After reading many posts here about the difficulties some users are having regarding compatibility with midi files playable on various Casio keyboards-I found this which might be helpful:. In particular, I noticed that there is a need to re-map program change messages you may wish to play on various Casios, for most smf standard midi file which are older and are usually mapped as GM1.
There have been many GM extensions by Roland GS Yamaha XG and others that allow for mapping many more sounds than the basic GM1 standard, but the more recent Casios with their extended tone or sound maps apparently need the GM2 mapping ino order to get older GM1 sounds to play correctly.
I posted in this forum since there are a wide variety of Casios that this may pertain to. Hope it helps. There is a table at the back of the GM2 MMA specification that outlines its specific use to select 'voices'. For those who are interested, from my own personal experience, I know that the following contemporary Casio.
This is stated in the manuals for each of the above models and means that any Program Change received without. This is not to exclude other, non-listed, Casio models with which. I have had no experience. Contrary to popular belief by mainly non-Casio ownersthe main "Panel" "Native" voices in these models are.
General Casio Discussion Search In. Recommended Posts. Posted July 14, Share this post Link to post Share on other sites. Posted August 10, edited. They publish all the standards on-line, now.
Search for the Seminario : facebook & co.: possono i social raccontare. The Bank Select message must precede the Program Change message. See the tables at the end of the manual.
What's the difference between GM, GS and XG?
Hope that's of some help? Posted August 10, Johnathon - Good topic - Thanks for starting it! This is not to exclude other, non-listed, Casio models with which I have had no experience.
Contrary to popular belief by mainly non-Casio ownersthe main "Panel" "Native" voices in these models are not GM voices.Roland Global Official Fan Page. Stay up to date with Roland news, artists, promotions, events, and more. This channel provides information of the Roland's best quality electronic musical instruments.
Provides an overview of key features, functions and operational tips. Welcome to our global family. The Roland Worldwide Social Network keeps you connected to the latest products, exciting events, and much more. This channel provides instructions of the Roland's electronic musical instruments and equipment. First introduced inthe Roland Sound Canvas series has long been the de-facto standard in GS sound modules.
It comes with over 1, high-quality sounds, plus 64 different insert effects, global effects like reverb and EQ, and extensive sound editing capabilities. Combining classic sounds with current technology, the Sound Canvas VA is the modern evolution of a long-running benchmark. Included are 1, popular sounds and 63 drum sets that are ready to play, and a single plug-in instance supports 16 parts with up to 64 notes of polyphony. The graphical interface makes it simple to create original tones using filters, envelopes, and numerous GS sound parameters.
You can also store the sounds you create and quickly load favorites from your custom library when you begin a new project. To enhance your sounds, the Sound Canvas VA comes with 64 types of insert effects, plus global reverb, chorus, delay, and EQ.
With the Effect Editor, you can easily adjust them all via an intuitive interface. Each plug-in supports one insert effectand you can open multiple plug-in instances to use additional insert effects on different tracks as needed.
The Sound Canvas VA plug-in must initialize its parameters and read various settings when it loads, and this may take about 15 seconds for each plug-in instance.
Due to host application specifications, you cannot use control changes to make correct bank selections and program changes in the following host application. Due to host application specifications, there is a limit to the parameter that can use automation in the following host application. Use this trial to verify how the plug-in operates in your setup before purchasing it.The January, newsletter indicates several manufacturers plan to show instrument prototypes using MIDI 2.
The newsletter describes MIDI 2. The MIDI 2. One of the core goals of the MIDI 2. I'm looking forward to MIDI 2. A lot of hardware companies will love this because it will give them a chance to resell you the v2 version of your audio interface or controller. By the same measure a lot of software companies will be upset because they'll have to shoehorn v2 features into their product s at some point within their annual update cycle to appear competitive.
MIDI has been a successful tool for more than 3 decades. The features of MIDI 1. The basic semantic language of music does not change and as a result the existing definitions of MIDI as musical control messages continue to work remarkably well.
However, MIDI has not changed to fully take advantage of the new technical environment around it. We want to expand the feature set of MIDI capabilities. At the same time, we recognize there are several key hurdles and requirements to consider as we make any additions to MIDI:. The opcodes and data payloads are defined. It is difficult to define any new message types or change the format of the existing MIDI messages. To protect backwards compatibility in an environment with expanded features, devices need to confirm the capabilities of other connected devices.
When 2 devices are connected to each other, they use MIDI 1. Once a MIDI-CI connection is established between devices, query and response messages define what capabilities each device has.
MIDI-CI then negotiates or auto-configures to use those features that are common between the devices.
If a test fails, then devices fall back to using MIDI 1. There was always a negotiation step during the dial-up connection process where the two devices decided what transmission rate was acceptable to both. You always had to accept default to the lowest common denominator, or the speed of the slowest device.
This sounds like a great way to roll out new MIDI features, while keeping the old standards intact.
If you use two new devices that both support a new MIDI feature, then great, they should work together with the new v2 feature enabled. But if you buy a new device and want to connect it to your old stuff, it should still work, but only the v1 features will be available.
While plenty of the sounds on these synths are dated, there are still some great sounds that havnen't been duplicated in newer devices. Amazing how MIDI standard has been relevant at version 1 for all these years.
You can compare them with a number of videos on YouTube. Here's one for Space Quest The Roland audio offers a bit better quality, has reverb effects, actual MIDI "instruments," is in stereo, etc. This might be the actual Roland hardware, although that's unlikely in this day and age. However, most modern sound cards have rudimentary support for MIDI, but the quality depends on your card, its drivers, etc. They are in order from best to worst.
Roland played a constant high tone behind the music. MT requires a special emulator to do. Wavetable Synthesis uses samples of real instruments that are pitch shifted up and down the musical scale.
Generally there are instruments and 32 drum samples, but Roland GS and Yamaha XG have additional instruments banks sets of instruments and drum sets. As an additional consideration, the larger the sample memory on the card, the more samples per instrument the card uses.
This makes them sound less "weird" on lower and higher notes as MIDI pitch shifting is done from the closest sound. FM or Frequency Modulated Synthesis is using a tone generator to simulate instruments by manipulating their waveforms.
Unless you're dealing with Chiptunes, Wavetable always sounds better than FM as it uses real instrument sounds. The biggest loser here is MT Side note: Gravis Ultrasound is the third major music option.
It's a wavetable option that supported loading the samples into the card's RAM dynamically. Microsoft just licensed the basic sound samples from Roland. Like agent86 mentions, it doesn't really matter for DOSBox specifically.
I wanted to take this opportunity to provide some background and helpful information. In my opinion, the difference between these sound cards primarily depends on personal preference. In the days of Gravis, Sound Blaster 16, etc, each sound card had its own synthesizer for playing MIDI, which is a standardized interface for sound and music instructions.
This is during a period of time where hardware had very limited memory to work with, so synthesizers would often produce radically different sounds depending on how the card was designed because none of them were able to push high-fidelity sound. This means that each sound card will play the music with different sounding "instruments," although the notes, volume and tempo will remain the exact same. Some of those synthesizers will sound worse and some will sound better; heck, I would even go so far as to say that certain games sound better with specific sound cards than others.
Doomfor instance, sounds better on the Gravis Ultrasound than the Sound Blaster 16 thanks to the crunchy electric guitar instruments and punchier percussion. SB16 has rather lame percussion and guitar instruments. Many Doom fans will praise the SB16, however, since that's how the vast majority of users played it when it was released, I think. Here is a link to a video of "At Doom's Gate" E1M1 from Doom being played with an array of different period-appropriate sound cards.
If you play Doom nowadays through an updated source port like ZDoom, or even natively through Windows 95 or 98, then you're always hearing the "MS Synth" version of the music.
That one sounds pretty good too. If you are ever curious as to how a game you're playing in DOSBox sounds using hardware it was designed for, you can search the name of your game and the name of the device on YouTube to usually find a video of the game's soundtrack rendered with that device.It is similar in purpose to the Roland GS standard. Relative to General MIDI, XG gained popularity by increasing the number of available instruments from to overand introduced a large set of standard controllers and parameters that composers could employ to achieve greater subtlety and realism in their compositions.
The XG also has a synthesizer that provides a 32 note polyphonic feature which is shared through the supported 16 MIDI channels. XG has a wide range of sounds to form such complex chords and produces a vast variety of lower synthesizer sounds to choose from. Coupled with their tone-generator, both devices included an on-board 4MB sound bank chip of sampled instruments and became highly desirable among MIDI fans due to their crisp, high-quality sounds similar to the newer models of Roland Sound Canvas [ citation needed ].
These devices feature an effects processing system with individual stereo reverb and chorus effects on any of 16 channels, and the ability to route any of the channels through an additional 'insertion' effect, and even guitar amp and wah-wah pedal simulations.
The SWXG was popular in the professional music industry, and many of Yamaha's amateur and professional keyboards implement either XG or a subset, known as "XGlite". Most XG standard tone generators can switch itself into TGB mode, which is an emulation of the competing Roland GS standard that allows adequate playback of musical data bearing the GS logo.
It used a 2 MB or 4 MB wavetable sound set, and was common among non-professional users who needed a cheap, high-quality MIDI synthesizer for purposes such as playing games that rely on MIDI to produce music and sound effects.
Korgdue to its close relationship with Yamaha, released three instruments with XG compatibility:. From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. For other uses, see XG disambiguation. This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources.
Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. This article needs attention from an expert on the subject.
Sound Canvas VA
The specific problem is: Ambiguous and rambling. When placing this tag, consider associating this request with a WikiProject. March PC sound cards. Hidden categories: Articles needing additional references from March All articles needing additional references Articles needing unspecified expert attention Articles needing expert attention from March All articles needing expert attention All articles with unsourced statements Articles with unsourced statements from September Namespaces Article Talk.
Manually, it would be a bit more work.
Tableau des instruments MIDI
First, you'd need to decode any sysex used. Then, you'd need to see if there is an equivalent on the other system a sysex decoder can help figure this out. Next, you'd probably change the instruments -- there is usually something on the other synth which is similar enough to substitute. However, in XG files created via some automatic tools, sysex is used to select instruments helps for synths with more than 16 channels, but mostly it is because if a big sysex block is going to be used, it may as well do everything.
You'd also need to check for any controllers not supported on the other model. It is just that some models don't respond to all of them -- meaning whatever sound they were intended to change won't be. The effects units would be hardest to manage. The two lines have rather different patterns for how effects are applied. But if you know what effect was intended, you have a shot at finding something which approximates it.
It is simpler than trying to remix a file which makes heavy use of the Roland features, especially lots of sysex. VBSYX is available from my home page - see below Top Yamaha XG vs. Top 1. Roland SC vs. SC vs.
XV vs. How do you get Backup Buddy to make a complete backup? Advice on keyboard selection - Casio vs. Yamaha vs. AKAI S Spam Report.Discussion in ' General Sequencing ' started by TerryFeb 26, Log in or Sign up. What is the difference between a GS midi and a XG one?
Messages: Likes Received: 0 Trophy Points: 0. Can some of you experts help me with this? Please explain. Thanks, Terry. TerryFeb 26, Messages: Likes Received: 0 Trophy Points: Does this sound right? Dont quote me on this because I could be wrong? I use a Korg module which will play both fine but sometimes have to adjust the sounds on the midi file to suit my module, but like I said, I may be wrong? Thanks for the answer Olly. Does anyone else have a different answer or is Olly right?
Let us know if you know for sure. TerryMar 2, I concur with oily on this one. Thanks so much guys. That helps! This board is so great when people are actually sharing midis and information!
TerryMar 30, Messages: 10 Likes Received: 0 Trophy Points: 0. A GM file uses only the voices standard on any keyboard. I'm thinking the GS is somehow similar to GM.
XG would use other voices that may or may not be carried on your keyboard. Stringman11Apr 5, Messages: 84 Likes Received: 0 Trophy Points: 0. Olly has it right. It obeys all the protocols and sound maps of General MIDI and adds many extra controllers and sounds. Some of the controllers use Unregistered Parameter Numbers to give macro control over synth parameters such as envelope attack and decay rates. The new MIDI Bank Select message provides access to extra sounds including variations on the stock sounds and a recreation of the MT factory patches.
The GS Standard includes a "fall back" system.