Re: [LAU] Sound Chip as a synthesizer on Linux. Thoughts, ideas?

On Thu, 2014-07-10 at 11:03 -0400, Rob wrote: I used the C64 with Speech Basic (or what ever the FLOSS sound sampler BASIC was named), build the inexpensive sound sample circuit that was using a joystick port (the circuit diagram and PCB layout were available for free too) and in 65xx assembler I programmed a MIDI extension for Speech Basic and than wrote a MIDI sound sampler. I bought a MIDI interface, but it's also easy to DIY. The sound was produced by SID. The gear is boxed, theoretical available for me, especially useful books such as the C64 Intern, but I dislike to search the cartons for the C64 gear. The sound of the SID is fuller than digital emulations of analog synth are, but a very, very serious drawback of the SID integrated to the C64 is secondary noise, so the less full sound by emulations of analog synth IMO is more usable than the SID integrated to the C64, that nearly is unusable regarding to it's secondary noise. You can't completely filter out the secondary noise and as soon as it's halfway filtered out, so that you might be able to use the sound for production, the sound quality has lost the fuller sound and will be less full than an analog synth emulation. JFTR in the 80s the C64 was more expensive than a PC nowadays is and some good analog synth based on CEM/Curtis chips were not more expensive than a C64, OTOH sound samplers were very expensive, so the lowest quality C64 sound sampler I programmed was useful, but IMO it never was useful to use the C64 as an analog synth. IMO no Linux analog synth emulation can compare e.g. to my Oberheim Matrix-1000 and even FM synthesis, e.g. Hexter can't compare to my first generation DX7, but Linux analog synth emulations are better than using a SID integrated to the C64. Using a C64 nowadays isn't worse the hassle and using it as an analog synth never was worth the hassle. 2 Cents, Ralf