> Hi Jimmy,
>
> Just keeping the already selected instrument when an
> invalid selection
> is received seems strange to me. Do you think that would
> create the
> desired effect in most MIDI files? It is a case of the
> MIDI file
> expecting an instrument to be present, which is not, right?
> I'm not
> convinced that just keeping the previous instrument
> selection is any
> better than trying to be a little smarter about it,
> depending on the
> mode (GM, GS, XG, etc). If a SoundFont was loaded, which
> supported all
> the instruments of the playing MIDI file, then there would
> be no issue.
>
> Best regards,
> Josh
Hi Josh,
Sure, you decide what's best to implement, when you have a chance that is. I
only wish that assume that when I load up several soundfonts, with at least one
complete GM soundfont, in any order, that FS won't skip out on any XG sound
selection -- like prog_change channel 5 bank 15231 prog_numb 43.
Since GM only assure bank 0 is available and complete. Softsynths, and
soundcards also allow multiple soundfonts to be loaded to override some
instruments using bank_number and prog_numbers base on some soundfont loading
order. Some of those soundfonts may not have complete set of GM instruments.
>From what I know of XG, and XG keyboards, those may have sound banks and drum
>kits that you and I don't have. Basically, they are hardware sound modules.
Soundcards with midi, and/or XG supports are PC emulation of those hardware
sound modules. FS is just software emulation of such. And I haven't seen a
hardware sound module skips any midi sound channels the way FS does. I have
played XG sequences onto a Casio keyboard, non-XG of course, and they do sound
something, not exactly as it may sound on a Yamaha XG keyboard, but it won't
skip out on any sound at all, probably just use corresponding prog_number of
the complete GM soundbank it has. Similar result with a PCI SB 5.1 Live!
soundcard if I have a GM soundfont loaded -- I haven't tried with just a non-GM
single-instrument soundfont.
I am fairly certain that most XG sound modules (including electronic keyboards)
have soundbank 0 that has a complete GM set of instruments. All other
soundbanks (non-0) may be virtual pointer to instruments in soundband 0 with
some or all instruments tweaked with different effects -- similar to
synthesizer keyboards that allow custom sound editing. I guess that's the
case, because many older XG keyboard specs I have seen showed only a few
megabytes of sound samples. Even Tyros, Tyros 2, and Tyros 3 (top of the line
arranger keyboards of its time) have only a few dozen megabytes of sound
samples.
Many of those XG arranger keyboards were implemented on a few "sound engines".
Even with the same "sound engine" (hardware soundchip, number of effect
processors, sound samples), I believe those XG keyboards have different number
of soundbanks and different soundbank numbering schemes (but same GM
prog_numbering) over the years.
The only fairly certain thing I know about them is that people can record midi
sequences from those keyboards, or copy style files for those keyboards. When
playing back those midi sequences, or styles on a different XG keyboard models
they will sound differently, even badly, because of different sound engines and
soundbank numbering schemes, but I don't think any of the sounds are skipped,
or ignored.
Again, I can't recall where I read it, but I believe that the XG prog_number
mirrors GM scheme in most cases. If you insist, I can try to locate that info.
Just that XG uses many more sound banks, and the more expensive the hardware,
the better sound sammples and sound engine they have. I think XG, and XG-Lite
are examples of pricing the market.
Best regards,
Jimmy
_______________________________________________
fluid-dev mailing list
fluid-dev@nongnu.org
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/fluid-dev
