Green Xenon

That maybe why I was getting the effect I described when phase-inverting one stereo channel and combine it with the other. I would guess that in stereo PM synthesis, one channel would naturally have a phase that's different from the other channel. Each stereo channel has its own tone generator. Again, this is just a guess. I could be wrong.

Does OPL3 use any phase modulation synthesis?

How much does it cost?

Easier said than done. No I am not talking about digital data transmission.

This is a bit OT but... OPL3 is a digital FM synth... Which means it generates digital FM signals... Initially [before passing through an ADSRs, VCAs or other amplitude processors], an OPL3's FM signal will have a constant peak-to-peak amplitude... Since these are digital FM signals with constant peak-to-peak amplitude with more than two frequencies, would these digital FM signals qualify as MFSK [multiple-frequency-shift-keying] signals? Binary FSK: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frequency-shift_keying Multiple FSK: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple_frequency-shift_keying Seems like an FM signal from OPL3 would initially resemble an MFSK signal, because it is a digital signal that changes only by its frequency and its peak-to-peak amplitude at first remains constant.

This effect can also be achieved w/out recording it into a wave file or recording it at all -- I.E. in real-time, OPL3's FM-signals are played through the voice-canceller and causes the effects I described.

If the effect is caused by a different sample-rate, then why does that effect occur also when I play the OPL3 [without recording it] in real-time through the analog voice-canceller? I could play the MIDI file through the OPL3 synth directly and on-the-fly without recording it to a Wave file. If I play the sound through a voice-canceller [which obviously has no sample-rate because its analog], the effect on the audio is the same as if I use audio software to phase-invert one stereo channel and combine it with the other stereo channel. BTW, if by "input of the SB16", you mean the "line in" of the SB16 card, then no it cannot be contributing to any of the effects I described because I don't use the "line in" or even "mic in" for that matter. When recording from MIDI to Wave, all processing is done within the PC and sound card itself. Also, when recording directly from OPL3 to a Wave file, the signal remains digital throughout.

In no part of my signal chain is the sample-rate or bit-resolution altered.

Sorry to be such a pain. I don't understand the 'beginning' of "Add ONE sample to the *beginning* of the right channel" and "Compare that with the same thing *without* the one sample added". I use Adobe Audition 1.5 to change the sample-rate. I haven't yet upsampled because I not sure whether or not to use the "Pre/Post Filter" option prior to changing the sample-rate. Once again, sorry if you feel this is annoying. I have a disability called Asperger's syndrome, you can read about it here: http://www.midibox.org/forum/index.php/topic,11515.msg91685.html#msg91685

Dear all: I’ve got a neurological disorder which I would like to discuss briefly. I am not trying to make excuses for any of my posts but I don’t want readers to wrongly-assume that I troll/spam the net just for attention nor do I want them to think I am lazy or unwilling to do my own research. I am really interested in the stuff I post about and hope that the readers will not get upset at me. I have a neurological disability called Asperger's Syndrome. I would like to give you all some information about my disability. The reason I am posting this message about Asperger's is to help avoid any potential misunderstandings [though it's probably too late]. I have been diagnosed with Asperger's Syndrome (AS). AS is a neurological condition that causes significant impairment in social interactions. People with AS see the world differently and this can often bring them in conflict with conventional ways of thinking. They have difficulty in reading body language, and interpreting subtle cues. In my situation, I have significant difficulty with natural conversation, reading social cues, and maintaining eye contact. This can lead to a great deal of misunderstanding about my intent or my behavior. For example, I may not always know what to say in social situations, so I may look away or may not say anything. I also may not always respond quickly when asked direct questions, but if given time I am able express my ideas. AS also decreases my attention span and makes it difficult for me do as much mental work for as long as most others can do. It also impairs my short-term memory and ability to retain information. On the internet, the cyber-equivalent of my disability is probably noticed. I do apologize profusely, for any inconvenience it causes. Thank you very much in advance for your understanding, cooperation, and assistance. Regards, Green Xenon

Nope. The sample-rate doesn't have anything to do with it because I can get the same effect using my analog karaoke voice canceller. This device is purely analog [hence it does not alias] and doesn't require any power supply to work. It's frequency response is likely higher than highest-frequency signal the OPL3 can output undistorted.

I doubt I would get the same effect by highpass filtering alone. I've done something similar before, using the Adobe Audition software's graphic equalizer to eliminate the bass and amplify the treble. It didn't work at all. The audio still had the quality of a lead vocal singer, and not the quality of the chorus. So there's more to it than just frequency. If OPL3 is a stereo synthesizer, wouldn't it make sense that there will be significant difference in the right signal vs. the left signal?

The signal chain was within the sound card itself. I did not use any external devices. You are right in that I prefer treble over bass. It also makes sense that it's easier for higher frequencies to lose phase more easily than lower frequencies. However, I think this is only the small [and very small], part of the issue. The waveshapes are actually very difference in polypadC5A vs. polypadC5B. This regardless of how much you try to make their frequencies identical. The shapes are different, hence the audios will have a different quality. PolypadC5A seems to have the sine-wave qualities of a lead vocal singer. PolypadC5B seems to have the sawtooth-wave qualities of the chorus. Sorry, this is a bad analogy, but it's the best I could express. This is very similar to pop music. The lead-vocal is usually phased identically in L and R while the chorus is usually phased-differently in L & R. That is what leads me to suspect that whoever designed the chip made this effect on purpose -- even if, in fact, it was not intentionally. It just seems so similar to pop music phasing that one would think the designer wanted to copy pop music in doing this effect. That's just how I perceive it.

My signal chain is all within the sound card itself. No external devices.

What do you mean by "audio chain" or "signal chain"?

Now I'm getting a bit concerned that this effect I described is a result of Creative Technology intentionally doing this. While I like the effect, I'd like to know more about it and CT ain't gonna tell me @%@$! about it. CT are so cruel! Anyways, I get the feeling that whoever designed the chip did intentionally design it that way. This is because, they were probably trying to place sounds with "vocal" qualities in the center [i.e. in-phase for both L and R] and sounds with "chorus-like" qualities phased-differently in L and R. I think they reason they did this is because they wanted to copy what the musical industry does. Normally, in most pop-music, the bass, lead vocals, kicks, and drums are recorded identically in both the L and R channels [which explains why most voice-cancellers decrease the bass], while the piano, pads, chorus, and guitars are recorded non-identically in the L and R channels. Once again, this is just my guess but it seems to me that this is what the chip-designer intended.

There not the same, you've got to phase-invert one channel and convert to mono to see the difference. Tomorrow, I'll send you the stereo file with the left channel's phase inverted. Then you can convert the file to mono and see if anything shows up. Not everyone has the same audio preferences. What one hates, another might love. For example, I've read many posts on Usenet of people saying bad things about OPL3. They call SB16's FM synth "cheesy" and "tinny". Of course, as a intense fan of OPL3, I strongly disagree with those posters. With or w/out these "unknown variables", phase-inverting one stereo channel and then combining it w/ the other channel [to convert to mono] seems to have the identical results I previously described.

Impossible. I've tried playing OPL3 audio through my Karaoke Voice Canceller [], the effects are the same as if I invert the left channel and mix it with the right using audio software [such as Adobe Audition or Wavelab]. The audio is more pleasant with than without the voice-canceller. The Karaoke Voice Canceller is a hardware analog device outside of the PC that does pretty much the same thing -- invert one stereo channel and combine it with the other channel to get a mono without what was identical in the original L and R channels. I can use audio software or analog audio hardware. The effect on the OPL3 audio is the same. I've done this with several different audio softwares [including Wavelab and Adobe Audition], as well as hardware analog karaoke voice-cancellers. Are you sure you didn't accidently do something that would cause them to completely cancel out? This is the voice-canceller I currently have: http://cgi.ebay.com/Optimus-Karaoke-Voice-Canceller-with-plug-audio-wires_W0QQitemZ380022294749QQihZ025QQcategoryZ64604QQrdZ1QQssPageNameZWD1VQQcmdZViewItemQQ_trksidZp1638Q2em118Q2el1247

Here is the original stereo recording. polypadc5.rar polypadc5.rar

Okay, here it is. The single note from OPL3. It is the PolySynth Pad instrument on note C5. C5 is the fifth C-key from the left. Compare the two. PolyPadC5A.wav is not "voice-cancelled". PolyPadC5B.wav is voice-cancelled. Zipped.rar Zipped.rar

Sorry.

What are you talking about? I posted a zip file of the song.

Hopefully this will work. It's a zip file of a 9-second wave file of the song. Zip.zip Zip.zip

Ok, I'll zip the Wave file and then send it. Does zipping a file decrease it's file size? If so, then I would be able to post more than just 9 seconds of the song.

The whole song is 25 MB. I've got a 9-second Wave-file sample that is below 1,024 kb but the messageboard does not supporting attachment of Wave files. So I don't know how to post my wave file.