Why did the Atari ST designers use such a CRAPPY sound chip?

[Minuous]

Atari ST sound is not even as good as the sound on the expanded Elektor TV Games Computer from 1979, which had two of these chips (plus various other sound hardware).

[dlfrsilver]

Originally Posted by ImmortalA1000

The possibilities were limitless with Portia for 1985, the problem was lazy idiots who sampled naff waveforms from horrible FM synths to make totally jarring game soundtracks that have bugger all to do with the atmosphere of a game like Risky Woods. When used in the right hands like Jeroen Tel in Agony (the frequency range on my Spectrum Analyser is quite high on the piano sample) or David Whittaker's Shadow of the Beast 1 tunes (512k game!) the Amiga has awesome sound. Few people did tunes that good. C64 games had much more talent in the sound department, and the two best Amiga games tunes are from SID composers. I suppose Ghouls n Ghosts will be mentioned but that game is PD quality at best so who is going to buy a £25-30 just for the music?

End of the day Atari had to hit a price point, they had to pay other companies to do work that in the past MOS Technology did for Jack for basic salaried wage and Atari had to make a profit. 512k of RAM was very expensive in early 1985 too, sharp drop in price by 1987 when A500 turned up (it accounts for more than 50% of the price drop). It's the second best computer after the Amiga 1000 in 1985.

The Amstrad's 1 channel to the left, 1 to left and right, 1 channel to the right is an idiotic idea and to be quite honest 99.9999999% of people buying an Amstrad CPC had no choice but to listen to it via a crap 2cm tiny little speaker even if they used it on a TV via the modulator (if you could find one).
At least the ST sound comes out of a decent speaker if you have a decent TV (we had a TV with very decent stereo speakers in 1982 so no reason to hear the AY/YM sounds in 2cm speaker quality lol)

It is what it is, the 520STM + external disk drive bundle in Spring 1985 cost less than a Commodore 128 + 1571 disk drive by a significant margin.

I just kept my 1983 C64 and bought some games for my C64 and some for my 520STM in 1986/87 until I found a used Amiga 1000 for half the price of an Amiga 500

I never had any issues with getting audio out from the monitor port on my 520STM, didn't sound any more hissy than doing the same via the monitor port on my C64. Would never buy an amplifier to listen to ST music. Maybe the later 520STFMs for £299 RRP had duff sound, can't say.

I think the ST soundchip is there for all sorts of stuff (disk controller?) so it just fit their budget restricted design. It's not as good as the sound on a $4000 512k Mac of 1985 sure but then the Mac has shit graphics so there's that too.

If you want to have the Amstrad CPC sound full flavour, you need to hook it on a TV with a cable plugged in the Stereo port.

Then you get a much much better sound than the one you get with the small crappy buzzer. And then you see that the sound is cristal crisp compared to the one the ST outputs....

[thegeps]

Originally Posted by Foebane

I've never heard anything technically impressive come out of AY, except for samples (even if they are very hissy) compared to SID.

Sample quality is a matter of algorithm and available memory...
My Turrican project on MSX1 (Z80 + AY)
[ Show youtube player ]

[Bruce Abbott]

Originally Posted by ImmortalA1000

The Amstrad's 1 channel to the left, 1 to left and right, 1 channel to the right is an idiotic idea

Idiotic? On the contrary, it's the obvious way to do stereo output on the AY. Most machines combined all 3 outputs into mono, which loses an important dimension of the sound. Later Yamaha equivalents combined the outputs inside the chip, so you didn't have a choice. I guess they did this because the machines were usually connected to a TV (which in those days generally only had mono sound).

and to be quite honest 99.9999999% of people buying an Amstrad CPC had no choice but to listen to it via a crap 2cm tiny little speaker

No choice? Of course they had a choice - they could plug headphones into the 3.5mm socket, or connect it to an external stereo amp (eg. PC amplified speaker set, hifi system).

even if they used it on a TV via the modulator (if you could find one).

Compared to an RGB monitor the modulator was pretty bad. It didn't have have a delay line in the RGB to composite converter so the colors smeared horribly. But CPC computers came with a monitor as standard, so there was little demand for the modulator (which might explain their rarity).

I got the CPC664 with monochrome (green) monitor, because I needed the higher resolution for programming. Later on I bought a Microvetic RGB monitor which had higher resolution than Amstrad's color monitor (which used a TV tube with coarse 0.43mm dot pitch). To avoid having to keep using the monochrome monitor just for the power supply I built my own PSU for the computer.

I think the ST soundchip is there for all sorts of stuff (disk controller?) so it just fit their budget restricted design. It's not as good as the sound on a $4000 512k Mac of 1985 sure but then the Mac has shit graphics so there's that too.

It was good a choice for budget synthesized sound, and a popular one too.

[Silverstreak]

I'm pretty sure they were screwed over at the last minute and the AY was available. It happens.

AMY was the chip that came to mind.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atari_AMY

[ImmortalA1000]

I don't think Atari ever planned to put the AMY chip in the ST.

The YM2149 is a shit sound chip for sure, a real chump's Colecovision type noise. It was shit for the £199.99 Amstrad CPC in 1984 never mind a £750 16bit Computer in 1985.

YM2151 or a single DAC like the Mac, the YM2149 is the reason ST sales never lasted long.

I played Atari 8bit games all the time and had a C64 myself before I got an ST, the sound was the biggest problem for people who had a decent sounding 8bit (not spectrum/amstrad wank sound).

Wiring up a sound chip with a single global volume control to Left/Right/Both IS a spastic move too. It's still a shit sound and with only 3 channels you're not going to be making anything brilliant with those shit square waves with a single volume level to control all 3. The Amiga has separate volume controls, the Archimedes has software left/right panning 8bit(?) value too on top. Even wiring up the 3 channels of the SID to left/right/both is still a dumb idea, you need individual volume control for each channel if you want stereo sound to be useful, otherwise it's just a gimmick for clueless idiots to argue about with me

Good example. ST International Karate (not IK+) may look better on the ST but it sounded like a naff 8bit console vs the Atari 800/C64 Hubbard tune/SFX. That's what it was like owning an ST in 1986 before Commodore got around to releasing a PAL Amiga 1000 in the UK.

[dreadnought]

Originally Posted by ImmortalA1000

...

Thank you for bringing these extremely classy and sophisticated arguments to our uncouth board

[Thomas Richter]

The problem is that you come here only for the technical aspects of the machine, but those were not really relevant. The design goal of the ST was to get a competitor of the Mac available as fast as possible, and as cheap as possible. Thus, they needed something "that made some sound in some way", and that's it. It was a business decision to go for industry standard parts, cheaply available in volume, easy to integrate.

The Amiga was designed by technical freaks using a design driven by technology, and their startup run out of money exactly because of that - the business aspect was ignored when designing it. They just had the luck (or fortune) of being bought in time by one of the big players of the time.

[Bruce Abbott]

Originally Posted by ImmortalA1000

Wiring up a sound chip with a single global volume control to Left/Right/Both IS a spastic move too.

Not sure what you are talking about here. The YM2149 has independent level control of each channel.

you need individual volume control for each channel if you want stereo sound to be useful, otherwise it's just a gimmick for clueless idiots to argue about with me

Problem is most TVs of the day only had mono sound input and a single speaker, so the channels had to be joined together to go to a single audio output. Sound going over the modulator had to be mono too.

But that doesn't mean the channels themselves couldn't have independent volume control.

Originally Posted by Thomas Richter

It was a business decision to go for industry standard parts, cheaply available in volume, easy to integrate.

And the YM2149 wasn't the worst choice out there. Many other machines like the Colecovision etc. used the SN76489, which is far less capable.

One advantage of using a popular 'standard' chip was that its operation was well understood and there was plenty of music already produced for it. Thousands of songs have been produced for the AY/YM in the 'standard' PT3 format which doesn't require emulating the CPU to play them. Some of them are very good, especially when played on a good stereo system.

[vulture]

I, for one, and I know I'm in the minority here, I loved the YM2149/AY-3-8910 sound and usually prefered it to SID, which I've always found to be "too noisy".

[gimbal]

Originally Posted by vulture

I, for one, and I know I'm in the minority here, I loved the YM2149/AY-3-8910 sound and usually prefered it to SID, which I've always found to be "too noisy".

Nostalgia does a lot to how you interpret sound and music I can even listen to the bleeps and bloops of the Atari 2600 with fondness. Usually. There are some games which produce criminal tones.

Case in point, there are far better ways to play music under DOS than adlib/software synth. But software synth is what I had all my (DOS-using) life so that is the music output I prefer even emulated today.

[TCD]

I'm still not sure which black magic makes the (rather short and repetitive) Xenon 2 intro possible: [ Show youtube player ]

[meynaf]

Originally Posted by TCD

I'm still not sure which black magic makes the (rather short and repetitive) Xenon 2 intro possible:

It is possible to make the YM2149 play PCM samples. Many games did this.
You have to send pulses with volume registers. It just takes a table lookup to convert one 8-bit sample into 3x 4-bit volumes.

[gimbal]

You explain that as if it is child's play. But I'm sticking with TCD's "black magic" despite of it

[TCD]

Originally Posted by meynaf

It is possible to make the YM2149 play PCM samples. Many games did this.
You have to send pulses with volume registers. It just takes a table lookup to convert one 8-bit sample into 3x 4-bit volumes.

That kinda makes sense. There are also samples played on the SID and even on the PC speaker, but the YM2149 does a good job with that 3 x 4-bit technique.

[Total Eclipse]

Originally Posted by vulture

I, for one, and I know I'm in the minority here, I loved the YM2149/AY-3-8910 sound and usually prefered it to SID, which I've always found to be "too noisy".

I had (and still have) a ST before my Amigas. While there's no doubt about the superiority of Paula over the YM2149, the ST chip music definitely has a charm to it, especially the work of artists like Mad Max.

Although I'm not sure why Atari couldn't find a way to shoehorn the POKEY in there.

[slaapliedje]

Originally Posted by gimbal

You explain that as if it is child's play. But I'm sticking with TCD's "black magic" despite of it

I had a Mega STe, and pretty sure Xenon 2 was one of the few that took advantage of the extra sound. But the STe basically had the best of both worlds, as far as sound chips go. Unfortunately most ST coders by the time it came out were targeting the 'lowest common denominator' and didn't release software that took advantage of the STe.

Fun note; while the Amiga had better sound from the beginning, Commodore sat on their asses with it (for the most part true with the rest of the Amiga), whereas Atari improved theirs with the STe/TT and then went on to make the Falcon which has amazing sound capabilities.

[TEG]

Originally Posted by ImmortalA1000

Good example. ST International Karate (not IK+) may look better on the ST but it sounded like a naff 8bit console vs the Atari 800/C64 Hubbard tune/SFX. That's what it was like owning an ST in 1986 before Commodore got around to releasing a PAL Amiga 1000 in the UK.

This is exceptional in mediocrity for sure But fortunately it's not representative of the true capacity of the chip.

[ Show youtube player ]

Originally Posted by Total Eclipse

I had (and still have) a ST before my Amigas. While there's no doubt about the superiority of Paula over the YM2149, the ST chip music definitely has a charm to it, especially the work of artists like Mad Max.

Exactly, I had one or two "music floppy" on the ST (a demo disk with a menu were you can choose a music to play among a list) and it was a lot of fun and for sure, better than the SID. But I remember, after 15 minutes or so, it was hard to listen.

The Amiga was a so great improvement for my ears. I must add, the Amiga stereo output "forced" me to adapt and so find a cable and use the family record player to have a stereo output. So if it's here, we found a way to use it. So to say you have to build a mono computer because TV are mono is half of the equation.

[Thomas Richter]

Originally Posted by TEG

Exactly, I had one or two "music floppy" on the ST (a demo disk with a menu were you can choose a music to play among a list) and it was a lot of fun and for sure, better than the SID.

This surprises me. There is nothing the AY could do the SID couldn't. The SID does have 3 rectangular voices, same as AY, and it had ADSR control, same as AY (actually, better than AY, as there is more control on the hull curve).


In the addition, SID as triangle and sawtooth output, and filters, all things the AY did not have. Thus, it should be relatively easy to emulate AY output on the SID.


Maybe the actual analog signal quality wasn't all that good for the SID? But remember, the AY is a much simpler device.

[meynaf]

Originally Posted by Thomas Richter

This surprises me. There is nothing the AY could do the SID couldn't. The SID does have 3 rectangular voices, same as AY, and it had ADSR control, same as AY (actually, better than AY, as there is more control on the hull curve).

In the addition, SID as triangle and sawtooth output, and filters, all things the AY did not have. Thus, it should be relatively easy to emulate AY output on the SID.

Maybe the actual analog signal quality wasn't all that good for the SID? But remember, the AY is a much simpler device.

I don't know much about the SID, but this looks like a property of the host machine rather than the sound chip. The AY in my Oric didn't sound that well.
But the ST has enough cpu power to "push" the sound chip. It can use fast effects on volume and period, with relatively complex players. The machine also has a lot more memory. Some Hippel tunes even used emulation of SID effects...