Author Topic: MML: What are people's actual complaints with the damn thing  (Read 7453 times)

Arkhan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14142
  • Fuck Elmer.
    • Incessant Negativity Software
Re: MML: What are people's actual complaints with the damn thing
« Reply #15 on: November 21, 2016, 02:10:37 PM »
You bitch and moan about why people are or aren't doing this or that, and when given answers when you ask why - you're response is complain/attack/insult.

 I'm not sure what want. Do you honestly want to know people's opinions and perspectives, or are you just interested in knocking people down or insulting them? It's like there's no compromise with you, unless it involves agreeing 100% with you.

Usually, when you posts stuff like this (one man crusade to rid the world of trackers), I try my best to ignore it and let your rant play itself out. I figured this time you wanted some honest feedback. My mistake. Whatever. Screw everybody else, right? By all means, continue on with whatever this post is supposed to be.

LOL, what?  Seriously.  What. in. the. f*ck?

Where did I attack or insult?  Or complain? You are going to need to point out where, because I really do not see it.    I suggest maybe going back and re-reading what I said a few times, because you've clearly misunderstood.   I'm not bitching and moaning.  I am trying to figure out and HELP people get to a better place with MML.   

This starts with asking "what's the problem", and possibly pointing out "hey, that's only a problem because you're doing it wrong" or "you're thinking about this the wrong way.  check this out."

With regards to what you said, I just pointed out the flaws in your statements that were honestly a bit short sighted.  You made incorrect or misinformed statements like you often do with this topic.   

[ul][li]Where you tried to draw a line and separate two things, I demonstrated that they are actually fairly equivalent. [/li][li]Where you conflate two separate parts of the music making process, I pointed out that they are different.[/li][li]Where you bring up "the good ones" with respect to chiptune composers, I pointed out that some legendary shit was not made the way you think.[/li][li]Where you suggested a full DAW be made for PCE, I pointed out the nonsensical nature of that thought process.  [/li][/ul]
My friend has been writing something like that for MSX for like 5+ years.   That's alot of time to invest in something.



Really, though, I was more looking for musician feedback.

You're not a musician.   So, you mostly just have skewed scene perspective on the matter, biased towards what you watch *other* people do, and you can't actually comment on your own experiences, because you don't have them.   You just assume the majority must be right, or something.

What I am trying to do is dispel incorrect and/or misguided views on MML that people like you perpetuate because you don't listen or even consider the things I am pointing out before you assume I am just attacking you.

Also, this isn't a one man crusade to rid the world of trackers.   You would know that if you actually read and absorbed what I have posted here.

Especially that bit where I mentioned that four songs I turned into MML for Insanity came from songs I made in a goddamn tracker.   You can use a tracker and then make MML out of the song.

Seriously dude.   Stop and actually read/process things before you do this shit.

If you're not going to bother to do that, just f*ck off already.  You're not going to help the conversation if you start commenting like a knob before your brain has caught up to your hands.
[Fri 19:34]<nectarsis> been wanting to try that one for awhile now Ope
[Fri 19:33]<Opethian> l;ol huge dong

I'm a max level Forum Warrior.  I'm immortal.
If you're not ready to defend your claims, don't post em.

Arkhan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14142
  • Fuck Elmer.
    • Incessant Negativity Software
Re: MML: What are people's actual complaints with the damn thing
« Reply #16 on: November 21, 2016, 02:25:56 PM »
Yes, it was all done very differently ... and Martin, Rob and Tim were all assembly-language programmers that wrote their own music drivers.

Yes, this is true, but, you missed the point! :) 

My point is that the songs were composed *externally*, and that they have an understanding of how music works, so programming knowledge aside, they would likely be able to translate the music into a simple to follow text representation of sheet music.  That sort of maneuver hasn't changed.  They didn't compose the song in some clunky beepboop assembly manner.  They just translated it to that after the fact.

MML is a similar equivalent.  I believe this is where people are getting hung up, as many seem to TRY to write the song in MML.

People need to stop doing that.  It's not really the way to go about it.

MML is basically there so you can punch sheet music into a computer. 



Quote
That's just not how the computer-music world, and especially the homebrew game-world operates anymore.

yes it does, ;)

See: MSX scene.  See Mabinogi Music scene....

Where do you think I confirmed MML functionality for PCE?  Commercial titles for MSX still use MML.

Sometimes, I feel the tracker scene is actually the vocal minority because of all the cool Nintendo chiptune stuff, lol.   

There's a plethora of MML stuff in Mabinogi, and one of the best players for MSX expects MUSICA format, which is an MML engine.



Quote
It's already been done, and it's called deflemask!

Sure, it's far from perfect, but it seems to be meeting most people's needs, and it keeps on slowly getting better.

Deflemask is a tracker.  It's hardly the DAW anyone wants.  It's no better than any other tracker in terms of usability.  Even if it supports PCE, it's still wonky to use.  You could just do the same thing with other trackers if you use the right samples.

Now, lets say it gets a fantastic feature like other, better trackers (maybe it has it?), and allows you to import a MIDI file.

Then, if there were a Deflemask player, it would be great to just import MIDIs, save them as whatever Deflemask does, and play them in PCE projects.

MIDI really is the key here, I think.  MIDI ---> Something for PCE seems to work.   Compose how you want--->Save to MIDI--->convert and go.

Quote
Just take a look on YouTube for chiptunes made (in the Western world) with MML rather than a tracker of some kind. I found a one, a video by you ... and that was pretty much it.

That was a search for "mml chiptune".

Then I searched for "deflemask chiptune", and pages of hits came up, lots of them for PC Engine tunes.


You gooned up your search, lol.

http://mabinogimusic.tumblr.com/code
http://mabinogimml.blogspot.com/



[Fri 19:34]<nectarsis> been wanting to try that one for awhile now Ope
[Fri 19:33]<Opethian> l;ol huge dong

I'm a max level Forum Warrior.  I'm immortal.
If you're not ready to defend your claims, don't post em.

DarkKobold

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1200
Re: MML: What are people's actual complaints with the damn thing
« Reply #17 on: November 21, 2016, 02:35:12 PM »
Bonknuts, maybe a tracker is better, but lets remember that Catastrophy wouldn't even have sound if it weren't for Squirrel. Elmer's solution of "stick to CDROMs" seems like a step in the wrong direction.

Maybe the tools aren't ideal, but for what Arkhan's done, it should be appreciated. I mean, its all good and well to say "this is how it *should* be done," but that doesn't help shit coders like me add music to their HuC game.

And yeah, I can get why Arkhan gets defensive - Squirrel was probably really f*ckin' hard to do. So, I can see where he'd get defensive. When PP makes a new troll account and starts shitting on Catastrophy, I'm sure I'll get defensive too.

I'm just saying, I appreciate that Squirrel exists.
Hey, you.

Arkhan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14142
  • Fuck Elmer.
    • Incessant Negativity Software
Re: MML: What are people's actual complaints with the damn thing
« Reply #18 on: November 21, 2016, 02:38:28 PM »
The credit doesn't all go to myself.  Squirrel is the hot mess love child of myself and OldMan, with help from the Develo book, and the MSX scene.

It initially started as a little engine that parsed and played the MML during the game loop.  Then it turned into what it is now.

anyway, I'm trying to get people who are INTERESTED in actually using MML to a good place.   What problems are you having.  Here's how to fix it.

Shit like that.

People might be surprised once they start getting probably little mishaps sorted out and go "oh", and realize it's only bad if you make it that way.
[Fri 19:34]<nectarsis> been wanting to try that one for awhile now Ope
[Fri 19:33]<Opethian> l;ol huge dong

I'm a max level Forum Warrior.  I'm immortal.
If you're not ready to defend your claims, don't post em.

Bonknuts

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3292
Re: MML: What are people's actual complaints with the damn thing
« Reply #19 on: November 21, 2016, 03:08:25 PM »
Bonknuts, maybe a tracker is better, but lets remember that Catastrophy wouldn't even have sound if it weren't for Squirrel. Elmer's solution of "stick to CDROMs" seems like a step in the wrong direction.

Maybe the tools aren't ideal, but for what Arkhan's done, it should be appreciated. I mean, its all good and well to say "this is how it *should* be done," but that doesn't help shit coders like me add music to their HuC game.

And yeah, I can get why Arkhan gets defensive - Squirrel was probably really f*ckin' hard to do. So, I can see where he'd get defensive. When PP makes a new troll account and starts shitting on Catastrophy, I'm sure I'll get defensive too.

I'm just saying, I appreciate that Squirrel exists.


 I'm not saying a tracker is better; I'm just saying that's what the majority of chiptuners prefer. He asked WTF the deal was, and I answered to what chiptuners particularly would give him - based on the responses I've seen. Believe it or not, this came up a LOT when there was no tracker for PCE music. Squirrel wasn't the first MML related music tool for the PCE; there have been others. And in the scenes that I visited, Squirrel was unfairly lumped with the other two simply because of MML. But that's the way it goes. I've written many music drivers for PCE - some just for fun. Be it pattern music (tracked), or command string format (underlying mml structure). I do my own stuff, so I'm in neither boat. If I'm working with a chiptune artist, I find out what they want - work around that. If they want something like mml, or tracker - I could care less as long as they have what they need.

 As far as personal preference; obviously I have more experience with trackers than midi or mml. I've used them enough in my youth that everything about them IS intuitive. I know how to massage and draw out very specific sounds for instruments in tracked music. I'm also aware of the faults of patterned music too. If I was serious about music, I'd probably ditch trackers. But I'm not. And I'm not going to get bent out of shape over it either, if people don't like them.

 In fact, the only real criticism I have about Squirrel toolset is sample support (real samples).

Arkhan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14142
  • Fuck Elmer.
    • Incessant Negativity Software
Re: MML: What are people's actual complaints with the damn thing
« Reply #20 on: November 21, 2016, 03:16:24 PM »
Using them enough that they are intuitive... is not how intuitive works.   

You are conditioned by them.   

They were never intuitive.   Theyve always been clunky, and a bit laborious at times.

Theyre a product of the time that everyone got used to, and likes as a result of little in the way of options.

I grew up on them, and happily ditched them when better tools arrived.   

And, ive never had good luck with vsts in trackers.  Renoise just barfed on them. 

But, as mentioned, by all means, compose in a tracker.   You could turn em into mml when done.

Adding effects back in is the only downside.   Those tend to get lost during the midi step.



Sent from my D6708 using Tapatalk

[Fri 19:34]<nectarsis> been wanting to try that one for awhile now Ope
[Fri 19:33]<Opethian> l;ol huge dong

I'm a max level Forum Warrior.  I'm immortal.
If you're not ready to defend your claims, don't post em.

touko

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 953
Re: MML: What are people's actual complaints with the damn thing
« Reply #21 on: November 21, 2016, 07:45:22 PM »
Quote
Using them enough that they are intuitive... is not how intuitive works.   

You are conditioned by them.   

Sorry ark i have to desagree, intuitive for me is when a musician who know shit about programming(or the need to be a tech guy) can make musics for any systems easily with a tool .
A tool with a GUI is always more intuitive than a simple file based tool which require some other tools to works .
And i don't speak about the need to compile a .pce for testing,you cannot say that MML for PCE is intuitive .
« Last Edit: November 21, 2016, 07:52:46 PM by touko »

Arkhan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14142
  • Fuck Elmer.
    • Incessant Negativity Software
Re: MML: What are people's actual complaints with the damn thing
« Reply #22 on: November 21, 2016, 08:24:13 PM »
Quote
Using them enough that they are intuitive... is not how intuitive works.   

You are conditioned by them.   

Sorry ark i have to desagree, intuitive for me is when a musician who know shit about programming(or the need to be a tech guy) can make musics for any systems easily with a tool .
A tool with a GUI is always more intuitive than a simple file based tool which require some other tools to works .
And i don't speak about the need to compile a .pce for testing,you cannot say that MML for PCE is intuitive .

What are you disagreeing with?

The statement I made was with regards to trackers not being intuitive.  If you have to become accustomed to it through repeated use, it's not intuitive.  That goes against the textbook definition of the word.

Intuitive implies you can sit down and immediately get it to start working how you want based off of simple instincts.   Trackers don't do that.   Anyone who says they do, are completely lying.   Nobody sat down at a tracker for the very first time and was like "oh yes this all makes perfect sense" and started getting exactly what they wanted/thought out of it.   

Everyone's first tracker experience was more like "whats this do".  "What is that".  "Why isn't this working right?" .  "What are all these columns".   "Ok, I made a pattern now what.". 

It's goofy. 

You need a manual, and hex fiddling to create a song in a tracker.  The benefit you gain from a tracker is mostly that it forces formatting for you、because it's all locked to steps, and has defined columns for all the things.   

However, you are still just banging the alphabet into a mess of stuff that happens to play music, lol.     The effects columns in a tracker are clunky and look like total nonsense.  Even people that love trackers seem to be aware of that.  :D 

So, trackers aren't intuitive.   More modern DAWs are, because they are  modeled after actual musical devices which, by their very nature, were designed to be intuitive.  (analog synths, drum machines, mixers, etc.)

That's why I think it's nice to make songs that way (with a more modern piece of software), and then go through a relatively painless conversion process to get it onto the PCE.   On that note, I know at least three non-programmers who successfully got things to work with Squirrel.

I never said that MML for PCE was intuitive.    MML is only truly intuitive if you can read sheet music, and understand how to compose music from a theoretical standpoint.    Most tracker users don't really seem to know any of that, have no concept of time signatures, key, or anything.   So, trying to use MML just doesn't automatically click for them.

Converting a MIDI to MML, and moving it into a more or less pre-formatted file isn't exactly a horrible process. 

Also, you COULD just write the songs in 3MLE.  It's got a piano roll and will show you exactly what you're doing as you add notes.   That's not really any different than a tracker.  It just goes >>>>> instead of VVVVVVVVVVVVVV.

3MLE supports soundfonts, so one could make a soundfont of PCE stuff for it...

and then you'd just need to have those same waves defined in Squirrel (or make the soundfont out of the waves from Squirrel that are built in).




It seems like the biggest hangup is the MIDI-->MML process.   I'd like to see what people are doing, so I could maybe help sort out any scary issues, or confusion.



[Fri 19:34]<nectarsis> been wanting to try that one for awhile now Ope
[Fri 19:33]<Opethian> l;ol huge dong

I'm a max level Forum Warrior.  I'm immortal.
If you're not ready to defend your claims, don't post em.

touko

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 953
Re: MML: What are people's actual complaints with the damn thing
« Reply #23 on: November 22, 2016, 12:17:43 AM »
Quote
What are you disagreeing with?
About that's intuitive or not .

You can blame trackers as many times as you want,it's really the simplest way for interesting some musicians to start composing for old systems .
It's the same about coding, some people cannot want to start learning a new language,and can do some homebrews in basic as they did with BEX on MD .

MML is good if you are a musician and not affraid to put your hands in the shit,else for the others 99% a GUI tracker is by far less scary and more affordable.
In my non musician standpoint, MML or tracker are the same, i am not abble to create anything with those two method,and i know it's more easy to find deflemask musicians than MML .
« Last Edit: November 22, 2016, 12:26:57 AM by touko »

Hu-man

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 6
Re: MML: What are people's actual complaints with the damn thing
« Reply #24 on: November 22, 2016, 05:14:09 AM »
So, I've only posted here a few times, but I follow all of your work a lot. My goal is to pop out of the woodwork one day and say, "Hey! Look at what I made on the PCE!" and then have everyone respond in unison, "What a piece of shit!" But till then, I'm mostly just a reader.

And before I go on my rant about MML, I should preface it by saying that I don't have much experience with trackers, and that my PCE stuff is the only experience I have with making music on a gaming platform.

That said, for someone who can read music, MML seems like a pretty decent notation. In fact, I'm hard-pressed to think of a better way. It's pretty close to modern musical notation, and that's been around for maybe a thousand years, so you'd think it'd at least be fairly good.

As far as my process is concerned, I'll usually just write on a real instrument then transfer it directly to the MML file, but sometimes I'll use a Finale NotePad-like tool to notate the music and then export to MIDI. I mention this because Finale NotePad has a free download and might help some of the people that are having a hard time with MML but can read music.

And as far as the readability of the MML is concerned, I agree that it can be kinda tough. But when it all comes down to it, it's being used to represent instructions you're giving the processor (code). So, like all code, it's easier to read when formatted. I often do something like 1 or 2 measures per line and use whitespace between notes to visually inspect that the timing matches up.

I think one of the reasons you don't hear about more people using it is that most people aren't the pros who post here most often. Compared to all the successes of everyone here, it seems to be taking me far longer than I would've expected - both in the time to develop a game and the time to figure out how to work around all of the PCE's/HuC's idiosyncrasies. Even yesterday while reading the "The new fork of HuC" thread, I saw Dave Shadoff's message about parameter-passing being bad, then I saw Elmer's message on the switch-statement being bad, and I thought, "Well that sucks for me."

So, as a verified non-pro, I find that Squirrel is probably one of the friendlier tools out there for PCE development. You don't need to worry about pointers, memory management, two's complement, or (may god have mercy on us all) learning assembly. You just feed it the MML, tell it when to play, and you're done! For the novice, learning HuC is probably enough, so I'll probably never be interested in writing a custom sound engine when all of the hard work seems to have been taken care of already. My personal opinion is that most of the non-vocal folks aren't writing in machine language, and those same folks would rather spend a little time learning MML over the (IMHO) steep learning curve that'd be required to reinvent the wheel.

Also, I could be totally wrong about this, but it kinda seems like Squirrel is the only game in town for making both music and sound effects on the PCE (other than custom sound engines). If not Squirrel, what are most developers using? And even if one uses CD-Audio for homebrews as Elmer suggests, what are people doing for sound effects?

I'm not on this forum as much as some of you other guys, but the only other sound tool I can remember was BT Garner's SoundGen tool, which I found extremely cumbersome. Also, it seemed like it took a very long time for ANY sound tools on the PCE to come around, so I don't know that waiting around for a new tool is a feasible option, especially when that theoretical tool will yield the same end result.

That said, here are my complaints about MML/Squirrel:
[uldecimal][li]Not that it's impossible, but getting triplets isn't straightforward, nor are a weird/staggered beats (I'm thinking the nasally horn riff in the lava level of Bomberman '94).[/li][li]MagicEngine doesn't emulate it faithfully (which I guess is actually a complaint about MagicEngine).[/li][li]And to Bonknuts' point, "what you hear is what you get" would be really REALLY nice, especially so that you could hear the waveform/envelope combinations. Still, I don't know if that's really the point of Squirrel. Maybe that'd be for another GUI for the future, but I kinda see Squirrel as a jam-in-an-MML-file-and-it'll-give-you-music-on-the-PCE tool.[/li][/ul]Most other complaints seem to be around the fact that people want a GUI to write music, but there's a lot of them out there that will let you output your song to MIDI, so I don't know what the benefit of yet another GUI would be (except for the aforementioned emulation of envelope/waveform combos). If people want to use trackers to create songs, do none of them have the ability to output a MIDI file? Again, since I only have limited experience, I guess I don't really understand the benefit.

But, yeah, take all of what I say with a grain of salt. I don't have a vast knowledge of all the possibilities that are out there. I'm not trying to diss anyone or stroke anyone's ego (especially Arkhan's  :P ). I just think that MML and Squirrel are pretty solid, and I wouldn't want people being discouraged from using them or told to only use CD-Audio (not that this should at all be construed as a dig on you, Elmer, I think you're rockin it with your work on the HuC fork) when MML and Squirrel are totally viable options. Squirrel has made developing on the PCE easier for me, and I think other people might agree if they give it a shot.

Anyways, that's the end of my rant. Talk to you guys in five years or so!

elmer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2153
Re: MML: What are people's actual complaints with the damn thing
« Reply #25 on: November 22, 2016, 05:21:03 AM »
My point is that the songs were composed *externally*, and that they have an understanding of how music works, so programming knowledge aside, they would likely be able to translate the music into a simple to follow text representation of sheet music.  That sort of maneuver hasn't changed.  They didn't compose the song in some clunky beepboop assembly manner.  They just translated it to that after the fact.

MML is a similar equivalent.  I believe this is where people are getting hung up, as many seem to TRY to write the song in MML.

People need to stop doing that.  It's not really the way to go about it.

MML is basically there so you can punch sheet music into a computer. 

Sure, I get it ... compose the tune in a decent package, and then convert that tune into the format that the target machine requires.

Yes, that's how things used to be done.

You're basically talking about having a musician do the same thing as TailChao was doing with his excellent HuSound package.

Now I find MML to be ugly-as-sh*t to be that format, and I find TailChao's SASS-format to be much more human-friendly, but that's just my preference.

They're basically the same process. I get it.

Here's an example of exactly the same process from the driver that I wrote for Jon Dunn (the guy that replaced Martin Galway when Martin bailed out to join Origin) ...

Code: [Select]
; ************************************************************************
;
; Music commands.
;
; *+ REPEAT    ,n      Repeat next sequence 'n' times.
;                      n=[1 to 255,0=256].
;
; *+ TRANSPOSE ,t      Transpose next sequence by 't' notes.
;                      t=[-128 to +127].
;
; *  JUMP      ,a      Jump to 16-bit address 'a'.
;
; *  END               End tune/fx/sequence.
;
;    LENGTH    ,l      Assume all notes have length 'l' until MANUAL.
;                      l=[1 to 255].
;
;    MANUAL            Assume each note is followed by a length.
;
;    TIE               Increase length of next note by 256.
;
;    REST              Play an empty note.
;
;    GLION     ,t,l    Glide to note from transpose 't'/2 over 'l' frames.
;                      'l' MUST be a power of 2.
;                      N.B. Also cancels effect.
;
;    GLIOFF            Cancel GLION.
;
;    EFFON     ,t,l    Transpose notes by 't' for their 1st 'l' frames.
;                      N.B. Also cancels glide and vibrato.
;
;    EFFOFF            Cancel EFFON.
;
;    ARPON     ,n      Arpeggio, using arpeggio table number 'n'.
;
;    ARPOFF            Cancel ARPON.
;
;    VIBON     ,d,t,l  Vibrato, delay 'd', amplitude 't'/4, over 4'l' frames.
;
;    VIBOFF            Cancel VIBON.
;
;    ENV       ,n      Use volume envelope 'n'.
;
;    DRUM      ,n      Play a 'drum'.
;
;    POKE      ,a,n    Poke location $FFaa with value 'n'.
;
;    WAVE      ,n,...  Set up the 16 bytes of waveform RAM and store ptr.
;
;    TMP_WAVE  ,n,...  Set up the waveform RAM.
;
;    OLD_WAVE          Set up the waveform RAM from the stored address.
;
;    DUTY      ,n      Set the duty register to 'n'.
;
;    SWEEP     ,v,l,n  Special glide. Sweep from note 'n' by subtracting
;                      'v' from the frequency (word value - hi/lo) for 'l'
;                      frames.
;
;
; * Only these commands can be used in a sequence list.
; + These commands cannot be used in a sequence.
;

;----------------------------------------------------------------------------
;TEMPO EQUATES
;-------------

TEMPO2 EQU 6 ;  TEMPO CONTROL
DSQ2 EQU TEMPO2/2 ;  DEMI-SEMI-QUAVER
SQ2 EQU TEMPO2 ;  SEMI-QUAVER
QV2 EQU SQ2*2 ;  QUAVER
DQV2 EQU QV2+SQ2 ;  DOTTED QUAVER
CR2 EQU QV2*2 ;  CROTCHET
QV2TRIP EQU CR2/3 ;  CROTCHET
DCR2 EQU CR2+QV2 ;  DOTTED CROTCHET
MN2 EQU CR2*2 ;  MINIM
DMN2 EQU MN2+CR2 ;  DOTTED MINIM
SB2 EQU MN2*2 ;  SEMI-BREVE
DSB2 EQU SB2+MN2 ;  DOTTED SEMI-BREVE

TEMPO3 EQU 7 ;  TEMPO CONTROL
DSQ3 EQU TEMPO3/2 ;  DEMI-SEMI-QUAVER
SQ3 EQU TEMPO3 ;  SEMI-QUAVER
QV3 EQU SQ3*2 ;  QUAVER
DQV3 EQU QV3+SQ3 ;  DOTTED QUAVER
CR3 EQU QV3*2 ;  CROTCHET
QV3TRIP EQU CR3/3 ;  CROTCHET
DCR3 EQU CR3+QV3 ;  DOTTED CROTCHET
MN3 EQU CR3*2 ;  MINIM
DMN3 EQU MN3+CR3 ;  DOTTED MINIM
MN3TRIP EQU MN3/3 ;  DOTTED MINIM
SB3 EQU MN3*2 ;  SEMI-BREVE
DSB3 EQU SB3+MN3 ;  DOTTED SEMI-BREVE

TEMPO4 EQU 5 ;  TEMPO CONTROL
DSQ4 EQU TEMPO4/2 ;  DEMI-SEMI-QUAVER
SQ4 EQU TEMPO4 ;  SEMI-QUAVER
QV4 EQU SQ4*2 ;  QUAVER
DQV4 EQU QV4+SQ4 ;  DOTTED QUAVER
CR4 EQU QV4*2 ;  CROTCHET
QV4TRIP EQU CR4/3 ;  CROTCHET
DCR4 EQU CR4+QV4 ;  DOTTED CROTCHET
MN4 EQU CR4*2 ;  MINIM
DMN4 EQU MN4+CR4 ;  DOTTED MINIM
MN4TRIP EQU MN4/3 ;  DOTTED MINIM
SB4 EQU MN4*2 ;  SEMI-BREVE
DSB4 EQU SB4+MN4 ;  DOTTED SEMI-BREVE

;-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
;IN-GAME TUNE
;-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

INGAME3 ;TREBLE
DB 42
INGAME3LOOP DB LOOP,8
DB 84
DB 81
DB LOOP,4,80
DB 84,88,84,89
DB 87,TRANS,1,92
DB 94,84,84
DB JUMP
DW INGAME3LOOP

INGAME1 ;MIDDLE
DB LOOP,4,85
DB 82,82,79
DB LOOP,4,69
DB LOOP,6,68,91
DB LOOP,4,TRANS,1,68,TRANS,1,91
DB LOOP,4,76
DB JUMP
DW INGAME1

INGAME2 ;BASS
DB LOOP,3,83,86
DB 83,TRANS,3,83
DB TRANS,5,83,83
DB 83,TRANS,3,83
DB TRANS,5,83,83
DB 83,TRANS,3,83
DB TRANS,5,83,86
DB LOOP,10,78,90
DB LOOP,4,TRANS,1,78,TRANS,1,90
DB LOOP,4,83
DB JUMP
DW INGAME2

INGAME4 DB LOOP,4,70 ;79
DB LOOP,11,71,73
DB LOOP,8,72
DB LOOP,12,74
DB 75
DB LOOP,8,74
DB 75
DB LOOP,4,72
DB JUMP
DW INGAME4

;-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
;IN-GAME TUNE
;-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

SEQ77
SEQ78
DB ENV,$B2
DB EFFON,12,3
DB C1,CR4,C1,CR4,C1,DCR4,C1,QV4,DS1,DCR4,D1,DCR4
DB C1,CR4,C1,CR4,C1,DCR4,C1,QV4,G1,DCR4,AS1,DCR4
DB END
SEQ79
DB ENV,$30
DB ARPON,MINR
DB C3,SB4+DMN4
DB ARPON,MAJR
DB DS3,SB4+DMN4
DB ARPON,MAJ2
DB F2,SB4,ARPON,SUS42,F2,DCR4,ARPON,MAJ2,F2,DCR4
DB ARPON,MIN1
DB C3,SB4+DCR4,ENV,$93,ARPON,MINR,C4,DCR4
DB END
SEQ80
DB WAVE
DB $44,$77,$99,$BB,$AA,$88,$66,$44
DB $22,$00,$11,$22,$33,$44,$33,$23
DB ARPON,EFFECT1
DB G5,QV4,REST,QV4,G5,QV4,REST,QV4,G5,QV4,REST,CR4,G5,QV4
DB GS5,QV4,G5,QV4,G5,QV4
DB GS5,QV4,G5,QV4,REST,QV4
DB G5,QV4,REST,QV4,G5,QV4,REST,QV4,G5,QV4,REST,CR4,C5,QV4
DB G4,QV4,F4,QV4,G4,QV4
DB AS4,QV4,C5,QV4,F5,QV4
DB END
SEQ81
DB ENV,%01000000
DB WAVE
DB $44,$77,$99,$BB,$AA,$88,$66,$44
DB $22,$00,$11,$22,$33,$44,$33,$23
DB VIBON,40,1,3
DB G5,DSB4+CR4
DB G5,DSB4+CR4
DB F5,SB4,AS5,DCR4
DB A5,CR4,AS5,SQ4,A5,SQ4
DB G5,DSB4+CR4
DB C6,DSB4+CR4
DB AS5,DSB4+CR4
DB A5,SB4,AS5,DCR4
DB A5,CR4,A5,SQ4,AS5,SQ4
DB C6,DSB4+CR4
DB END
SEQ82
DB ENV,$40
DB DUTY,%01000000
DB ARPON,MINR
DB C3,SB4+DMN4
DB ARPON,MAJ2
DB DS2,SB4+DMN4
DB ARPON,MAJ1
DB F2,SB4,ARPON,SUS41,F2,DCR4,ARPON,MAJ1,F2,DCR4
DB ARPON,MINR
DB C3,SB4+DMN4
DB END
SEQ83
DB ARPON,EFFECT1
DB ENV,$B2
DB DUTY,%01000000
DB C1,MN4,C1,MN4,C1,DCR4,C1,DCR4
DB END
SEQ84
DB ENV,%01000000
DB WAVE
DB $44,$77,$99,$BB,$AA,$88,$66,$44
DB $22,$00,$11,$22,$33,$44,$33,$23
DB REST,CR4,DS5,QV4,REST,DCR4,D5,QV4,REST,QV4
DB REST,QV4,DS5,QV4,REST,CR4,D5,QV4,REST,QV4
DB END
SEQ85
DB DUTY,%00000000
DB VIBOFF,ARPOFF
DB ENV,$45
DB REST,CR4,C5,QV4,REST,CR4,AS4,CR4
DB REST,QV4,C5,CR4,REST,QV4,AS4,DCR4
DB END
SEQ86
DB C1,MN4,C1,MN4,C1,DCR4
DB DUTY,%10000000
DB ENV,$B3
DB G1,CR4,AS1,QV4
DB END
SEQ87
DB VIBON,35,1,3
SEQ92 DB G5,SB4,DS5,QV4,REST,CR4,F5,QV4,REST,CR4
DB G5,DSB4+QV4,REST,QV4
DB G5,SB4,AS5,QV4,REST,CR4,A5,QV4,REST,QV4
DB AS5,SQ4,A5,SQ4
DB G5,DSB4+CR4
DB C6,SB4,AS5,QV4,REST,CR4,F5,QV4,REST,CR4
DB G5,DSB4+CR4
DB C5,SB4,G5,CR4,REST,QV4,F5,CR4,REST,QV4
DB DS5,DSB4-QV4,D5,CR4
DB DS5,SQ4,D5,SQ4
DB C5,DSB4+MN4+QV4
DB WAVE
DB $06,$78,$9A,$BC,$DC,$BA,$98,$76
DB $54,$32,$10,$01,$01,$12,$34,$56
DB LENGTH,SQ4
DB G2,AS2,D3,F3,G3,AS3
DB C4,DS4,F4,G4
DB AS4,MANUAL,D5,SQ4+4,F5,SQ4+5,G5,SQ4+6
DB END
SEQ88
DB REST,CR4,DS5,QV4,REST,DCR4,D5,QV4,REST,QV4
DB REST,QV4,AS4,QV4,REST,CR4,D5,QV4,REST,QV4
DB END
SEQ89
DB REST,CR4,DS5,QV4,REST,DCR4,D5,QV4,REST,QV4
DB G3,QV4,G5,QV4,REST,QV4,F3,QV4,F5,QV4,REST,QV4
DB END
SEQ90
DB C2,CR4,C2,CR4,C2,DCR4,C2,QV4,DS2,DCR4,D2,DCR4
DB AS1,DCR4,C2,DCR4,DS2,CR4+7,D2,CR4+8
DB END
SEQ91
DB ARPON,MIN1
DB REST,CR4,C4,CR4,REST,CR4,ARPON,MIN2,G3,CR4
DB ARPON,MIN1
DB REST,QV4,C4,CR4
DB ARPON,MIN2
DB REST,QV4,G3,CR4
DB ARPON,MIN1,C4,DCR4,ARPON,MIN2,G3,DCR4
DB ARPON,MIN1,C4,CR4+7,ARPON,MIN2,G3,CR4+8
DB END
SEQ93
DB AS1,SQ3,C2,SQ3,REST,CR3,G2,QV3,F2,SQ3,REST,SQ3
DB DS2,SQ3,AS2,SQ3,REST,SQ3,D2,SQ3,DS2,SQ3,REST,SQ3
DB END
SEQ94
DB WAVE
DB $44,$77,$99,$BB,$AA,$88,$66,$44
DB $22,$00,$11,$22,$33,$44,$33,$23
DB G5,DSB4+CR4
DB REST,DSB4+CR4
DB END

Arkhan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14142
  • Fuck Elmer.
    • Incessant Negativity Software
Re: MML: What are people's actual complaints with the damn thing
« Reply #26 on: November 22, 2016, 05:54:01 AM »
Quote
What are you disagreeing with?
About that's intuitive or not .

You can blame trackers as many times as you want,it's really the simplest way for interesting some musicians to start composing for old systems .
It's the same about coding, some people cannot want to start learning a new language,and can do some homebrews in basic as they did with BEX on MD .

MML is good if you are a musician and not affraid to put your hands in the shit,else for the others 99% a GUI tracker is by far less scary and more affordable.
In my non musician standpoint, MML or tracker are the same, i am not abble to create anything with those two method,and i know it's more easy to find deflemask musicians than MML .

None of this gives any indication that a tracker is intuitive, though.   Neither MML nor Tracker is actually intuitive.

Trackers are just such old juggernauts that tons of people have gotten a handle on them.   

I don't disagree that a tracker is pretty accessible, and gives you immediate(ish) results.  they are popular.   I'm not blaming them for anything, so I am not sure what you mean there.

As said though, trackers can 100% be used to end up with MML.   :) 



As far as my process is concerned, I'll usually just write on a real instrument then transfer it directly to the MML file, but sometimes I'll use a Finale NotePad-like tool to notate the music and then export to MIDI. I mention this because Finale NotePad has a free download and might help some of the people that are having a hard time with MML but can read music.

And as far as the readability of the MML is concerned, I agree that it can be kinda tough. But when it all comes down to it, it's being used to represent instructions you're giving the processor (code). So, like all code, it's easier to read when formatted. I often do something like 1 or 2 measures per line and use whitespace between notes to visually inspect that the timing matches up.

That said, here are my complaints about MML/Squirrel:
[uldecimal][li]Not that it's impossible, but getting triplets isn't straightforward, nor are a weird/staggered beats (I'm thinking the nasally horn riff in the lava level of Bomberman '94).[/li][li]MagicEngine doesn't emulate it faithfully (which I guess is actually a complaint about MagicEngine).[/li][li]And to Bonknuts' point, "what you hear is what you get" would be really REALLY nice, especially so that you could hear the waveform/envelope combinations. Still, I don't know if that's really the point of Squirrel. Maybe that'd be for another GUI for the future, but I kinda see Squirrel as a jam-in-an-MML-file-and-it'll-give-you-music-on-the-PCE tool.[/li][/ul]Most other complaints seem to be around the fact that people want a GUI to write music, but there's a lot of them out there that will let you output your song to MIDI, so I don't know what the benefit of yet another GUI would be (except for the aforementioned emulation of envelope/waveform combos). If people want to use trackers to create songs, do none of them have the ability to output a MIDI file? Again, since I only have limited experience, I guess I don't really understand the benefit.
Formatting is *definitely* key.  Using any of the available MML editors out there gives a bit of highlighting so it's more readable than notepad.  This is why I go with 3MLE, as it also lines up a piano roll to improve readability and give a visual representation of your tunes to make sure timings are right.  If you run it through a converter, it pays to take the 5 minutes to break out things and make it more readable. 

3MLE's conversion process actually puts measure comments in front of EACH measure, which is pretty nice.

Is there a tracker that has an accompanying piano roll?  The piano roll is probably one of the most brilliant things to ever be added to music software.

Triplets are a pain in trackers, too.  You sort of have to trick things either way into working right.  Getting the little triplet riff in Atlantean's level music was a bit efforty.   

But, you do it once, you can always reuse it.

MagicEngine's built in SystemCard has really.really.wonky. PSG.  Is that what you were using?

I agree having a way to immediately hear stuff would be nice, but I take what I can get.  I might look into sampling the default Squirrel waves, to make a Soundfont that can be dropped into FruityLoops or 3MLE, or even a Tracker.

It won't have the envelopes, though. 

I usually just approximate with Chip32, and get it "about how I'd want", because I usually have an idea in my head already.   Sort of like how composers wrote entire symphonies on a piano, just by imaginging what the rest of the crap would sound like. :D

To your last question, yes, trackers typically output a MIDI.  MODPlug did for sure.  I used that to get some songs I made years ago onto PCE. 

So, you can use a tracker to go to MML, but you will have to re-do the effects part manually (slides, vibrato), because those are generally lost in the MIDI shuffle. 

I don't find it too painful to keep changing waves and relaunching the tune.  I do similar things on the MSX when I am fiddling around in Musica to make songs.  Granted, Musica just requires pressing F5 to play the song, as opposed to rebuilding.

...but that's why I made that little batch file for Squirrel, so you can just press a button and hopefully have it launch and play!

Sure, I get it ... compose the tune in a decent package, and then convert that tune into the format that the target machine requires.

Yes, that's how things used to be done.

You're basically talking about having a musician do the same thing as TailChao was doing with his excellent HuSound package.

Now I find MML to be ugly-as-sh*t to be that format, and I find TailChao's SASS-format to be much more human-friendly, but that's just my preference.

They're basically the same process. I get it.

Here's an example of exactly the same process from the driver that I wrote for Jon Dunn (the guy that replaced Martin Galway when Martin bailed out to join Origin) ...
That's how things can still be done.  I don't know about anyone else, but composing songs with real instruments beats the shit out of a tracker, or any DAW, anyday.  That's why so many people get midi controlled drums/pianos/guitars to plop stuff into software. 

It'd be great if that SASS thing from TailChao had a midi--->SASS conversion. 

I think MIDI is kind of the key to making life easy, personally.  and as I've said numerous times, it also allows you to recreate the songs for CD audio, too. 

2 birds, 1 stone.

[Fri 19:34]<nectarsis> been wanting to try that one for awhile now Ope
[Fri 19:33]<Opethian> l;ol huge dong

I'm a max level Forum Warrior.  I'm immortal.
If you're not ready to defend your claims, don't post em.

Gredler

  • Guest
Re: MML: What are people's actual complaints with the damn thing
« Reply #27 on: November 22, 2016, 07:02:41 AM »
Anyways, that's the end of my rant. Talk to you guys in five years or so!

Please make it sooner than 5 years, I appreciate you chiming in and adding more perspective to the conversation!

What software are you using to create your midis right now, or am I reading it correctly that you currently play music and then manually write the mml to match what you enjoyed hearing from your playing?

Do you have a musical background? I cannot play any instruments and have 0 musical background, so I should probably not even be in this conversation #-o

That's how things can still be done.  I don't know about anyone else, but composing songs with real instruments beats the shit out of a tracker, or any DAW, anyday.  That's why so many people get midi controlled drums/pianos/guitars to plop stuff into software. 

This is my biggest disconnect from the process. My real instruments are a WASD keyboard and a mouse :-({|=

I think a midi keyboard is being added to my Christmas wishlist, unless you guys have a suggestion for where to go from straight trial and error MML coding :-k

Arkhan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14142
  • Fuck Elmer.
    • Incessant Negativity Software
Re: MML: What are people's actual complaints with the damn thing
« Reply #28 on: November 22, 2016, 07:09:56 AM »
A MIDI keyboard is definitely a good life choice.  Using WASD + mouse for music kind of blows a lot.  It's probably one of the most awful things I've ever personally tried doing.  I would rather go play sports than try and poke music out with WASD, lol. 

some of those midi keyboards come with free-ish versions of some nice DAWs too.

I'm pretty partial to FruityLoops, as it's been the most intuitive of all of them with respect to acting like you've got real shit sitting in front of you, and having it work like you would expect.

Cakewalk and Cubase had a few things that made them kind of irritating where FruityLoops didn't.

but, I believe, with trackers like Renoise, you can also use MIDI input.   MilkyTracker might too, IIRC.   I haven't used MilkyTracker since I got FruityLoops like 12 years ago.


[Fri 19:34]<nectarsis> been wanting to try that one for awhile now Ope
[Fri 19:33]<Opethian> l;ol huge dong

I'm a max level Forum Warrior.  I'm immortal.
If you're not ready to defend your claims, don't post em.

elmer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2153
Re: MML: What are people's actual complaints with the damn thing
« Reply #29 on: November 22, 2016, 07:54:26 AM »
You can blame trackers as many times as you want,it's really the simplest way for interesting some musicians to start composing for old systems .
It's the same about coding, some people cannot want to start learning a new language,and can do some homebrews in basic as they did with BEX on MD .

MML is good if you are a musician and not affraid to put your hands in the shit,else for the others 99% a GUI tracker is by far less scary and more affordable.

This.

That's 100% of the argument.

Approachability for people that want to experiment who aren't hardcore musicians with hundreds or thousands of dollars of MIDI software/instruments.

I can bitch and moan as much as I like about how programmers aren't "real" programmers if they use HuC instead of 6820 assembly-language, but that would be both extremely rude, and absolutely pointless.

I've come to appreciate how HuC has enabled new progammers to experiment and create things on the PCE, and I now see a wisdom in its creation that I missed a couple of years ago.

Exactly the same argument applies to Trackers, especially Deflemask.


Quote
Deflemask is a tracker.  It's hardly the DAW anyone wants.  It's no better than any other tracker in terms of usability.  Even if it supports PCE, it's still wonky to use.  You could just do the same thing with other trackers if you use the right samples.

The point is, that it is more usable for folks doing chiptunes, because it emulates the audio hardware of a bunch of consoles.

It's the classic WYSIWYG ... the tunes that people make in it are supposed to sound exactly the same when they're played back on real hardware.

You specifically say that that's not the case with the FruityLoops/3MLE/Squirrel process.

That's a problem, from my POV.

Yes, you can say how folks should just man-up and be like Beethoven, but that doesn't encourage people to your side.

But, the reality of the current situation is that ...


Also, I could be totally wrong about this, but it kinda seems like Squirrel is the only game in town for making both music and sound effects on the PCE (other than custom sound engines).

Until there's a usable Deflemask player for the PCE, then nobody is going to be using it in homebrew, and it is only going to be used to create stand-alone chiptunes for fun.

Hu-man, you might consider taking a quick look at TailChao's HuSound to see if it offers you anything.

If nothing else ... the excellent demo/test environment and the PCM playback channels are both something that it would be nice to see in the Squirrel package.

Yes ... I know that PCM playback in particular would break compatibility with the System Card ... but that's the point.

The System Card player has been stagnant for decades.

Having some extra features would be rather nice ... and the 8KB cost for a new sound driver isn't very much with the 256KB environment of the Super System Card, and even less in the 768KB environment of a Turbo Everdrive 2.