Uuuh Bero, i feel right, da ModPlug sounds better than you!

[Poser]

Hello folks, i'm back!

I've compared BeRoTracker with ModPlug and the Oscar goes to ...

Using the same track with the same settings and the same plugins:

http://www.uploadyourfiles.de/028bc9316a570b1912945a881e772f8e/2l53e/Download.html

ModPlug: Sounds fat and clear as always.

BeRoTracker: Dry sound, no dynamic, no effect on the claps(?), low resampling,
(just listen to the snare at 00:21 - sounds like a bad mp3-encoding eh? But it isn't. As .wav it sounds the same.)

Also i must admit, that ModPlug runs fast at Win98 and a P2!

So there is no reason to replace ModPlug with BeRoTracker,
especially if Rewbs add in the near future this modular effect stuff.

PS: The tested track is an old one from ~2001, so don't blaspheme me please

[pyby_]

i dont know if any other trackers use ASIO, because my first(and the last also)  tracker from the beginning till now is MPT

i like mpt because it maintaines ASIO

and sound is really nice, deep & clean as you've said. i simply agree with you

[BeRo]

THen compare http://www.berotracker.de/resampling/BeRoTracker.png with http://www.berotracker.de/resampling/ModPlug.png .  BeRoTracker has a better resampling engine, MPT has more resampling aliasing than  BRT . you must select on the wave export dialog the right resampling method  and  resolution  (for example FastSINC256 at 32-bit IEEE Floating Point,  where you don't lose any quality at the down mixing for example from 32-bit to 16-bit and where then it will get normalized,  you did lost there a lot of quality (because the Normalizing is "AFTER" the downmixing). Please use the Export function with 32-bit IEEE resolution, if you do want perfect quality, this way will give you still the best results )

Short: BeRoTracker works internally only with 32-bit IEEE Floating Point Sample values. You must set only the settings right for a perfect soundoutput quality.

P.S. Here the module http://www.berotracker.de/resampling/15kHz_60bpm.xm  for to testing yourself. But please, you do it with the right way

edit: And  BeRoTracker  (the ImpulseTracker GUI variant) supports ASIO

[hotkey]

Poser...!

You're really want to... -sorry, let me repeat it in order to get it right- compare MODPLUGTRACKER to BEROTRACKER?

Please, use the correct interpolation before exporting - BeRoTracker features FSINC512 (soon 1024) interpolation that is just uncomparable to anything else out there... (And I code my own music software myself - //www.BUZZle.de - So: I got no reason to prefer my contestants  :wink: )

Maybe the ImpT-look is not everyone's darling, but technically there's no tracker available with quality comparible to BeRo-Tracker - Got your Spectrum set up correctly? 'cause I've seen different BeRo-Benchmarks.... honestly...)

So don't judge too early - get your setup right!  :idea:

[speed-goddamn-focus]

And I code my own music software myself - //www.BUZZle.de - So: I got no reason to prefer my contestants  :wink:

"BeRo and I are working out how to grant a perfect cooperation of BeRo Tracker and BUZZle * BeRo Tracker (ImpulseTracker's "successor") is, like BUZZle, coded in FreePascal * So let's hope for a seemless integration of the BTP SDK!" doesn't sound like very fierce competition...

Maybe the ImpT-look is not everyone's darling, but technically there's no tracker available with quality comparible to BeRo-Tracker

I would say Aodix is.

But don't get me wrong, I welcome Bero Tracker and Buzzle, the more the merrier. I wish you'd consider making your software open source tho, or even better; help out with MPT.

[BeRo]

BeRoTracker will become a commerical product. The actual versions are free to use but currently only alpha/beta test builds to get some user feedbacks (Bugreporting etc.). ModPlug vs. BeRoTracker is like comparing a good VW car (Modplug) to a porsche or ferrari (BeRoTracker). Two trackers with different goals, userbase and concepts. BRT has Automations, full MIDI implementation, a modular route system, "native" support for 24 and 32 bit samples, many filtertypes, perfect resampler (for whose you must set the right settings to get a good result), drum patterns, extended patterns, and a inoffical "native" multichannels (not only stereo) support (up to 16), 32-bit IEEE floating point mixing engine and so on.

The cooperation between Buzzle and BeRoTracker is not a fusion but instead more a kind of information and technology sharing (e.g. BTP plugin spec). Also Buzzle will stay freeware.

P.S. http://www.vectronix.org/wbb/archive/index.php?t-1105.html

[Poser]

@beRo:

If you really want to release your tracker als "commercial" product you
have a lot of work to do! I thought BeRoTracker should be free furthermore
and another sequencer-version of it should go commercial?

The actual version is unstable, crashes on loading and is slowly (not
only while playing, even just the buildup of the gui (gadgets a.s.o.)).
Perhaps FreePascal is the wrong programming language for this...

ModPlug vs. BeRoTracker is like comparing a good VW
car (Modplug) to a porsche or ferrari (BeRoTracker).

Harhar! :lol: For me as musician it's uninteresting which engine works,
i just trust my own ears!!! I've testet some other settings (IEEE) but this
also don't satisfy me.

[Audio Honk]

@Poser:

Sorry but you talk nothing but rubbish. So far I haven't seen any other other users (e.g. in the BRT forum) complaining about crashes or other unstable functions. So if you are really concerned then submit a detailed bug report or do some verifyable comparison. Otherwise just shut up.

btw: Are you kidding? You seem to care about good sound quality but in the same time you rely on windows 98 as operating system? Good laugh, really.

[LPChip]

Do I sense an invasion of BeRo users over here?

[Poser]

@Poser:
Sorry but you talk nothing but rubbish. So far I haven't seen any other other users (e.g. in the BRT forum) complaining about crashes or other unstable functions. So if you are really concerned then submit a detailed bug report or do some verifyable comparison. Otherwise just shut up.

btw: Are you kidding? You seem to care about good sound quality but in the same time you rely on windows 98 as operating system? Good laugh, really.

I talk no "rubbish", i tell the truth but you can't deal with criticism hm?

On my machine (win98, p2, 350 mhz) it loads only sometimes, crashes and
is slowly like hell. Do i need 3.0 ghz and xp to hear the "superb" sound of BeRo?

Do I sense an invasion of BeRo users over here?

Yes, seems like that. They urgently need new users for their tracker/forum or something :-)

If they wanna start a war between MP and their BT they are wrong here.

The only thing annoying is that the author seems to be biheaded and arrogant like
"my program is the best and your's is shit!"...

Please come back to ground my dear!

[Squirrel Havoc]

f they wanna start a war between MP and their BT they are wrong here.

Uh, call me crazy, but you started this with the comparison between the two. But I don't want to get involved, I never liked playing favorites....

[BeRo]

On my machine (win98, p2, 350 mhz) it loads only sometimes, crashes and
is slowly like hell. Do i need 3.0 ghz and xp to hear the "superb" sound of BeRo?

You need for BRT a NT-based windows system or x86-Linux/x86-BSD with WINE, and at least 1 GHz.
Only 350 MHz for a music computer is really a joke, if you want work really professional today.
Aodix needs also the similiar minimal system requirements like BeRoTracker (see http://www.aodix.com/ )  .

[Audio Honk]

@Poser:

I think you started the "war" which you are talking about.

IMHO it's just not fair to post biased blubber (and disguise it as a comparison) about a piece of software in a concurrent forum without giving the author any chance to give a statement or to clear things up. Submitting a bug report or posting it in the BRT forum would have been the right choice for both sides. But instead you chose to flame and now whine about the arrogance of the BRT author.

[Poser]

Uh, call me crazy, but you started this with the comparison between the two.

Yes you are right... but this comparison should only show,
that BeRoTracker sounds NOT better than ModPlug
(argued by BeRo himself many times).

But I'm of course too stupid to set his engine right harhar...

[Poser]

@Poser:

I think you started the "war" which you are talking about.

IMHO it's just not fair to post biased blubber (and disguise it as a comparison) about a piece of software in a concurrent forum without giving the author any chance to give a statement or to clear things up. Submitting a bug report or posting it in the BRT forum would have been the right choice for both sides. But instead you chose to flame and now whine about the arrogance of the BRT author.

Harhar... BeRo himself has posted here many times how good his tracker is and that ModPlug has no chance (blablabla)...

But if his tracker is sooooo superb and wonderful, why he keep it needful to compare with such a "lame" tracker like ModPlug?

Whatever... he should be proud of his engine and the stuff (as well it sounds not better than others)...