I'd just like to add that UMX doesn't support all the features of S3M, XM, or IT. I believe volume envelopes, filters and NNA's are not supported, and the volume of the song will be much lower in Unreal than it is in the tracker.
That's good to know... Has anyone done any experimentation with the conversion allowances? If not, i will and i'll get back to you in this thread.
I AM concerned about the extra stuff that the latest version of MPT adds (at the end of the .it file?). Will this affect UnrealEd's conversion, L-chip?
He wants to be able to process just a certain note (like all C-4's in a channel), which is very easy to when using a piano roll but impossible in a tracker. Of course the find/replace function will do the job, but it's not very intuitive. I'm not sure why that functionality is important tho...
Sequencers like those from Master Tracks allows mass editing of any MIDI messages; once you've worked with this capability, you can't do any electronic music composition without it.
For example, the other day while putting together an .it track, i needed to switch all the C notes down an octave (because the sample at that note wasn't the sound i was looking for). If that's the only notes that were in that channel there'd be no problem, but i also mix instruments within one channel (like drums) as long as they don't interfere with each other. I also needed to lower the volume only of
that sample in
that channel. MPT does not expect me to use it like a sequencer, so there's no ability to filter notes or other volume or FX data.
I guess what i'm saying is, MPT would do better if you can select non-contiguous data. This can be done by shift-clicking and dragging the selection rect over the target (this is second nature for mac users), or by presenting a dialog box which first asks you to narrow down which data to select (such as all C5s with instrument 01 with volume over 32) and then asks what you want to do with it (attenuate the volume, add panning effects, transpose down an augmented fifth, or the like) ? this was the method that Master Tracks used. And believe me, if MPT had this capability, this would set MPT apart.
As a matter of fact, tracking should actually be called
channeling, because as i'm learning, MPT uses data primarily by channel ? mostly because the sound data is included within the file and the software only needs to know when to play the data and on what channel (plus what to do with the channel sound in some cases). Sequencers are the ones that actually use data by tracks; you can have all you channels on one track if you wish, or divide the MIDI data among tracks with little concern about the channel the computer is using. But that's just FYI...
I took the latest version of MPT home (2.42 for short), and was happy with the new features ? altho i had a few issues with the layout, since i only use a 1024x768 screen (the Channel Manager window was too big, for example). I also had a problem with "bouncing" playback, but i think that has more to do with the speed of my machine (which is about 150mHz with VirtualPC). But i LOVE the key assignment options, as well as the extra panes within each window (pitch manipulation, etc.).
BTW, concerning my question previously with the resonance effects: THANKYOU, Mr. LaPicque!! There is now a slider which allows random fluctuations of both cutoff
and resonance; now i can tap my rez synth rhythm and get that perfect rave track! (Altho i'd still like to figure out how to use the Zxx FX for moving the sliders from within the track.)
