Is OPL3 the same synth as Creative Music Synth [220]

[Green Xenon]

Hi:

Creative Music Synth [220] is the hardware chip-based FM synth present in the SoundBlaster-16 ISA card. Is this the same synth as OPL3? If not, then what are the differences?

Thanks,

Green

[stryd_one]

Heya Green welcome aboard :)

First off, you should read the ucapps.de page, then you'd already know the answer to this question. It's the same chip, but not as you know it.

[Green Xenon]

Is it possible for me to buy the Creative Music Synth chip from ucapps or here?

[Pascal]

Look here:

http://www.midibox.org/forum/index.php/topic,10859.0.html

[Green Xenon]

Look here:

http://www.midibox.org/forum/index.php/topic,10859.0.html

Darnit! The sale is closed. This means I can no longer buy any of them.

[seppoman]

look here to put your name on the waiting list for the next bulk order: http://www.midibox.org/dokuwiki/wilba_opl3_bulk_order

BTW, the [220] isn't really part of the name, that's just the ISA adress the driver was using, could also be e.g. 240 ;)

The standard sound bank of the MB FM is more or less the Creative GM bank, so you'll find what you're after, plus a lot more possibilities to discover :)

S

[Green Xenon]

I've recorded sound from the Creative Music Synth. I make a stereo recording of a wave file [of the CMS sounds] that is 44.1 kHz sample-rate, 16-bit and stereo. I then invert the left channel and then combine it with the right channel. I then get a mono of the sound

without what used to be panned to the center. This is how those karaoke voice-cancellers work. I notice, after this processing I use, the sounds are even better than what they used to be.

After I use the "voice-cancellation" method, the resulting sound is a lot sharper, fresher, warmer, crisper, brighter, more rejuvenating --

and otherwise more heavenly -- than what it sounds like if I don't use "voice-cancellation".

Why was the chip made for certain sounds to be out of phase while other to be identical?

I notice the audio of Creative Music Synth is equally-loud and equal-pitched whether or not its "voice cancelled". Its the *waveshapes* that are different.

So its obvious that CMS's audio signal have certain elements [the freshness, warmth and brightness] of their L and R signals phased

differently from each while certain other elements [cheeziness, whininess, moaning] phase identically in the L and R channels. This

occurs in CMS much in the same way that many of the stereo hits from the 80s onwards, have their lead-vocals, bass, and drums phased-identically while their painos, guitars, pads, and chorus are phase-differently.

Once again, I ask, why was Creative Music Synth designed like this?

[seppoman]

hmm, the criteria you're describing (like "rejuvenating" or "whininess"  ;D) sound quite esoteric to me  ::)

The question "why was the CMS designed like this" can't possibly get an answer without talking to Yamaha design engineers. The effects you're describing probably weren't designed on purpose (don't think anyone would put in a kind of hidden feature for users who're inverting the phase...) so what you're experiencing are probably technical imperfections of the chip regarding phase stability.

S

[Green Xenon]

hmm, the criteria you're describing (like "rejuvenating" or "whininess"  ;D) sound quite esoteric to me  ::)

The question "why was the CMS designed like this" can't possibly get an answer without talking to Yamaha design engineers. The effects you're describing probably weren't designed on purpose (don't think anyone would put in a kind of hidden feature for users who're inverting the phase...) so what you're experiencing are probably technical imperfections of the chip regarding phase stability.

S

These effects are present only in OPL3, not OPL2. This is because OPL2 is mono.

If the effects are caused by "technical imperfections", then these 'imperfections' are a good thing. I like the quality of the audio better after it is "voice-cancelled" than before.

[stryd_one]

It's probably the patch you're using, is my guess... If it's intentional and part of the design, then it'll be for psychoacoustic effect, and maybe it doesn't sound so good because your setup isn't quite right?

Edit:

a lot sharper, fresher, warmer, crisper, brighter, more rejuvenating --

and otherwise more heavenly -- than what it sounds like if I don't use "voice-cancellation".

... [the freshness, warmth and brightness]

... [cheeziness, whininess, moaning]

LOL!!

[fluke]

Creative Music Synth [220] is the hardware chip-based FM synth present in the SoundBlaster-16 ISA card. Is this the same synth as OPL3? If not, then what are the differences?

The synth chip on the SoundBlaster 16 is an OPL3 chip.  The "Creative Music System" (aka C/MS), the first sound card Creative produced, later marketed as Game Blaster, had two Philips SAA 1099 chips.  The Sound Blaster 1.0 had these chips as well as the OPL2 chip, they were an option for the Sound Blaster 1.5 and removed for the 2.0 and Pro, as the OPL2 was a more popular synth.

[Green Xenon]

It's probably the patch you're using, is my guess... If it's intentional and part of the design, then it'll be for psychoacoustic effect, and maybe it doesn't sound so good because your setup isn't quite right?

Edit:

LOL!!

I doubt it's my setup. I've tried the same experiment on other computers which still have Creative Music Synth. The results are the same.

[Green Xenon]

The synth chip on the SoundBlaster 16 is an OPL3 chip.  The "Creative Music System" (aka C/MS), the first sound card Creative produced, later marketed as Game Blaster, had two Philips SAA 1099 chips.  The Sound Blaster 1.0 had these chips as well as the OPL2 chip, they were an option for the Sound Blaster 1.5 and removed for the 2.0 and Pro, as the OPL2 was a more popular synth.

What is the bit-resolution of the C/MS's audio? I believe OPL3 is 16-bit and OPL2 is 8-bit?

Also, why don't PCI sound cards have any real OPL3 chips in them? All of them are emulation, which I really hate. I can easily notice the difference between the real OPL3 in my golden great SB16 ISA card and the stale fart-machine of the OPL3-emulation in the newer PCI cards.

[stryd_one]

I've tried the same experiment on other computers which still have Creative Music Synth. The results are the same.

Yeh? how many did you find? these things are pretty rare, I've not seen one in action since...well, since they were new.

So, I assume seeing as you've studied it so much, that you disabled some of the operators until you found out exactly how to reproduce only the phase-shifted waveform? Do you have wavs? Patch files?

[Green Xenon]

Yeh? how many did you find? these things are pretty rare, I've not seen one in action since...well, since they were new.

So, I assume seeing as you've studied it so much, that you disabled some of the operators until you found out exactly how to reproduce only the phase-shifted waveform? Do you have wavs? Patch files?

I done this on 4 PCs.

BTW, I did not disable any of the operators. I don't have nearly enough knowledge and math skills required to do to be able this. For me, that would be dream. I don't have any patch files. Sorry.

Is it likely that Creative Technology added their own patches to the OPL3 in the SB16 card? I hope not but I fear so. CT provides very poor customer service and never responds to my questions about Creative Music Synth. CT will never let me in on any info about what they did to the OPL3 on SB16 or whether they did anything to it.

I do have the wave files I made from recording audio from the Creative Music Synth. I use Adobe Audition or Wavelab to record the audio.

[buhler]

I do have the wave files I made from recording audio from the Creative Music Synth. I use Adobe Audition or Wavelab to record the audio.

you should post them!!  we would all love to get in on the "whining surreal rejuvenation!"  but seriously, i think we would all love to hear these recordings to get a grasp on what you have been talking about.

[fluke]

What is the bit-resolution of the C/MS's audio? I believe OPL3 is 16-bit and OPL2 is 8-bit?

The OPL2 uses the YM3014 DAC, which has a dynamic range of 16 bits (its input is a floating point number with 10 bit mantissa and 3 bit exponent).  As used in the AdLib and SoundBlaster cards it has a sampling frequency of 49.716 kHz.

The OPL3 The OPL2 uses the YAC512 DAC, which has a dynamic range of 16 bits (its input is a floating point number with 10 bit mantissa and 7 bit exponent).  As used in the SoundBlaster Pro and 16 cards it also has a sampling frequency of 49.716 kHz.

The SAA1099 uses pulse width modulation for its output.  The PWM frequency is 62.5kHz.  Low pass filtering is used on the output and i don't know what the filter of the C/MS was.  However i suspect this isn't the chip you're talking about when you say CMS as it only outputs square waves.

Also, why don't PCI sound cards have any real OPL3 chips in them? All of them are emulation, which I really hate. I can easily notice the difference between the real OPL3 in my golden great SB16 ISA card and the stale fart-machine of the OPL3-emulation in the newer PCI cards.

They don't have real OPL3 chips in them as its cheaper not to.  I had a ISA sound card with the OPL3 chip inside one of its ASICs and a real YAC512 DAC outside.  The later Sound Blaster 16 cards didn't even use the proper DAC and they sounded ok.  I suspect that the emulation you're referring to is a pure software emulation run on the host CPU.

Is it likely that Creative Technology added their own patches to the OPL3 in the SB16 card? I hope not but I fear so. CT provides very poor customer service and never responds to my questions about Creative Music Synth. CT will never let me in on any info about what they did to the OPL3 on SB16 or whether they did anything to it.

Have a look on your SB16 card and see if you can find a chip labelled YMF262.  If you can, then what you're hearing is a real OPL3.  If you can't, then they've put their own implementation inside an ASIC.  the YMF262 is a pure digital chip so i wouldn't expect them to need to change it, but they may have changed its output to be standard 16 bit instead of floating point (for ease of interfacing with their digital mixer) and the converter circuit may have introduced a phase change in one channel.

[Green Xenon]

you should post them!!  we would all love to get in on the "whining surreal rejuvenation!"  but seriously, i think we would all love to hear these recordings to get a grasp on what you have been talking about.

How do I post the wave files? There doesn't seem to be an "attachment" option on this forum.

[Green Xenon]

The OPL2 uses the YM3014 DAC, which has a dynamic range of 16 bits (its input is a floating point number with 10 bit mantissa and 3 bit exponent).  As used in the AdLib and SoundBlaster cards it has a sampling frequency of 49.716 kHz.

The OPL3 The OPL2 uses the YAC512 DAC, which has a dynamic range of 16 bits (its input is a floating point number with 10 bit mantissa and 7 bit exponent).  As used in the SoundBlaster Pro and 16 cards it also has a sampling frequency of 49.716 kHz.

The SAA1099 uses pulse width modulation for its output.  The PWM frequency is 62.5kHz.  Low pass filtering is used on the output and i don't know what the filter of the C/MS was.  However i suspect this isn't the chip you're talking about when you say CMS as it only outputs square waves.

They don't have real OPL3 chips in them as its cheaper not to.  I had a ISA sound card with the OPL3 chip inside one of its ASICs and a real YAC512 DAC outside.  The later Sound Blaster 16 cards didn't even use the proper DAC and they sounded ok.  I suspect that the emulation you're referring to is a pure software emulation run on the host CPU.

Have a look on your SB16 card and see if you can find a chip labelled YMF262.  If you can, then what you're hearing is a real OPL3.  If you can't, then they've put their own implementation inside an ASIC.  the YMF262 is a pure digital chip so i wouldn't expect them to need to change it, but they may have changed its output to be standard 16 bit instead of floating point (for ease of interfacing with their digital mixer) and the converter circuit may have introduced a phase change in one channel.

You're right, when referring to CM/S I am referring to the "Creative Music System", not "Creative Music Synth". The two are totally different things.

When asking about the bit-resolution/sample-rate, I was more interested in the bit-resolution/sample-rate of the FM-synth itself and not the ADCs/DACs involved.

Yes, the "emulation" I am referring to is pure software emulation run on the host CPU. I hate it.

I've looked at my SB16 ISA card, it has a chip which has "Yamaha" printed on it. The rest is too small and covered in dust for me to read. I've tried to remove the dust but I still can't see what else is printed on it. I'm assuming this is the Creative Music Synth [i.e. OPL3] chip. Is it likely that Creative Technology made modifications to this OPL3 before soldering it on this card?

Approximately, what is the cost difference of a real OPL3 chip vs. emulation of that chip?

[Green Xenon]

How many voices does Creative Music Synth have?

Also, the website http://www.opensound.com/dmguide/dmfm.html states:

"OPL-3 mode supports 18 channels of 2-operator Stereo FM tones or 6 channels of 4-operator and 6 channels of 2-operator FM tones 5 percussion instrument channels"

What does "channel" mean, in this context?

[seppoman]

When asking about the bit-resolution/sample-rate, I was more interested in the bit-resolution/sample-rate of the FM-synth itself and not the ADCs/DACs involved.

well the sample rate and resolution of DAC and synth should better match or very ugly sounds would be the result ;)

more info, also about polyphony: http://www.fit.vutbr.cz/~arnost/opl/lost+found/ymf262.pdf

Is it likely that Creative Technology made modifications to this OPL3 before soldering it on this card?

No. Very unlikely. And, allow me to get very offtopic for a second - if Creative had made any change to anything, they would've only made it cheaper and shittier - the OPL3 is about the only part of a SB16 that was not complete bullshit. I'm very happy that I never owned one because even listening to web radio through a SB16 would be a pain for me... I never had any respect for their products as each generation had similarly priced competitors' products that were way ahead of anything CL ever built.

Approximately, what is the cost difference of a real OPL3 chip vs. emulation of that chip?

the difference would be around the cost of that chip, plus cost for mounting/soldering etc. Let's say 2 Euros - but I don't think the OPL3 is still in production and I doubt you could persuade Yamaha or any sound card manufacturer to change that, so this discussion is quite futile. The future is software, nobody except a few nerdy musicians would use it. Gamers wouldn't because all games have CD quality sampled soundtracks. Best is just to accept the facts - and if you want more OPL sound, just build an MBFM :-D

S

[fluke]

You're right, when referring to CM/S I am referring to the "Creative Music System", not "Creative Music Synth". The two are totally different things.

Try to say OPL3 when you mean the FM synth chip.  It will be less confusing. :)

When asking about the bit-resolution/sample-rate, I was more interested in the bit-resolution/sample-rate of the FM-synth itself and not the ADCs/DACs involved.

The sample rate is the same 49.716kHz.  I'm not sure of the exact sample rate for the internal calculations, but it will be at least 12 bit mantissa as that's what the log-sin table in the ROM takes up. See this forum post on OPL Decapsulation for more information on the ROM contents.

I've looked at my SB16 ISA card, it has a chip which has "Yamaha" printed on it. The rest is too small and covered in dust for me to read. I've tried to remove the dust but I still can't see what else is printed on it. I'm assuming this is the Creative Music Synth [i.e. OPL3] chip. Is it likely that Creative Technology made modifications to this OPL3 before soldering it on this card?

That sounds like an OPL3 chip.  It's unlikely that Creative modified the chip as they'd need a custom production run of it and then it would more likely have a Creative logo on it instead.

Approximately, what is the cost difference of a real OPL3 chip vs. emulation of that chip?

Emulation is free once you've written it once.  Real chips cost real money, not just buying the chip, but the increased PCB area, soldering and testing it.

How many voices does Creative Music Synth have?

The OPL3 has up to 18 voices.

Also, the website http://www.opensound.com/dmguide/dmfm.html states:

"OPL-3 mode supports 18 channels of 2-operator Stereo FM tones or 6 channels of 4-operator and 6 channels of 2-operator FM tones 5 percussion instrument channels"

What does "channel" mean, in this context?

Channel means voice in this case.  The OPL3 has a total of 36 operators (oscillator + enveloping), so either 18 2-op voices, or 6 4-op voices and 6 2-op voices, or 15 2-op voices and 5 percussion voices, or 6 4-op voices, 3 2-op voices and 5 percussion voices.  MBFM uses the last mode (but doesn't give you access to the 2-op voices).

[Green Xenon]

Does MBFM have polysynth-pads as one of the instruments? I hope so, as it is my favorite OPL3 sound.

[Green Xenon]

Does more voices [channels] and operators mean the sound quality will be better?

[stryd_one]

Why?