Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[feature request] Better dual-OPL2 compatibility mode #6

Open
sdsnatcher opened this issue May 4, 2016 · 2 comments
Open

[feature request] Better dual-OPL2 compatibility mode #6

sdsnatcher opened this issue May 4, 2016 · 2 comments

Comments

@sdsnatcher
Copy link

One of the major incompatibility problems between the OPL3 and the dual-OPL2 from SoundBlaster Pro software was that the second set of channels of the OPL3 didn't feature the rhythm mode and the timers.

It would nice to implement support for two rhythm modes and the two missing timers in this OPL3 core, improving compatibility with dual-OPL2 software.

@sdsnatcher sdsnatcher changed the title Better dual-OPL2 compatibility mode [feature request] Better dual-OPL2 compatibility mode May 4, 2016
@sdsnatcher sdsnatcher reopened this May 4, 2016
@gtaylormb
Copy link
Owner

gtaylormb commented May 4, 2016

This is pretty easy to do. The code for the operators in bank 0 that are dual-use for rhythm mode could also be carried over to bank 1. The register map would also have to be updated and corresponding signals added. The timers are a cinch. From a software standpoint does it even make sense to have two sets of timers though? Are they often used in dual-OPL2 software?

@sdsnatcher
Copy link
Author

That's a really good question, but I don't know the answer for sure. There are a plethora of PC software for the SB-Pro out there and I have no idea how many of them use the 2nd set of timers. I just know that they were available in the SB-Pro.

Maybe just let out the timers for now then. Two sets of rhythm mode are fun enough. :)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants