> > channels. There's a world of difference when you use a NNA-type system. > >That would require a lot of channels though... Wouldn't it be easier to, for >example, fade out a channel at a really high speed right before the next >note instead?
depends on what channels you mean, internal channels won't exceed 24,but visual channels can be any number ranging from 1 to 100000.. but lets asume that we limit the visual channels to 24. When you play 4 notes in 1 visual channel (and all notes continue), internally it uses 4 channels, it's the same as spreading those notes manually but this method works better. I mean, face it: you don't want a split melody, spread over 4 channels, it looks messy and you're way less flexible. (in most cases then, you're just copying/pasting patterns and replacing notes with others that way, just because it saves you work) Your midi equipment works this way too! >Naahhhh it's not that slow a processor... 24 divisions within one interrupt? >It should definately be able to handle that. However, don't expect a game to >be running in the background while you're at that ^_^. ah, in that case, there's still hope :) anyway, what's the intention of such a new tracker then? making tunes for a music disk or making tunes for a game ? /\/\ . / \/\/ . _______________________________________________ MSX mailing list ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Info page: http://lists.stack.nl/mailman/listinfo/msx
