			     .
  founded march 12, 1995   _| :            _____  t r a x w e e k l y  # 8 6
	   ______________ |___|  _ _______/    /\___________________________
	 /  ____________/ /\__\ _ _______/____/_____________________________
	/  /  _________   \/__/    ______\    \_____________________________
       /  /  /          `_  .  .~         \____\/                 _  __ ___
      /  /  /     _____   . _ \                                __ ___ _/__/\
     /  /  /     /    /\ _        The Music Scene Newsletter     __  __\__\/
   _/__/  / ____/    /__\_________________________________  _____      ___ _
  /    /\/ /___     __________  _   ______   _     ___    \/    /\    /    /
 /____/  \ \  /    /\     /      __/\   /         /\  \    \   /  \  /____/
 /  / \  /  \/    /_ \___/___/     \ \_/___/     /  \_/       /   /  \ ___\
   /  /_/   /______/\/   \  /______/\/ \  /_____/   //   \    \  /    /  / \
  /  /      \      \ \    \_\      \ \  \_\     \  //____/\____\/    /  /  /
 /  /        \______\/       \______\/     \_____\/ \    \ \    \   /  /  /
   /                                                 \____\/\____\ /  /  /
  /  _____     _____     _____     _____     _____     _____      /  /  /
 /__/ w  /\___/    /\___/ e  /\___/    /\__ / l  /\___/    /\____/  /  /
 __/____/____/____/____/____/____/____/____/____/____/____/________/  /
 __\    \____\  e \____\    \____\  k \ ___\    \____\  y \__________/
    \____\/   \____\/   \____\/   \____\/   \____\/   \____\/WW

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  | TraxWeekly Issue #86 | Release date: 26 Jan. 1997 | Subscribers: 940 |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------


/-[Introduction]------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------/

  Welcome to TraxWeekly #86.

  Thank you, readers!  I recieved a large batch of articles this week in
 the mail, so many that I couldn't even include them all for this issue.
 Also, my apologies for a(nother) late release.  Hopefully, missing TW for
 a few days has not ruined your weekend (it shouldn't =).

  Lots of tracking articles covering numerous subjects from effects to
 hexadecimal round out this issue.  I also recieved some letters from RAR
 supporters who have something to say about their preferred compression
 standard.

  Enjoy!

						    Gene Wie (Psibelius)
						    TraxWeekly Publishing
						    gwie@csusm.edu


/-[Contents]----------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------/

 ________  _________________________________________________________________
 /  ____/_/       __/    \  __/         /  _____/    \  __/      __/   ___/_
<   \____\    \   \\      \ \\____   __/   __/_\      \ \\____   \_____  \__
 \        \    \   \\   \    \ww\     \\       \\   \    \  \     \       \_
 _\________\________\\___\____\  \_____\\_______\\___\____\  \_____\_______\


  Letters and Feedback

     1. Letter from Udi Meiri
     2. Letter from Maz

  General Articles

     3. An Outsider's Look into the Demoscene.........Era
     4. Impulse Tracker Tip of the Week...............Pinion
     5. Intro to Music Theory: vol 5..................Greg Heo
     6. Hexadecimal 101...............................Chinaski
     7. Wrecking Samples with IT......................Graham

  Closing

     Distribution
     Subscription/Contribution Information
     TraxWeekly Staff Sheet


/-[Letters and Feedback]----------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------/


--[1. Letter from Meiri]----------------------------------------------------

 Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 12:33:16 +0200
 From: Meiri <meiri@ibm.net>
 To: gwie@mailhost1.csusm.edu
 Subject: Re: Compression Quality of Music

 Regarding smallest tracker file size: Since a song is %90 more or less
 samples, you shouldn't be troubled by tracker file "overhead". Only MDL
 files have compressed samples, so use Digitracker instead.
 If you believe that all people should convert their modules to IT's, you're
 dead wrong. I believe that the original format should be preserved, since
 it was the wish of the composer to create the song in the specific format
 that he chose. Changing the format might also change the song
 (incompatabilities between trackers). People shouldn't go and distribute
 converted modules. Don't you hate AMF's?

 Regarding archiver performance: I'll have you know that RAR is not mainly
 preferred for it's user interface, but for it's superior compression.
 Setting up "normal" and "multimedia" compression and turning off the "add
 recovery record" option in RAR will yield %50-%55 compression for ALL
 modules. I have no idea what options or version you used, but here are my
 results for Mech8.s3m:

 RAR (2.00) using normal and multimedia compression, and no recovery record
 (lha, pkzip, and arj don't support this, so it'd be unfair to turn it on
 since it increases the  file size), Arj (2.50a) using best compression,
 Pkzip (2.04g) using best compression, and LHA (2.55b) using best
 compression:

 MECH8    ARJ   474029
 MECH8    LZH   476550
 MECH8    RAR   428551
 MECH8    S3M   745436
 MECH8    ZIP   472339

 RAR using best and multimedia compression:
 MECH8    RAR   427909

 Note that there is very little to be gained by using best compression, and
 it take a while longer to compress this way.

 My suggestion to any listeners that need the extra disk space and use Cubic
 Player or any other player that supports rar is to compress their songs
 into one rar file. (don't make a solid archive - it'll take forever to
 extract!) It gives me a total compression ratio of %54 percent over 601
 songs (of all types of formats) and saves about 75mb. Extracting a single
 song doesn't take too long either.

 Udi Meiri
 meiri@ibm.net (no, I don't work for IBM)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------


--[2. Letter from Maz]------------------------------------------------------

 Date: Fri, 17 Jan 97 12:05 SAT
 From: maz@fh-zwickau.de:
 To: gwie@mailhost2.csusm.edu
 Subject: Compression

 Hi there!

 I guess you will get tons of mails from RAR-"fans" regarding the
 module/packer-test (a "test" with only 2 different files has no value by
 the way ...):

 > Test Two: Mechanism 8
 >
 > Mech 8 in Scream Tracker Format       MECH.S3M           747,596 
 > Mech 8 in Scream Tracker Format RAR   MECH_S_R RAR       478,933 

 How the hell such a big file with RAR? 50 K bigger than my quick RAR-test??
 Dictionary-Size 128K, Best Compression, MM-Compression, No Recovery Record
 I RARed it and got - guess - 427072 (it was mech8.s3m, not mech.s3m, but I
 guess that will NOT make the big difference)

 I wrote a program for my www-pages, which depacks + recompresses any
 archive I put into my pages. This little proggy tests ZIP, ARJ, LHA (always
 with best compression) and RAR in 9 different commandline switch
 combinations (all dictionary sizes + more...)  - if the file itself is
 bigger than let's say 50 K I don't need to test ZIP, LHA, ARJ, since I
 NEVER got another result than RAR WINS. Even the DOS RAR-version can unpack
 the MM-compressed files + bigger dictionary-sizes.

 > So according to these tests Impulse Tracker is the best program if your
 > going to leave your files uncompressed. If you do decide to compress them
 > use Fast Tracker and LHA.

 LHA?? You better should do a module/compression test next time ...

 > Generally though I have seen most people use
 > either RAR or PKZIP. Why?

 You really don't know it right?

 > RAR has its own menu driven format 
 > which makes it a bit easier to use.

 ? That should be a reason? The reason is, that rar is the best on packrate
 with it's multimedia compression!
 Btw, I use the commandline win32 version - no NC-interface :)

 > LHA unfortuanetly has recieve little
 > recognition even though it is probably the best compressor.

 Sure it's the worst. My experiences and I _DID_ tests.
 I guess your "test" was a bit quick and dirty, right :)

 RAR ruulez.

 Bye,

 MAZ
 maz@fh-zwickau.de

----------------------------------------------------------------------------


/-[General Articles]--------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------/


--[3. "An Outsider's Outlook Into The Demoscene"]--------------------[Era]--

 (or "How to DEMOnstrate Originality to the Audience")
 by Era / MARTYR from December 1996 to January 1997
 in Montreal, Quebec



 greetings my fellow #trax-ers,

         well, i've been reading TraxWeekly and DemoNews for some time and
 noticed something peculiar the other day. There seems to be loads of talk
 about the commercial overtaking of the demoscene (a public invasion of the
 demoscene's private underground sphere), but nobody ever writes from the
 perspective of one on the outside. That is why I take this opportunity on
 this day to write you this article for TraxWeekly. If you like what you
 read here, I hope that I can write a whole series of articles centered
 around the same topic.
         The topic at hand here is what people outside the demoscene think
 of trackers, coders, and graphists.

 the ambiguity of tracked music
 ------------------------------
         I'm sure there have been some of you musicians out there who have
 composed something wonderful, only to be told by others that your music
 sounds artificial. Even for those of you who write for yourselves, it must
 still hurt somewhere emotionally to have your latest triumph dismissed as
 'cheap video game music'. That's usually the typical reaction of someone
 _NOT_ in the demoscene listening to a chiptune.
         Has it ever happened to you that someone close (or distant) from
 you has heard your latest masterpiece and said that certain riffs sound
 exactly like some real-world artist? Does that suck to hear that kind of
 cold rejection after putting in over 20 hours of your creative soul into
 the song?
         In many cases with tracked music lately, some rejection is most
 certainly deserved. Critique is always important toward self-improvement
 and nobody is going to improve in their art unless they swallow their
 pride and listen to others' council. It might mean getting one's ego
 bruised, but it can be valuable learning so do not take offense if that
 occurs.
         It's when you try to compose something original and it winds up
 sounding like the usual commercial breakbeat (and worse still, everyone
 you play it for notices), that massive rejection from real-worlders comes
 into play (unless you acknowledge it to be a cover track).
         I've heard advice from other trackers about listening to lots of
 stuff on the radio or from tapes/CDs. This can be a pro and a con. For one
 thing, it is good because you can get valuable _inspiration_ (notice I did
 not say plagarism), hence giving you great new ideas to put forward. Also,
 listening to other tracked music helps, although not too much because that
 can have detriments. Case in point, there is a musician I have heard who
 composes as if he's a living replica of The Zapper! / F10. Now, when a
 musician simply emulates the style of another tracker, then that clearly
 demostrates a lack of originality and creativity on their part. Lame! :-/
         The bad thing about listening to other commercial music in the
 real-world media is that it can "inspire" a musician so much that they
 fail to realize they are not being original. They are simply indirectly
 (sometimes through plagarism) emulating the style of their favorite music
 in the media. I'm all for tracked music supporting all forms of music
 (rock, heavy metal, new age, classical, grunge, industrial, jazz, etc.),
 however I do not want to be reminded of the song off the radio I heard
 yesterday. The whole point to listening to tracked music (in my opinion)
 is mainly to get away from the crap we hear on the radio, in concerts, and
 on tapes/CDs. If one truly wanted to hear commercial, mainstream,
 real-world music, wouldn't they just stick to the traditional medium of
 radio/TV or tapes/CDs?
         Another issue has always been sampling: should we or shouldn't we?
 Well, my opinion is that a lot of people out there just don't know how to
 make good samples, so I think they should rip. But for those lazy asses
 that know how and can make their own samples, I think they don't have much
 reason to rip aside from laziness. I mean, of course samples are the
 proper musician's tools. They have to be carefully selected and used, but
 more trackers should make their own samples because it will sound more
 authentic than by using someone else's sounds. Besides, it places your
 song in a better context for the other person who is probably thinking
 "wow! This musician really went all out for the listener...". Composing is
 a process (refer to Necros' THE PROCESS series of articles) and sampling
 is part of that process. Ripping is an evil necessity in some cases where
 the sample one wants is a rare commodity, but where the option exists to
 make one's own samples, such trackers should take full advantage of their
 abilities.
         The last thing I will speak of here is the concept of cover songs
 and remix songs. Truth be known, I generally find that remixing an old
 tune is a lot like doing a sequel to a blockbuster movie hit. The second
 movie usually isn't as impressive as the original. That rule usually can
 be applied to remixes done in tracked music. There are notable exceptions
 but that doesn't disclaim the fact that remixes tend to be lamer than the
 original rendition. I can't really express any advice here from the outer
 limits except DON'T REMIX. I have to add here that remixing can be done
 well if done rarely (some songs leave very little inspiration to rearrange
 it -- choose well). Also, don't reuse the same patterns over and over as I
 suggest again below. Try to make the remix your own flavor of the song.
 Don't let it be a slighly modified copy of the original! :-/
         Cover songs... what can I say? Most of the time, they are great.
 The problem with them is that they are rarely fully appreciated because
 they sound like some cheap imitation of the original commercial hit. I've
 heard one from F10 that sounded pretty close to the original, but none
 have ever reached that pinnacle of success. That has to do with the fact
 that most trackers that do a cover song sample the same instruments used
 in the original commercial song, but not the same _SOUND_. Also, there is
 a lot of guesswork on the notes transposed into the pattern editor. So
 what you get is rather a module cover song that sounds about 60%-80% like
 its original counterpart. The idea I am conveying here is REALISM. With
 16-bit sample capabilities of IT and FT2 and the CD-Audio ripping utils
 out there, maybe trackers can achieve greater realism in their music and
 we can hear cover songs that sound less artificial, less synthesized in
 the future.
 
 the false world of graphics
 ---------------------------
         I don't know about some of you, but the latest breed of lame has
 been unfolded within the graphists' world.
         What am I talking about here? I'm taking about the lamers passing
 themselves off as graphists just because they know how to use PhotoShop or
 similar programs. It is really a sad state of affairs when a demogroup is
 looking for graphists to join and realize that lamers are passing off work
 that isn't even hand-drawn pixel for pixel.
         I realize this is bound to offend and I am sorry. This is just my
 opinion so please don't beat me for it! :-)
         I mean, any fool with half a brain can use PhotoShop and create
 beautiful swirling vortexes or kleidoscopic images using those special FX
 that amount to over 1/2 a meg of non-creative crap. However, don't let 
 beauty fool you. These pics are often completed in like 15 minutes and
 show no talent save for an adeptness at using PhotoShop, not drawing. Real 
 graphists should be able to handcraft their works without the need of such
 effects in PhotoShop or related products. 
 
 the wacky old world of demos
 ----------------------------
         I have to admit before I go into this that I have my own set image
 of what a demo should be. Please pardon my confusion at any of the
 elements of demos should there be any.
         One frustrating thing about demos is their lack of creativity.
 Mind you, I have seen a few that stand out in the crowd. Namely, some
 demos from Nooon, Kosmic, and a few sparse others. The simple fact is that
 most demos simply show off the coding abilities of the coder more so than
 they convey something of artistic beauty. Who cares about plasma effects
 or some of the other overdone demo patterns we've all seen in a million
 other demos before it?
         My personal vision of what a demo should be is this: the artistic
 expression of coder, musician, and graphist combined. Not a power trip for
 some coder to show people that YES, he/she can copy effects his/her fellow
 coders began 2 years ago! Anyway, I hope people take this idea seriously
 and we see some semblance of improvement in the demoscene soon.
         Demos are an audio/visual computerized presentation, so why not
 make them more like, say for example: music videos, than programming
 algorithms.
 
 
 getting in the last werd
 ------------------------
         It's things like seeing repetitive music (STOP REUSING THE EXACT
 SAME PATTERN 4 OR MORE TIMES!!! ARGH!!!) that define my pet peeve...
 please don't drag out a song any longer than it needs to be. The length of
 a demo, pic, or song is simply measured by the imagination of its creator.
 
         Well, I hope this article has given you all a broad outlook on how
 the real world perceives the underground demoscene. I personally think it
 should remain underground. Anything mainstream usually becomes corrupt
 soon after. The whole elitism of the scene is ridiculous, but in any
 social structure such as this quite inevitable. The Hornet Team, despite
 criticism for its lack of objectivity in ratings (hey, they're only
 human!) are doing the demoscene a great service but I feel that they could
 improve their objectivity if their ratings were more detailed.
         Anyway, please send me feedback on this article and I hope it will
 generate enough demand so that I can continue this series. Can't wait to
 hear more of your tunes... :-)

 Era / MARTYR [admin/poet/listserv]
 era@myth.org
 http://www.myth.org/~era/

----------------------------------------------------------------------------


--[4. Impulse Tracker Tip of the Week]----------------[pinion (Ryan Hunt)]--

 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Tip #6: ping-ponged drum loop trick
 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

 Often times I've heard drumloops played in reverse to affect a fill or drum
 break.  Now you could get this effect by loading up the drumloop you're
 using into the tracker and then reversing it, but that would waste valuable
 file size, and the idea it to make modules as tight as convieniently
 possible.  Here's an easier way using IT or FT2.  Very easy...

 <step one> Take any give drum loop (some sound better than others) and give
 it a ping-pong loop that encompasses the entire sample area (ie- the loop
 starts at 0 and ends at the last byte.)

 <step two> Trigger the drum loop as usual within your song, but when you
 want the backwards effect use the sample offset command (Oxx) to start the
 sample playing at the exact point where the ping-pong starts going backward.
 It may take some experimentation to get the excat value, but if you're good
 with hexdecimal you can figure it out.


 That's it.  That's all there is to it.  One thing to note is that if your
 drum loop is larger than a certain number of bytes (I don't the exact value
 right now =) then you will need to use the set high order command (SAx
 where x is a value in hex) before using the Oxx command.  It's recommended
 that you reset the high order to 0 again after doing the offset, because
 the reset value will carry through to future patterns.


 If you need further information on this trick or have an idea for a Tip of
 the Week email pinion@netcom.com

 -pinion (phluid)
 email: pinion@netcom.com
 web  : www.acid.org/phluid/newmain.html

----------------------------------------------------------------------------


--[5. introduction to musical theory: volume five]--------------[Greg Heo]--

 [introduction]

  Welcome back.  Today, we will explore the vast field of chords: the
 building blocks of harmony.  I'll get straight into it...almost ;).


 [intervals]

  I'm taking a step back here, because I didn't mention this earlier.
 Basically, intervals refer to the distance between two notes.  Consider:

  # of semitones apart     name
         0                unison
         1                minor second
         2                major second
         3                minor third
         4                major third
         5                perfect fourth
         6                augmented fourth / diminished fifth
         7                perfect fifth
         8                augmented fifth / minor sixth
         9                major sixth
         10               minor seventh
         11               major seventh
         12               perfect eighth (octave)

  Note that only the fourth (subdominant), fifth (dominant) and the octave
 are considered 'perfect' tones.  This will come in later when we discuss
 basic harmonization.


 [symbolization]

  Just some abbreviaions I use:
    + or M: major
    - or m: minor
    A: augmented
    d: diminished
    P: perfect


 [the major triad]

  triad = three.  this is the very simple one.  It uses I, III, and V.
 Go track them...wow, sounds pretty :).  actually...it's quite boring.
 But we'll get to that later...

  "triad" also refers to the distance between notes.  Consider a major
 triad in the key of C:
    C                       <--+
      } major third apart      |
    E                          |------ perfect fifth (P5)
      } minor third            |
    G                       <--+

  And a minor triad:
    C                       <--+
       } minor third           |
    Eb                         |------ P5 again
       } major third           |
    G                       <--+

  So what about the other combinations...+3 +3, and -3 -3??


 [more triads]

  Well, there's the minor one of course (look up there).  An _augmented_
 triad is the +3 +3 combination.  Note that in this chord, the total
 distance is _not_ a P5.  This causes the chord to sound a little 'funny'
 sounding.  I use the term 'funny' in comparison to a regular P5 triad.
 Try it out and see (hear?) for yourself.  The diminished triad is the
 -3 -3 combination, and has the minor third in it, giving it a minor sound.
 Again, it is not a P5 chord.  Like I said, go try it out.  You gotta
 listen to this stuff to learn it.


 [root position and inversions]

  These triads are said to be in _root_ position.  This is because the I is
 at the root, or bottom, of the triad.  Now...try playing the notes in a
 different order...III, V, I.  Note that the I must be the highest note
 now.  We've kept the same notes, just changed the order.  This is known
 as _inverting_ the chord.  III-V-I is _first_ inversion.  V-I-III is
 second inversion.  And there you have it...here's an example

               root   |C-4 .. ...|E-4 .. ...|G-4 .. ...|
      1st inversion   |E-4 .. ...|G-4 .. ...|C-5 .. ...|
      2nd inversion   |G-4 .. ...|C-5 .. ...|E-5 .. ...|

  Inversions are _very_ important to break the monotony of having every
 single chord in root position.


 [consonance and dissonance]

  Back in the olden days, composers set down rules as to what sounded
 right, and what didn't.  Of course, this is all completly subjective, but
 today's western music is based on this, so I'll discuss it...

  Consonance is the good sounding stuff.  P1 (unison), P8 (octave), P5
 and P4 are the _perfect consonance_ intervals.  The _imperfect consonance_
 intervals are M3, m3, M6, and m6.  Finally, the dissonant ones are
 whatever's left :).

  Notice that in discussing triads, I said they sounded 'funny', but now
 you can impress everyone and say "i found that this particular tune used
 many dissonant chords."  wow.


 [chords as accompaniment]

  The major triads of I, IV, and V form the basis of simple harmony.
 Take the example song of, "twinkle twinkle little star" (in the key
 of C major)

   00|C-5 ...|  I chord (C)     16|F-5 ...|  IV
     |... ...|                    |... ...|
   02|C-5 ...|                  18|F-5 ...| 
     |... ...|                    |... ...|
   04|G-5 ...|                  20|E-5 ...|  I
     |... ...|                    |... ...|
   06|G-5 ...|                  22|E-5 ...|
     |... ...|                    |... ...|
   08|A-5 ...|  IV chord (F)    24|D-5 ...|  V
     |... ...|                    |... ...|
   10|A-5 ...|                  25|D-5 ...|
     |... ...|                    |... ...|
   12|G-5 ...|  I chord (C)     28|C-5 ...|  I
     |... ...|                    |... ...|
   14|... ...|                  30|... ...|
     |... ...|                    |... ...|

  Remebering our scales from last week, and the triad information in this
 issue, we can easily construct these chords:

  track position 00: C major (no sharps/flats)
                     I, III, V are: C E G
        position 08: F major (B is flat)
                     I, III, V are: F A C
        position 24: G major (F is sharp)
                     I, III, V are: G B D

  And there you have it.  Simple harmonization with the perfect tones.

 [conclusion]

  Well, we've scratched the surface of chord theory, but there's still
 A lot to cover.  Next time, we'll discuss seventh, ninth, and suspended
 chords.


 until then,
  greg - [river@io.org]

----------------------------------------------------------------------------


--[6. Hexadecimal 101]------------------------------------------[chinaski]--

 Howdy. 
 I'm called chinaski. You aint heard of me, 'cause I havent released any
 tunes (yet :p).

 I've been tracking for about 8 months now(i know what yer thinkin: "F%#king
 newbie!"), but I figure I would have started a bit sooner if it weren't for
 2 things:     
     1. Totally inadequate (ST3) and incomplete (FT2) documentation, and
     2. What the hell is HEXADECIMAL?

 Now, I can't answer the first problem, what with my 2-fingered typing
 skills and all, but for all the non-programmers and "newbie" trackers out
 there, maybe I can help with hex.

 Hexadecimal is a numeric system that is "base 16" or has 16 characters: 0
 -9 plus ABCDEF(as opposed to decimal, which has 10 - 0123456789.). Usually,
 a prefix of 0 or a suffix of "h", and sometimes both, are used to show that
 a value is in hex. 

 (Take a look at the addresses for the com ports on an msdos machine......
 It uses both.)
     
 Now, 0 thru 9 work normally, but then comes the tricky part. For 10, you w
 ould simply use "A", 11 would be "B", and so on. So a quick little
 reference chart would be something like this:

 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9  A  B  C  D  E  F 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 1A 1B
 
 So you see, to get the decimal equivalent from a Hex number, like say
 02Eh,you could multiply the digit that is second from right by 16. then
 add to it the digit to the right of it.  So,  02Eh  (remember, the "0" and
 "h" are _not_ part of the value.)
                    /  \ 
              2x16=32 + E {14} = (decimal) 40.

 See? Easy. :) Well, actually it can be confusing to people who already
 know it, so it can take a while to just get used to it. 

 Tracking software usually only uses hex values of 0FFh (256) and smaller, 
 so that can narrow it down a bit. Sometimes it helps to have a calculator
 nearby for parameters that require precise values. Maybe even a chart like
 above might help until you get it ingrained into your head. 

 I hope that this is easy enough to understand ( I tested it on my
 girlfriend, who hates anything computer-related, and she started to grasp
 it.....:)). It has helped improve my tracking (and gave me a little head
 start for my computer science classes ;)

 Now, go track some music ! 

 P.S. -If anyone has a better explanation, or notices a mistake in mine,
 by all means - let me know! 

               Regards, 
                    chinaski [curt crosby] 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------


--[7. Wrecking Samples with Impulse Tracker]-------[Graham the Happy Scum]--

 Fun ways to destroy your samples on the Sample Window (F3), which may
 or may not prove useful.

 1. smoothing samples 

 Do this in either 8-bit or 16-bit, although 16 bit works better. Alt-E
 changes the length of the sample with interpolation. To smooth it out,
 which has more of an effect on high frequencies than low, simply hit
 alt-E, increment the value in the dialog window by 1, and possibly hit
 alt-E again, and decrement the length by 1. This tends to murk the sample
 up, but it should be useful in someways

 2. a really crude 'noise-gate'

 Take a sample (this works best on percussion sounds, like hihats, snares,
 and claps), Alt-A to unsign it, and Alt-M to amplify it slightly
 (something like 103 or 104 percent.), then Alt-A to resign it. Really
 sucks, especially at high values. The main effect is that it reduces low
 sample values to zero, and makes some samples 'staticky'.

 Probably better to use something like CoolEdit for noise-gates. 

 3. doing them tres funky 24-note-in-an-octave scales:

 load a sample twice. multiply the sample rate of one by 1.0293 (which is
 2^(1/24) for math-boys :), and enter that value into the playback rate one
 of the samples. 

 Use the two samples in conjunction in your compositions for instant Ravi
 Shankar melodies. (well, not quite instant. The actual melodies are left
 as an exercise for the reader.)

 Enjoy!

 Graham the Happy Scum (gths@flat-earth.org)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------


/-[Closing]-----------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------/

 TraxWeekly is available via FTP from:
 ftp.cdrom.com /demos/incoming/info (new issues)
 ftp.cdrom.com /demos/info/traxw/   (back issues)

 To subscribe, send mail to:      listserver@unseen.aztec.co.za
 and put in the message body:     subscribe trax-weekly [name] (NOT address)
 To unsubscribe, mail same and:   unsubscribe trax-weekly (in message body)

 Contributions for TraxWeekly must be formatted for *76* columns,
 must have a space preceding each line, and have some measure of
 journalistic value.  Please try to avoid the use of high ascii
 characters, profanity, and above all: use your common sense.

 Contributions should be mailed as plain ascii text or filemailed
 to: gwie@csusm.edu before 11:00pm PST (North America) every Thursday.

 TraxWeekly is usually released over the listserver and ftp.cdrom.com
 every Thursday or Friday at 10:00am PST (North America).

 TraxWeekly does not discriminate based on age, gender, race, political
 or religious statures and standpoints.

 The staff can be reached at the following:

 Editor:   Psibelius (Gene Wie)..............gwie@csusm.edu
 Staff:    Atlantic (Barry Freeman)..........atlantic@arcos.org
           Benjamin Krause...................orogork@cs.tu-berlin.de
           Fred (Fred Fredricks).............fred@paracom.com
           Kal Zakath (John Townsend)........jtownsen@sescva.esc.edu
           Kleitus (Seth Katzman)............katzms@rpi.edu
           Mage (Glen Dwayne Warner).........gdwarner@vinson.navy.mil
                                             gdwarner@ricochet.net

 Graphic Contributors:
           Cruel Creator . Stezotehic . Squidgalator2 . White Wizard

 TraxWeekly is a HORNET affiliation.
 Copyright (c)1995,1996,1997 - TraxWeekly Publishing, All Rights Reserved.


/-[END]---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------/
                                         ::
                                          :::                  :
     . ..... ..............................:::.................:....
                                            :::                :
                                            ::::               :
        .::::.      .:::::.:::.     ..::::  ::::               :
       ::    ::    :::  .::  ::    ::     WW::::               :
       ::.   ::   :::  .::  ::   .::        ::::               :
        :::.::.  :::  .:: .::  .:::::...   :: :::..      ... ..: ...
 ..::::::::::::::::  .:: .:::::::   ::::::::    ::::::.. ::: ::: :::
                                                               :
                                              until next week! =)
           ..  ... .. ....... ............... .................:..... .. .
                                                               :

