certainly a 
wonderfully slick little program.  It could have been the ultimate answer 
to the support problem, but the new generation of protected mode games 
has made that an impossibility.

--Michael-- << dmcintyr@muselab.ac.runet.edu >> <<dmcintyr@vt.edu>>

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

Date: Tue, 10 May 94 12:06:12 +0300
From: Yossi Oren <LIOREN1@WEIZMANN.weizmann.ac.il>
Subject: Re: GUS Daily Digest V13 #9

>Date: Mon, 9 May 94 10:15:06 EDT
>From: redwolf@MIT.EDU
>Subject: Where can I find .AVI files for video for windows?
>
>I've looked around using xarchie, but cannot seem to find any
>AVI files for video for windows. Can someone please let me know
>of some sites that have them?

Check phoenix.oulu.fi.  They have MPEGs and AVIs (under Windows_AVI somewhere).
HTH,
Yossi.

+---+-----------------------------------------------------------+---+---+
| = | Yossi Oren, Al-Daf Technological Mercenaries. [diet .sig] | v | ^ |
+---+-----------------------------------------------++----------+---+--+|
|LIOREN1@weizmann.weizmann.ac.il (or just @weizmann)||GUS-sound that's ||
|The people are with the Golan Heights!             ||worth hearing!   ||
+===================================================++=================++

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

Date: Tue, 10 May 94 08:44:26 TZ
From: Daryl James <darylj@microsoft.com>
Subject: GUS MAX PANIC

Mike Geileskey wrote on the Digest ...

>Date: Mon, 9 May 1994 13:24:59 GMT
>From: Mike Geileskey <GEI0089L@whstud1.uel.ac.uk>
>Subject: The GUS v. The MAX
>
>Hi there people!
>
 >................. Why have Gravis released the MAX so soon?
>
>Surely if the same manufacturer release too many different sound
>cards, they will not get a 'sound standard'
<SNIP>
>Does it mean that software companies will produce
>drivers for the GUS only or the MAX only?
<SNIP>
>Perhaps Gravis should have waited a little longer, until full
>recognition and software support was made for the GUS.

Mike please calm down and take a look at the specs of the MAX.
Essentially it is the same card as the original GUS with a few
trimmings: eg CDROM interface (good for non serious SCSI devices)
16bit Recording built-in (a very nice option) and 512k RAM standard
(You would want to upgrade to 1M right away!)
So you can be safe in the knowledge that the GUS MAX will be fully
compatible with existing software that supports the original GUS.

As for the next sound card produced by Advanced Gravis?? My belief
is that it will be a leader in its class- like the GUS. But it would
be pure speculation to say it will be backwards compatible with the
GUS as we know it.

Mike, the best advice I can offer on this topic is-
  "Watch this space..."
- which loosely translates to
  "Read this Digest- Regularly!"

Daryl James
Sydney Australia    -=< Sigs waste bandwidth >=-

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

Date: Tue, 10 May 1994 11:59:14 -0400 (EDT)
From: mikebat@netcom.com (Mike Batchelor)
Subject: Re: GUS MAX too early?

Not the GUS Server once wrote...
$  
$  ------------------------------
$  
$  Date: Mon, 9 May 1994 13:24:59 GMT
$  From: Mike Geileskey <GEI0089L@whstud1.uel.ac.uk>
$  Subject: The GUS v. The MAX
$  
$  Hi there people!
$  
$   ................. Why have Gravis released the MAX so soon?
$  
$   Surely if the same manufacturer release too many different sound 
$  cards, they will not get a 'sound standard'
$   
$   When the Sound blaster was released, it became the standard, because 
$  Creative labs did not produce a better sound card immediately after 
$  it. They waited until it became the standard.

No, they were unable to make anything better for three years or more. 
Still aren't.

$   Look at Creative labs SB's now. Due to the release of the SB-16, 
$  PAS, etc in a relatively short period of time, there is no real 16-bit 
$  standard; there are too many different cards for the public to buy. 

GOOD!!!

$   Software companies have just started producing native sound drivers 
$  for the GUS. By releasing the MAX, ordinary GUS'ers feel a bit 
$  cheated... Does it mean that software companies will produce 
$  drivers for the GUS only or the MAX only?
$   Personally I can't really see software companies producing 
$  too many separate sound drivers, they much prefer to produce drivers 
$  to a 'sound standard'. If they stick to producing GUS drivers, the 
$  MAX's {expensive} capabilities will not be used.

It seems obvious that "software companies" means GAME VENDORS to you,
since all other sound/music software of consequence runs under Winders,
where GUS has had support all along with its own drivers.  Not everyone
cares if the GUS works with games.  It's more than a game squawk box.  It
makes music.  I couldn't order my MAX fast enough.  I don't care if it's
better at making noise with games.  As long as it makes better music, and
works about as well with games, then I will be happy.

$  Perhaps Gravis should have waited a little longer, until full 
$  recognition and software support was made for the GUS.

You mean until every game supported it natively?  Forget it!  My MAX
arrives next week!

-- 
Mike Batchelor      | UseLinuxUseLinuxUseLinuxUseLinuxUseLinuxUseLinuxUseLinux
mikebat@netcom.com  | xuniLesUxuniLesUxuniLesUxuniLesUxuniLesUxuniLesUxuniLesU
 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Plug 'N' Play:  A specification invented by Microsoft and Intel which
enables a computer and its operating system to create hardware conflicts
without user intervention.

No more jumpers to misplace!  The computer will misplace them for you.

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

Date: Mon, 9 May 1994 14:53:42 -0500 (CDT)
From: vic@cd.com (Vic Serbe x237)
Subject: Re: Help with ominous error message!

> Date: Thu, 5 May 1994 13:28:59 -0600
> From: masten@beta.lanl.gov
> Subject: Help with ominous error message!
> 
> GUS seemed to be working fine alone.  And even seemed to coexist with
> LAPC-1 and SBPro.  But lately (after I started playing Privateer), I
> occasionally get the following message (in large unfriendly block letters)
> when I boot:
> 
> PARITY ERROR ????
> SYSTEM HALTED
> 
> And they ain't kidding.  Ctl-alt-del or reset or off-on req'd.  And often
> it will appear again, but not always.
> 
> I've been using 240,5,5,11,5 due to having the SBPro at the default
> 220,7,1.  Otherwise, nothing unusual in the config/autoexec.
> 
> Also, even worse, on the occasional boot, my system now loses its BIOS info
> (eeek!), and I have to re-enter the HD numbers, floppy info, and other BIOS
> settings. 
> 
> I just switched to 240,5,5,15,5, and the problem hasn't recurred, YET. 
> Haven't tried it too many times, but hopefully it'll clear the problem. 
> Any clues?

Do you have a SCSI board in your system?

I had the same problem for a while, but maybe for different reasons.  In
any case, in explaining what happened to me, maybe you'll get an idea.

Parity errors happen when you read from memory that has never been written
to.  Parity bits are initialized on write, and checked at read.  PC's
consider parity errors totally catastrophic (tied to the NMI) and fail
assuming you have a memory error.

Now, the way these TYPICALLY happen is due to interrupt problems.
Memory errors are rediculously rare these days.  The way an interrupt
problem can cause this, is if you have a card, say a SCSI host adapter,
that generates an interrupt (spurious) due to a chip not being
initialized, due to the driver not having been run.

The interrupt tells your system to jump to the ISR table (low in
memory) and read the routine to find out what to do to service it.
Well, if no piece of software has init'd it yet, BAM...  parity error
and system halt.  I solved my problem by making sure I ran
ASPI4DOS.SYS, even though I might not have any SCSI devices atttached
at that boot.

The default interrupt for an Adaptec SCSI host adapter is 11 (a must if
you want to boot from SCSI), but they can be set to 10 if you don't need
to boot from the bus (in my case, I boot from IDE, and use SCSI for tape,
and eventually 3x or 4x CD).

> Last Q.  I gather after a power down, if I don't initialize the GUS, it'll
> go to the default setups?  I've tried configs without initializing the GUS,
> and I get SBPro conflicts.  I gather it is due to the default DMA/IRQ?

Yep.  You have to make sure to ALWAYS run ultrinit after setting the env
variables at boot.  To quote Wilford Brimly: "It's the right thing to do".

-- 
Vic Serbe (vic@cd.com), Applications Engineer
Central Data Corp. - Makers of the scsiTerminal Server
800/482-0315 or (+1) 217/359-8010 (FAX-6904)

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

Date: Tue, 10 May 94 10:34:56 +1000
From: s2102949@cse.unsw.edu.au (David Khoury)
Subject: Re: IDEA FOR NEW DB

>Ok, it's pretty obvious that if the GUS ever dies (and it looks as if it may
>do), it is because of a lot of bad press over SB incompatability.  It seems
>that software emulation really won't work reliably because programmers seem to
>enjoy programming the SB in different (non-standard?) ways, which the software
>emulation can't handle (not without a patch or update of the software anyway).
>It also seems apparent that Advanced Gravis could have maybe avoided some of
>these problems by whacking on an OPL3, and a seperate DAC for SB emulation.
>Why didn't they do this?  Maybe, 1. They wanted to keep this cost down?  2.
>They -really- thought sbos would work, or(and?)  3. It's not possible.  My
>point is, If it is possible to create a daughterboard for hardware SB
>emulation, maybe it could save the gus, and maybe we could all avoid having to
>buy a new soundcard when the gus FINALLY dies...
>
>My questions,   1. Is this possible?
>                2. Does the 16bit DB have piggyback slot?
>                3. Would it be cost competative?
>and lastly,     4. Would Advanced Gravis be interested???
>
>If the answers to questions 1-4 are 'yes', then maybe the GUS can be saved.  If
>the answer to question 1 is 'no', then I must look like a real idiot :-)
>
>Just an idea....
>

I don't know why some people are convinced that the GUS is going to die. Where
I am, the GUS is thriving like a bull on growth hormones. Most of my friends
have a GUS and we're continuously convincing more people to get one. It's 
more popular here than any other single sound card. It's an utterly fantastic
card. Sorry it's not the same where you are :( .

About that DB..... people would only need it if they were using SBOS and I can
tell you now that I have not used SBOS for close to 1 YEAR.  All the games
that I have played since then have all supported GUS in native mode or 
through megaem (which is far superior in sound quality than SBOS). NO games
have been any trouble to get running.... the most trouble I have to go to is
by setting up megaem before I play some games.

Another thing.... before you get set in your mind that a SB Daughterboard is
the only solution, keep in mind that Jayeson at Gravis is programming a much
better version of MEGAEM that will run in protected mode. Who needs SB 
music through SBOS when you can get the full midi score through MEGAEM!!!!

My personal opinion is that a SB daughterboard is not necessary and is actually
a step in the wrong direction.

				David Khoury

 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
The opinions above are only of the author,     | David Khoury
and in no way are they related to the          | Student
opinions of little furry creatures that        | UNSW University.
look really cute but would probably bite       | s2102949@cse.unsw.edu.au
your hand if you tried to feed them....        |          8^)
 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Mon, 09 May 1994 20:02:55 MDT
From: mymelanson@uccs.edu
Subject: IDEA FOR NEW DB

 
----ON----
  --->> Date: Mon, 09 May 94 22:55:52 +1030
 
----THIS PERSON----
  --->> jordan - jn@adam.com.au - Adelaide, South Australia
 
----ASKED THIS QUESTION----
 
  --->> ... by whacking on an OPL3, and a seperate DAC for SB emulation.
  --->> Why didn't they do this? Maybe, 1. They wanted to keep this cost down?
 
	Is it possible, you ask?  As far as my technical knowledge goes,
yeah; it'd be pretty simple.  It probably wouldn't have even upped the overall
cost very much.  But I think the problem here is that almost all new sound
boards, at least those meant mostly for games, have all been just an original
SB with a few new features like an OPL-3 instead of an OPL-2 and a DAC or 2
more with expanded sampling resolution.  When you think about it the only real
reason any other sound boards have really prospered is because they basically
were sound blasters under a new name and had the potential to do much
more.  I look at the packages of so many games and see something like:  Sound
boards supported:  Adlib, SB, SBPro, SBPro 16, PAS+, PAS 16, etc., and they're
all the same thing.  Very few of the games ever use any of boards' individual
expanded talents.  Have you ever even heard of a piece of commercial software
that uses the OPL-3 chip to it's fullest capacity with all 20 stereo voices?
	I believe Gravis's aim was to create a better standard for audio en-
joyment and that's why they started from scratch.  To solve the emulation con-
undrum they (tried to) make the DAC's emulate FM such that the DAC's would
still produce the same melody but with far better-sounding instruments.  Tech-
nically, I suppose that all of the instruments are better due to superior
sound reproduction.  In the end, of course, whether or not a particular in-
strument actually does sound better all comes down to personal opinion.
	Hope this helps...
			  -Mike
			(mymelanson@happy.uccs.edu)

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

Date: Mon, 09 May 1994 17:55:12 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Out of it..." <JKS4675@ritvax.isc.rit.edu>
Subject: Megaem/ protected mode

Any chance of seeing Megaem working with protected mode executables
such as Mortal Combat (or Kombat, or Kommbaghtt), or OS/2, for that matter??

As far as .AVIs go, theres a HEAP at FTP.CDROM.COM in the pub/os2/multimed/avi
or something to that effect. There are a few 4+MB AVIs, 16 bit audio. Nice. 
They came with OS/2 2.1's CDROM release. That site also has some MODs, MIDI,
FLIs, et al. The zipped files are pretty big- you get a 16-bit AVI and the same
in 8-bit audio. They work magnificently with Mr. Manley's OS/2 GUS driver,
which is profoundly better than the mystery-vaporware (see also 'Microsoft')
OS/2 driver purported to be worked on by Forte, Gravis, ConHugeCo, Oswald
Boelcke, Enrico Fermi, and the DiFranco Family.

Joe Bob says check it out. 
+--------------------------------------------------------------+---------------+
|"Sometimes I try to beat other people's achievements but on   |JK Salzmann    |
| occasions I find it's better to beat my achievements. That   |JKS4675@RIT.EDU|
| can give me more satisfaction. I don't feel happy if I am    +---------------+
| comfortable.  Something inside me pushes me when I get comfortable.          |
| It makes me go further and want to keep pushing"  - Ayrton Senna, 1960-1994  |
+------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

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

Date: Mon, 9 May 1994 09:59:57 -0700
From: dross@ultrix5.cs.csubak.edu (dean ross-smith)
Subject: mega race

Mega race works ok with the gus for Digital sound using megaem.
sbos works not quite as well but you get the cheesy FM music too.

I called Software Toolworks tech support and they said something about
updating the game to include GUS support Real Soon Now.

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

Date: Tue, 10 May 1994 12:28:55 +0000
From: Chrysolite <chrys@ozspace.brisnet.org.au>
Subject: Samplers for demos

I saw somewhere here (either in this digest or in the UltraSound Source) 
a demogroup saying not to sample with a GUS; they use a SB16 or PAS16.  
I have a GUS with a 16-bit DB, and the quality from that is much better 
than anything from Media Vision or CL.  Maybe soon we'll get a few demos 
released with sound quality better than 8-bit 22kHz (that's all Second 
Reality was, BTW).

-=Chrysolite=-

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

Date: 09 May 94 16:41:37 EDT
From: "Eric Bell, Howling Dog Systems" <71333.2166@CompuServe.COM>
Subject: server help - thanks

Thanks to everyone who responded to my file server woes.

I got UPL02.ZIP - trying for gusdly10.zip now. Its definitely partly a matter
of case.

Gotta get an Internet ID somewheres...

Eric
 

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

Date: Mon, 9 May 94 17:42:17 -0500
From: jfulmer@databank.com (John Fulmer)

>Hi:
>
>I bought the CD version of BUSYTOWN, a game for my son, and I am having 
>some problems.
>
>Using SBOS I was able to run the game with sounds, but it hangs on me
>after a while. Especially, after leaving the firestation, it hangs
>every time I tried. My system is a DX2-66 with Award bios and SIS 
>chipset. I use address 240, interrupt 7 and DMA channel 1.
>
>Any help/suggestion would be appreciated.
>
>Cheers.
>
>Nhut.

You know, I've noticed that any time that a program hangs with SBOS on me, 
all I have to do us make sure that it is not loaded high (I forget the 
switch). This has worked for me on Biomenace, Links386 Pro, and a few others 
that would just hang. Couldn't hurt....

John F.
*--------------------------------------------------------------------*
|John Fulmer(jfulmer@databank.com)|      "I find it in-ter-es-ting,  *
|Micom Computer Systems           |       A noun's a person, place,  *
|Lawrence, Ks.                    |              or thing..."        *
*--------------------------------------------------------------------*

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

End of GUS Daily Digest V13 #10
*******************************
