Topic: MIDI? (Read 29849 times)

ClémentXVII · « **on:** April 26, 2003, 04:25:07 PM »

Err.. sorry if this has already been posted, but I couldn't find any references to it...

Is there any MIDI playback possibility with WME? Or do we have to write our own dll to play these sounds?

The advantage of MIDI is that files can be really small while maintaining some good quality...

odnorf · « **Reply #1 on:** April 26, 2003, 05:26:50 PM »

From the documentation, in the "supported files formats" section: "WME supports two file formats for storing the sounds and music: WAV & Ogg vorbis"

So, my guess is that there is no MIDI support yet, but I could be wrong because the documentation is incomplete.

Personally I don't really like MIDIs very much because they sound very different in every soundcard, and despite how good a midi file is if the player has a very bad soundcard then he will hear bad (quality wise) music.

Scarpia · « **Reply #2 on:** April 26, 2003, 08:44:37 PM »

Actually yes, the question has already been posted, and no, MIDI is not supported in WME. But after the previous discussion I believe Mnemonic agreed to implement MOD file support if someone would find a good open source C library for it. I think you can convert MIDIs to MOD pretty easily and MOD has better sound quality.

Scarpia

Mnemonic · « **Reply #3 on:** April 27, 2003, 08:04:46 AM »

Yes, that's right. MIDI is not supported. Of course, it wouldn't be a big deal to add MIDI support, but I'm not sure it's really necessary (for the reasons odnorf described above). I haven't seen a commercial game using MIDI in years...

ClémentXVII · « **Reply #4 on:** April 28, 2003, 09:06:05 PM »

Of course, if you're talking about 'commercial' games ;-)

What's nice with playing music in another format (MIDI/MOD) is that the music/speech volume can be adjusted separately, from the windows mixer... this would save some problems when the sounds would e.g. be too loud in comparison to the music...

Mnemonic · « **Reply #5 on:** April 28, 2003, 09:16:20 PM »

True, but you can adjust sound/speech/music volume separately in WME (using script commands).

Niklaus_Kerner · « **Reply #6 on:** April 29, 2003, 04:40:21 PM »

MIDI is a good file format for small games and 'Old School' games, and it easily permit to arrange music 'interactively' with the player actions. Just look at what can be done with iMuse from Lucasarts (ok, iMuse is a high quality level library).

I suggest maybe you could look at this possibility.

the midi (or mod) file format is to my mind perfect for a amateur game developpement

Mnemonic · « **Reply #7 on:** April 29, 2003, 06:44:52 PM »

Quote from: Niklaus_Kerner on April 29, 2003, 04:40:21 PM

Just look at what can be done with iMuse from Lucasarts (ok, iMuse is a high quality level library).

Yes, but even iMuse doesn't use MIDI nowadays

I was hoping the DirectMusic would be an alternative to iMuse, well, it probably is, I just don't have years to study that cryptic documentation

Quote from: Niklaus_Kerner on April 29, 2003, 04:40:21 PM

I suggest maybe you could look at this possibility.

Okay, I'll see what I can do about that. Like I said, it shouldn't be a big problem (I hope).

ClémentXVII · « **Reply #8 on:** April 30, 2003, 09:25:09 PM »

Cool, thanks!

Brassfire · « **Reply #9 on:** May 03, 2003, 06:18:47 AM »

DirectMusic is so confusingto make music in...

Jerrot · « **Reply #10 on:** June 11, 2003, 08:23:22 AM »

I'm sure you have enough sources for this stuff, but maybe this is also helpful for anybody.

Playing Midi files with C++ / DirectMusic (DX8):
http://www.codeproject.com/audio/cmidimusic.asp

It's a great site for coders anyway.

Mnemonic · « **Reply #11 on:** June 11, 2003, 08:16:13 PM »

Yeah, CodeProject.com is an excellent site!
I have my doubts about DirectMusic though...

Jerrot · « **Reply #12 on:** June 12, 2003, 02:36:07 PM »

Quote from: Mnemonic on June 11, 2003, 08:16:13 PM

Yeah, CodeProject.com is an excellent site!
I have my doubts about DirectMusic though...

Unfortunately I never got deep enough in that stuff (yet) to be able to discuss this... so I won't!

ClémentXVII · « **Reply #13 on:** July 01, 2003, 06:23:36 AM »

Thanks, now that the holidays are there, I'll be able to look into it!

Mnemonic, I suppose you're using DirectX to program WME? So using DirectMusic is not a 'bad' thing for loading music files, no?

odnorf · « **Reply #14 on:** July 01, 2003, 09:26:03 AM »

Quote from: Mnemonic on June 11, 2003, 08:16:13 PM

Yeah, CodeProject.com is an excellent site!
I have my doubts about DirectMusic though...

Do you know the sdl library at http://www.libsdl.org/index.php ?
I think that it might be easier to use it than DirectMusic (althought I am not a programmer myself).

Slightly off topic:
And it would be be usefull if in 10 years you want to create a linux/macos/etc port of the wme

(one less thing to program because the sld library is a cross-platform library... and it even supports opengl...).

ClémentXVII · « **Reply #15 on:** July 01, 2003, 10:11:29 AM »

I know about it, it's even used extensively by all my Linux games ;-), but I didn't find any info or tutorial about playing MIDI files on their site.

Eg: does SDL connect automatically to the MIDI sequencer, or do I have to connect it myself?

odnorf · « **Reply #16 on:** July 01, 2003, 11:32:07 AM »

[quote author=Cl

ClémentXVII · « **Reply #17 on:** July 01, 2003, 03:12:41 PM »

By Linux games, I mean games I bought (Neverwinter Nights, Wolfenstein,...) or GPL games (see http://www.happypenguin.org/ ).

I don't have 'Linux-specific' CD's, but they are needed to install the game with the game binaries, often found on the game's homepage, on the CD or on icculus's website.

I guess I'll try to make my hands on DirectMusic, and maybe try SDL later on... the structure shouldn't be too different ;-)

Mnemonic · « **Reply #18 on:** July 01, 2003, 03:20:38 PM »

[quote author=Cl

ClémentXVII · « **Reply #19 on:** July 01, 2003, 03:23:49 PM »

Really? $:-\$

odnorf · « **Reply #20 on:** July 01, 2003, 05:32:19 PM »

Quote from: Mnemonic on July 01, 2003, 03:20:38 PM

[quote author=Cl

Mnemonic · « **Reply #21 on:** July 01, 2003, 10:31:12 PM »

Quote from: odnorf on July 01, 2003, 05:32:19 PM

SO... you know about the SDL library? Why didn't you choose it to create the wme? (Just asking out of cusiocity, since using SDL makes a program highly postable on many OSes.)

Well, I don't really know. I probably didn't even know about SDL back then. Didn't much care about portability neither. And, except the portability, I don't feel like I'm missing something by not using SDL. At least I have a complete control of what's happening inside the engine.

odnorf · « **Reply #22 on:** July 02, 2003, 11:09:02 AM »

Quote from: Mnemonic on July 01, 2003, 10:31:12 PM

Well, I don't really know. I probably didn't even know about SDL back then. Didn't much care about portability neither. And, except the portability, I don't feel like I'm missing something by not using SDL. At least I have a complete control of what's happening inside the engine.

Well, NO, ofcourse you are not loosing anything except the portability... As I said I was just curious (because for me portability is usually a first-class priority so I don't understand 100% the need for directX for an adventure game engine).

Jerrot · « **Reply #23 on:** July 02, 2003, 11:27:31 AM »

Quote from: odnorf on July 02, 2003, 11:09:02 AM

I don't understand 100% the need for directX for an adventure game engine).

Speed and graphics card compatibility to use the hardware rendering! In fact DirectX was one of my prior reasons to have a closer look on WME. Of course that's only because I didn't know SDL yet... and didn't care too much about the portability yet...

Is it really comparable with DirectX (speed and functionality!) ?

Mnemonic · « **Reply #24 on:** July 02, 2003, 11:41:10 AM »

Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe SDL is built on top of DirectX anyway (the Win32 implementation that is).

odnorf · « **Reply #25 on:** July 02, 2003, 12:17:52 PM »

Quote

Is it really comparable with DirectX (speed and functionality!) ?

Well, I don't think that is as good as DirectX (but I might be wrong), but for an adventure game it has everything anyone needs (in the wme case, it has opengl support instead of directx) + VERY GOOD portability (DirectX is only for win, but opengl is for every OS).

Quote

Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe SDL is built on top of DirectX anyway (the Win32 implementation that is).

I can't really say. Maybe if you don't use the opengl acceleration then it uses the directx directdraw (or maybe not

). But it really doesn't matter, because if a program is using the SDL library then it can be built (if it doesn't have some specific-os code ofcourse) in many OSes.

EDIT: from the SDL WINDOWS FAQ page at http://www.libsdl.org/faq.php?action=listentries&category=4
"SDL takes advantage of DirectX hardware acceleration when it is available, but falls back to the standard Win32 services if DirectX is not installed."

Oh... and for anyone that might think that I am whining about wme's direct3D... I am not....

I find this feature VERY exciting...

In fact, it's one of the main reasons that I am using this engine. I just mention SDL for the midi playback...

EDIT: I also forgot to say that the SDL library is under the LGPL opensource licence which meant that any closed-source program can used it if it links to the sdl.dll.

ClémentXVII · « **Reply #26 on:** July 02, 2003, 12:55:40 PM »

Quote

Is it really comparable with DirectX (speed and functionality!) ?

Considering all the Linux ports of current games (Neverwinter Nights, games based on ID Software's Quake III engine like wolfenstein, medal of honor, UT2K3,...) are using SDL (because DX isn't available on that platform), I'd say yes.

KA-su-MA-kun · « **Reply #27 on:** July 30, 2003, 03:52:01 PM »

LOL The only reason mod has better sound is because it's the software equivalent of a SFX sampling board. The independent sounds are actually samples which are called via the same method used in MIDI (or similar at least because I've never seen a MIDI sequencer work like a MOD one period).

You can get the same quality of sound using a similar method with MIDI files, like iMuse I think used which is called a wave table, which is similar to the "Sound Font" libraries used by Creative soundcards these days (like my SBLive!, the Audigy, etc), in that the MIDI sequencer isn't called, but a replacement of it's instruments sounds ie I call a Muted Trumpet, it plays a sound effect which in theory is a recorded Muted Trumpet at a neutral tone, which can be modified via other calls like normal midi effects (ok so I'm simplifying it a lot).

It depends on where you want to take Wintermute in the future, if you intend to remain freeware the SEAL Development kit would be a good idea to look at. http://www.sonicspot.com/sealsdk/sealsdk.html Or even FMOD http://www.sonicspot.com/fmod/fmod.html I cannot think of any completely open source development as far as MOD goes, but you might try having a look at the Amiga developers archives, it is where it started from. :-)

odnorf · « **Reply #28 on:** July 30, 2003, 03:59:02 PM »

Quote from: KA-su-MA-kun on July 30, 2003, 03:52:01 PM

Or even FMOD http://www.sonicspot.com/fmod/fmod.html

FMOD has a really strange licence. And it seems that nobody (not even the guys at fmod site) knows what's the deal if someone wants to create a commercial game/product with it. I wouldn't want wme to mess with such a license.

EDIT: I even remember a discussion(s) about FMOD at Sludge forums (Sludge is using FMOD library) and nobody was able to tell 100% sure what's the state with the licence.

Mnemonic · « **Reply #29 on:** July 30, 2003, 04:43:27 PM »

Quote from: odnorf on July 30, 2003, 03:59:02 PM

EDIT: I even remember a discussion(s) about FMOD at Sludge forums (Sludge is using FMOD library) and nobody was able to tell 100% sure what's the state with the licence.

I don't know the details, but... either the engine developer would have to buy some kind of redistributable license (expensive) or the engine users would have to pay (less expensive). AFAIK even Sludge is about to abandon FMOD because of the licensing issues.

odnorf · « **Reply #30 on:** July 30, 2003, 06:12:56 PM »

Quote from: Mnemonic on July 30, 2003, 04:43:27 PM

...or the engine users would have to pay (less expensive)...

I remember people talking about this at Sludge forums and I believe that it's NOT much more "less expensive" (althought I can't remember the exact prices).

KA-su-MA-kun · « **Reply #31 on:** July 31, 2003, 06:51:12 AM »

Never claimed to know everything. But most people ditched MOD and MIDI in favour of MP3, not caring about the licensing details.

If I could remember the URL I'd give you the one for all the Amiga source code that became public domain, like I said MOD was AFAIK originally a Amiga file format, before some intelligent human being ported it to the DOS platform.

odnorf · « **Reply #32 on:** July 31, 2003, 09:29:11 AM »

Quote from: KA-su-MA-kun on July 31, 2003, 06:51:12 AM

But most people ditched MOD and MIDI in favour of MP3, not caring about the licensing details.

That's why Mnemonic made the smartest move and support only (so far) Ogg vorbis (and someday speex) which is patent-free & opensource under a BSD-like licence

And if *I* had to choose beetween MOD & MP3 for a game, I would have chosen MOD, because AFAIK it's legal whether MP3 is NOT.

Mnemonic · « **Reply #33 on:** July 31, 2003, 09:35:08 AM »

...and sounds better

EDIT: (Vorbis, I mean, not MOD)

odnorf · « **Reply #34 on:** July 31, 2003, 10:00:54 AM »

Quote from: Mnemonic on July 31, 2003, 09:35:08 AM

...and sounds better

EDIT: (Vorbis, I mean, not MOD)

You know how much I love Ogg Vorbis for it's licence, but this statement has yet to be prooven. At bitrates lower than 128 it has been prooven with blind listening tests to be much better than all mp3 encoders. At bitrates above 160 (in the search for transperancy) we still don't have prooves. Actually it seems that it's a matter of taste. Some people like better "lame -alt-preset standard" and some other like more "oggenc -q6" (both lines have a nominal bitrate of 192).

A usufull & interesting test that is being condacted now can be found at http://audio.ciara.us/test/128extension/presentation.html

EDIT: I personally prefer Ogg Vorbis over MP3 not only for it's licence but also for it's quality. Anyone interested in encoding with oggenc at -q5 or above should use this encoder http://64.246.62.80/~hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?showtopic=6023&st=0&#entry60471
It's much better tuned, especially in noise issues and preecho. But keep in mind that for the quality switches -q5 has bigger nominal bitrates, so if you were use -q6 for example you could try -5.5
(The link I provided might not work in a few days due to server changes. But you could still do a search for GT3b1 at www.hydrogenaudio.org)

KA-su-MA-kun · « **Reply #35 on:** July 31, 2003, 10:34:31 AM »

People have a bad habit of ditching the old for the new, even if there is no actual improvement, look at how many people snapped up copies of Windows ME when it first came out, when it is still the common opinion now that of the 9x operating systems Windows 98SE is still the best.

I personally don't know anything about OGG vs MP3, or even the OGG format. If it had been something like the DivX - MPeG4 - OGM debate, I think I would keep my mouth shut and stick with my own thoughts (I used to be part of an encoding group that uses OGM, involved with subtitling so some of the OGM features appeal to me enough to be willing to advocate it).

odnorf · « **Reply #36 on:** July 31, 2003, 10:51:10 AM »

Well.... I think I should improve my english because I don't really got the meaning of what you are trying to say

But anyway I'll try to answer. If I respond something irrelevant to what you are trying to say please forgive me.

Quote

People have a bad habit of ditching the old for the new, even if there is no actual improvement, look at how many people snapped up copies of Windows ME when it first came out, when it is still the common opinion now that of the 9x operating systems Windows 98SE is still the best.

If assume (usually a bad think to do

) you are talking about the "MP3 or Ogg Vorbis" discussions here. Well, first of all, there is no ditching. I said that Ogg Vorbis is a much better tool because it has a much better licence and ALSO quality comparable to MP3. So it seems obvious that Ogg Vorbis is a better overral choice for an adventure game.

EDIT: And if you refering to "MOD or MP3" discussion then I have already said that MOD is a better choice due to licence issues with MP3. But overal they are not really comparable as they are completely different formats made for different pursposes.

Quote

I personally don't know anything about OGG vs MP3, or even the OGG format. If it had been something like the DivX - MPeG4 - OGM debate, I think I would keep my mouth shut and stick with my own thoughts (I used to be part of an encoding group that uses OGM, involved with subtitling so some of the OGM features appeal to me enough to be willing to advocate it).

I don't understand why anyone can't say that x is better than y when he had some points to make and proove his claims. ?!?!?
And you confused me even more because you speek for DivX and Ogm as competitors when they are not. Divx is a codec while Ogm is a video/audio container (basically Ogm is the same as Ogg with some additions that were always in the Ogg specs but never programmed before).

Even more, I actually didn't advocate Ogg Vorbis because I said that it may have worse quality than MP3 at bitrates of 160 or higher.

Oh... and a really unimportand thing for me, but important for xiph.org is the names. It's not OGG & OGM but Ogg & Ogm (I am not saying this myself, xiph.org has requested it from anyone because it doesn't pronounced OGG but o-g-g, one letter at the time).

KA-su-MA-kun · « **Reply #37 on:** July 31, 2003, 12:16:55 PM »

No you just don't understand me, but that is ok not many people ever have or will.

OGG is more correct as a pronunciation aid, since Ogg looks like it's intended to be a word, not an acronym, so are you certain they got it around the right way, I'm trying to find a reference to such an issue on their site now.

Regarding the ditching I was talking about people abandoning the older formats in favour of newer formats without ever looking back and considering where such a format would be more suitable to the needs they had.

odnorf · « **Reply #38 on:** July 31, 2003, 12:22:33 PM »

Quote from: KA-su-MA-kun on July 31, 2003, 12:16:55 PM

No you just don't understand me, but that is ok not many people ever have or will.

Hehe! I think the problem here is called "native english & not-native english speakers"

Quote from: KA-su-MA-kun on July 31, 2003, 12:16:55 PM

OGG is more correct as a pronunciation aid, since Ogg looks like it's intended to be a word, not an acronym, so are you certain they got it around the right way, I'm trying to find a reference to such an issue on their site now.

OK... I just make a fool out of myself because I just remembered that the correct way to pronnounce it is "og" and not "o-gee-gee" and that' because it's not an acronym and they didn't want it to sound like another mp3 (which it is 3 different words). Sorry for the inconviniance I have caused. The part about how we should write it is still correct. Actually it should be better to write "Ogg Vorbis" when we refer to a vorbis endoded file and not just Ogg because Ogg is just the container. We could also have Ogg Flac and Ogg Speex.

And this time I hope to be correct.

I have read all this information at the mailing list of xiph.org and at various posts at www.hydrogenaudio.org by Emmett (ex CEO of xiph.org) and Monty (the "father" of Ogg container and Vorbis codec).

[talking to myself] Have to sleep more and drink less! [/talking to myself]

KA-su-MA-kun · « **Reply #39 on:** July 31, 2003, 02:20:54 PM »

Hardly, I'm one of those people who confuses everyone because I have a very different way of thinking. It doesn't matter what your first language is.

I *was* wondering about that like I said. Oh well no harm done, I'm just used to all the acronyms they use around computers, about the only acronym I appreciate is TWAIN (Technology Without An Interesting Name).

odnorf · « **Reply #40 on:** August 06, 2003, 11:36:47 AM »

About the Ogg vs OGG...

Here is an "Ogg traffic" from March 2003 that explains everythingl.
http://www.vorbis.com/ot/20030318.html#id2727368

News:

Author Topic: MIDI? (Read 29849 times)