/vr/ - Retro Games

[Anonymous No.7227229]

Why was the sound quality leaps and bounds better than the SNES? Both used samples, it had fewer sound channels, yet why was it so much better than the SNES?

[Anonymous No.7227250]

>>7227229
Chords definitely rivaled the SNES, the melodies themselves not so much

[Anonymous No.7227264]

Know-nothing brainlet here, what's the main differences between the sound chips that both systems used?

[Anonymous No.7227379]

>>7227250
I'm talking about the audio quality rather than the composition quality though. Amiga seems to have a much better audio distortion and sampling capability unseen on the SNES.
https://youtu.be/BaEvSWE8V1w

[Anonymous No.7227658]

>>7227229
SNES' SPU cache was only 64kb, which meant samples had to be compressed as fuck making them sound like shit.

[Anonymous No.7227681]

>>7227229
different methods of playing samples. Amiga's audio was uncompressed PCM (max 22khz or so @ 8-bit). The SNES used a different system based around ADPCM called BBR (bit rate reduction) that was developed specifically for 16-bit samples. the SNES was far more capable of better sound quality than the Amiga - without question, but some of you clueless fags here always seem to think ROM space is infinite and completely forget that the SNES' SMP-P only has 64kb of RAM (shared by the machine language player, music data, samples and filter tables). musicians and audio designers weren't left with much room to work with, unlike amiga musicians that could use practically any area of an Amiga's 512kb of RAM for samples or music data. SNES musicians could stream BRR sample data directly from the SNES cart but it wasn't often used. Another thing to consider is outside of Japan, western license holders had to come up with their own solutions to programming the SMP-P. for example: David Wise (donkey kong country) composed the entire soundtrack using a text editor and an assembler as there were no proper tools for it.

As you can see, there's a bunch of reasons why SNES audio wasn't pushed to its limits.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bit_Rate_Reduction

>>7227379
poor example. this is shit quality even for an amiga song.

[Anonymous No.7227696]

>>7227229 (OP)
different methods of playing samples. Amiga's audio was uncompressed PCM (max 22khz or so @ 8-bit). The SNES used a different system based around ADPCM called BBR (bit rate reduction) that was developed specifically for 16-bit samples. the SNES was far more capable of better sound quality than the Amiga - without question, but some of you clueless fags here always seem to think ROM space is infinite and completely forget that the SNES' S-SMP only has 64kb of RAM (shared by the machine language player, music data, samples and filter tables). musicians and audio designers weren't left with much room to work with, unlike amiga musicians that could use practically any area of an Amiga's 512kb of RAM for samples or music data. SNES musicians could stream BRR sample data directly from the SNES cart but it wasn't often used. Another thing to consider is outside of Japan, western license holders had to come up with their own solutions to programming the S-SMP. for example: David Wise (donkey kong country) composed the entire soundtrack using a text editor and an assembler as there were no proper tools for it.

As you can see, there's a bunch of reasons why SNES audio wasn't pushed to its limits.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bit_Rate_Reduction

>>7227379
poor example. this is shit quality even for an amiga song.

[Anonymous No.7227703]

>>7227681
>this is shit quality even for an amiga song.
Any better example? How about this one?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w57_O_kGPzA

[Anonymous No.7227740]

>>7227703
much better quality song but I fail to see what point you are trying to make except
> muh sound quality
which was explained in great detail why sample quality is often poor on snes.