Search options (Page 24 of 40)

Neat!

"$db" is indeed a note value in hex notation, equal to 219 in decimal

I wonder what went wrong with those errors though. The line "#define db .byte" actually means the opposite in TASM, eg. "interpret '.byte' as 'db'". But as I said, back in the day when I wrote these I didn't have much of a clue about asm either. In any case, I promise to make a better version of ti1bit pack as soon as I can find the time, hopefully in January.

If you run into the "too many lines" problem, it might also suffice to put some dummy labels somewhere in the music data, eg.

   db $bla
   db $bla
   db $bla
dummyLabel1
   db $bla
   db $bla
   db $bla

Haven't tried this though. In any case, first thing for the new ti1bit pack will be to eliminate TASM and replace it with a modern assembler which doesn't bicker about stupid crap like that.

A note on speed: Speed conversion in ti1bit is not very accurate to begin with. But there are also other problems, some of which were discovered only recently. Namely 1) The TI-83 Parcus (the model you have) actually runs at around 7 MHz, despite the official specs claiming it runs at 6. 2) CPU speed on TI calcs fluctuates significantly depending on battery strength. On TI-83, it's not as bad as on some other calcs, but still normal to have +/- ½ MHz variation.

In theory it should just work by setting the loop point where you want it in 1tracker. I have no clue what I even meant by what's written in the ti1bit readme.

Ha, with a demo tune like this, it was totally worth it Looking forward to what you'll come up with. Please do post your stuff here, I'm curious.
And yeah, applying some eq is totally fine in the 1-bit world (well, in my opinion at least). Though lsengine is a pretty hopeless case. I've used it quite a bit for some time, but I never managed to get it to sound really good, neither on Spectrum nor on TI.

Hey, no problem at all. Using this crap package certainly isn't trivial and others might benefit from having these questions discussed. So no need to feel guilty.

Regarding the error, I'm a bit surprised by this one. I don't have any problem running TASM in DOSBox. But I just noticed that I'm appearantly using 3.1, not 3.2.
http://www.ticalc.org/archives/files/fi … /1504.html
Maybe using this ^ will solve the problem? Otherwise, I'd say 3.2 appears to NOT require DOS after all. So perhaps try to run in directly under Windows (though I doubt that would work under anything newer than XP)?

You're not giving up easily, are you? Well, with so much persistence, I don't have a choice but to help you

Ok, so first of all, you need the "other" TASM - not Borland, but Telemark. You can get it here:
http://www.ticalc.org/archives/files/fi … 25051.html
You'll probably need to run it in DOSbox, btw.
And devpac83 is here: http://www.ticalc.org/archives/files/fi … /3650.html
Just dump all the files in your working directory, where you have the asm files. "asm83.bat" goes into that folder as well.

Regarding step 5, just make sure the first two lines look something like this:

;#define TI82
#define TI83

Anything that has a ";" in front of it is considered a comment in assembly, and will be ignored by the assembler. If you just have the line "#define TI83" (without a ; in front of it), then that'd be correct. Don't worry about the "looping" part for now.

Also, don't worry about the "long song data corrupts TASM" part, unless you actually run into problems. If that happens, take this:

ptr1
loop1
    db $21
    db $2d
    db $1e
    db $2a
    db $20
    db $2c
    db $1c
    db $28
    db $2a
    db $1e
    db $26
    db $1a
    db $28
    db $1c
    db $25
    db $19
    db $2d
    db $2d
    db $2a
    db $2a
    db $2c
  bla bla bla...

and transform it into this:

   db $21, $2d, $1e, $2a, $20, $2c, $1c, $28, $2a, $1e, $26, $1a, $28, $1c, $25, $19
   db $2d, $2d, $2a, $2a, $2c, ...

Also yes, that rawp thing will be a bit easier to use. No need to fiddle with TASM, at least.

Ah, glad that's solved. Hmm, perhaps I can make things a bit more clear in the manual.

Also... you actually want to use ti1bit pack? I always assumed there's literally nobody using it, hence I haven't updated it in ages. In it's current form, it's a major p.i.t.a to use. Well, in theory you can use the engines while ht2 is installed, but I'm afraid you'll run out of RAM very quickly. On TI-83 with HT2 installed you have around 500 bytes left, of which Ion needs another 200 or so for its internal operations. So you have just 300 bytes left, but even a small 1-bit song usually takes more than 1 KB.

I believe there may be another way of fak... err, I mean generating a saw wave on beeper. For this, we need to look at the frequency spectrum, rather than the waveform. In the frequency domain, a square wave is characterized by having a peak at each odd harmonic. That means, for a 440 Hz, 50% duty square wave, frequency components will be present at 440*3, 440*5, 440*7 Hz, and so forth, but not at 440*2, 440*4, 440*6 Hz etc.
A saw wave, on the other hand, peaks at both even and odd harmonics. Thus it can be approximated by mixing a series of square waves with frequencies of f, f*2, f*4, f*8, etc. With the "fast accumulation" technique (add hl,de \ ld a,h \ out (#fe),a) we can easily achieve this by rotating A to get the required multiples. Doing this with 3-4 frequencies should already give a reasonable approximation of a saw, because the missing components will be high enough to fall out of the range at which humans can reliably detect the difference.

Cheers guys! All that digi stuff aside, my favourite engine from this year is probably Squeeker Plus. I do hope the other engines will get some love, too, though

Aye, sounds intriguing indeed, garvalf! Can we haz teasor nao?

Also yay for 15 minute Space Beeps!

Well, y'all pretty much know what I'm up to - trying to find new 1-bit tricks of course Also been spending a lot of time on that MDAL thing the past weeks. In December, I'll be taking a break from 1-bit as usual, so you won't be seeing me around these parts so often. Will see what I can finish up till then. Perhaps I'm gonna work a bit more on HT2, and maybe make one more Speccy engine.

Discovered something today. It may seem trivial, but nevertheless it was a bit of a revelation to me.
So basically I answered my own question about getting rid of the second counter in a simplified phaser algo. What I came up with is this:

   add hl,de
   ld a,h
   add a,c            ;C holds "second counter" offset
   and h               ;xor|or|and
   out (#fe),a

Now isn't it interesting how, by just swapping two bytes, this can be transformed into a regular "threshold" implementation? And yet this piece of code was derived from a Phaser implementation.

Hmm, in its current form it burns a lot of registers for the buck, I'd say. But generally speaking, anything that does pitch slides is always interesting. Do you think there's any chance to turn this into a vibrato effect somehow?

Meanwhile, I got permission from Rui, so find attached the source for his "WPDM16" player. A few notes:
- main.asm is the latest version. It does not attempt full PDM mixing, but rather a simplified version thereof.
- main_old.asm is an earlier version. Not sure if this one is working at all, so I include it mainly to illustrate how the player developed over time.
- Sample data should contain only signed offsets from -64 to +64. However, as I mentioned mixing is unreliable, so I created some samples that would mix with reliable results, but violate the specs.