Go to bottom

XM making?

category: music [glöplog]
Yes, because .it < .xm forever.
added on the 2011-03-03 11:44:29 by 4mat 4mat
dude, the it > xm is for it2 users.
You should have argued about the ugly interface. That's a ft2 user thing you know, you like to click on buttons.
added on the 2011-03-03 12:22:46 by __ __
yes, it's called a UI. I hear they're quite popular these days.
added on the 2011-03-03 13:13:56 by 4mat 4mat
MISTER BEEP: The reason you gave not to use FT2 has already been described a work-around for.
added on the 2011-03-03 13:20:38 by kusma kusma
milkytracker is the best modern ft2 replacement, period.

an number of people still seem to consider skale a valid alternative. newsflash: a) the latest version was released in 2005 or something, b) the playback never was that accurate to begin with, c) it was always pretty buggy.

pailes and the milkytracker folks have put in a lot of effort to achieve near-perfect playback of various mod/xm features and quirks, which is pretty much the point of a tracker still relying on 15-25-year-old formats. if you want more (daw-like) features in a tracker, you don't want ancient formats, you want renoise or something.
added on the 2011-03-03 13:45:50 by reed reed
There's something, a short song, that I've did using this engine.

added on the 2011-03-03 17:49:36 by SoDa7 SoDa7
Funny that f.e. OpenMPT's arpeggio is pretty much exact and Milky's is not, though. :)

Oh and yes, insert random IT vs XM flamewar here.
(IT obviously wins)
Titan's Milkytracker for life, homeboy.
added on the 2011-03-03 23:12:36 by iks iks
The .xm/mod. format sucks for true old-school chiptunes. IMHO.
(you cannot even play an arpeggio with more than 3 notes..)

On topic: Beeper noise from '87 (well ok, the AY drums are not beeper noise..)
added on the 2011-03-04 00:04:47 by xyz xyz
The .xm/mod. format sucks for true old-school chiptunes. IMHO.

In my world, a "true old-school chiptune" is played using hardware synthesis on a true old-school chip, not with samples, so... yeah :-)
added on the 2011-03-04 10:41:00 by gasman gasman
Thank you gasman for bringing back the old discussion about the true oldschool chiptunes. It's been a while.
added on the 2011-03-04 11:08:42 by __ __
Impulse Tracker 4Life.
Don't even try to compare it/xm format.
Lightyears difference.
added on the 2011-03-04 12:59:08 by ninja ninja
I tried Impulse tracker a long time ago and failed. It's probably designed for more intelligent people.
added on the 2011-03-04 13:08:02 by chromag chromag
I really hated it when I first tried it but finally decided to kick my ass to use it because of the NNAs and the lowpass filter... finally, after some months trying it and having fun in various irc ohc, I can definitely say it was the cleverest tracker made... for anybody (I see you coming with the "ahahah you're arrogant" troll)

First, FT2 is based on Protracker (And protracker is ooooold). The instrument/sample concept is limited. Everything feels "on top of everything else", clickclickclick. And I actually bitch on renoise because it's _again_ the same limited way.

IT2 brought a new and fresh concept to the sample/instruments. You could load samples and reuse the same sample into many different instruments for, let say, make different enveloppes... in FT2, you would reload the same sample into each instruments.
Then, the fast everything was clearly separated and accessible through F(unction) was really something clever, would make you track faster and faster. Not mentioning the huge amount of commands and shortcuts.

Of course, you could bitch about the NNAs, saying it's lame and all, that you could make a real and good tune with less channels and NO virtual channels and if you do think it's about this all, I'm really sorry since I thought we were talking about music making and the best tools for making music. No really, I really thought so :)
added on the 2011-03-04 13:51:58 by __ __
as an FT2 user let me disagree with everything kaneel just said.
added on the 2011-03-04 13:59:12 by 4mat 4mat
It's ok, you just failed at resisting posting.
added on the 2011-03-04 14:06:00 by __ __
There is no need to use NNA argument, some BASICS for example.

- Volume dynamic (same thing with panning dynamic):
IT > XM (channel volume and overall more volume control possibilities in IT)
- Finetuning:
IT > XM (more accurate)
- Pitch envelope:
IT only
- Envelopes:
IT > XM (per tick control in IT)

Btw. Hate Modplug and other fake-it-modules-making-clones...

This is OFC only useless flame tech speaking,
technology != music and tool <> artist...
But IT2 FTW ;)
added on the 2011-03-04 14:47:14 by ninja ninja
I was going to bring on the IT2 global pattern commands as well as the ghost effect commands.
added on the 2011-03-04 15:09:29 by __ __
And the NNA argument is pretty straight to the point... my point: The fact one sample would kill an other one if played on the same channel is a limitation... which became a feature for many musicians who tend to prefer argumenting on how hard it's been for them to have that much different instruments on 32 channels.
added on the 2011-03-04 15:11:19 by __ __

Hello, welcome to 2011, when was the last time you tried ModPlug?
this is all very well but if you want a game of Nibbles you're basically fscked in IT2.
added on the 2011-03-04 15:21:40 by 4mat 4mat
Oh noez, 4mat brought the ONLY argument about FT2.
Now, to the second discussion.

THE TRUE CHIPTUNE IS MADE WITH REAL CHIPS... even if the term was coinced during the samples era.
added on the 2011-03-04 15:33:20 by __ __
knl: go start that one on 8bc
added on the 2011-03-04 15:36:03 by 4mat 4mat
And if you want that nice starfield.. ft2, only way!
added on the 2011-03-04 16:01:33 by leGend leGend


Go to top