Actually, it depends on the NSF driver that your player uses.
The NSF you posted actually works as intended in NSFLive & VirtuaNSF, but it falters in Nestopia, FlashNSF & NotSo Fatso. It seems like JSR's NSF driver is more refined than Blargg's base NSF driver (which is what many players & emulators use).
And I tried 0.3.6 beta 3; it worked with that FDS module! I wonder why it crashed 0.3.5, though. Anyways, since kinkinkijkin only used 14 instruments out of the 17 he created, he technically broke his own rule (even though his song sounds very decent). My only recommendations would be to use a volume fade in the square channels instead of a note stop (to make the squares flow more smoothly).
_______________________
Technology: the one thing that's hated & cursed at by all engineers, technologists, scientists & technicians!
Good, both NSFLive and VirtuaNSF do not work. VirtuaNSF gives the result most other players give (slower, detuned B-2/C#3), while NSFLive gives another result (quicker, detuned C-3/C#3).
Why must performance vary between machines, no one will really know...
Well, we all know that there is no accurate way to emulate hardware from within a software environment. I personally think that the only way to accurately simulate the original hardware would be to find a die cast of the 2A03 (& all other chips) along with the original specs & schematics to try & rebuild the machine in software.
The sound drivers available to this day & age are programmed by different people who have researched the workings of the NES in different ways (mainly through physical testing of the finished product on a small number of test points & the use of non-reliable sources; sources from 3rd parties or sources that only relate to one aspect of a chip's functionality, contributed by others in the scene).
I have a schematic booklet of an NES console, but it states that it's a reverse-engineered schematic (& is, therefore, not completely reliable). All the sources we have on the 2A03's opcodes & operands are based on Rockwell 6502 documentation, yet we know that the 6502 component of the 2A03 behaves differently than a true 6502 (partly due to the audio generator component). We know through physical testing at the output of the console that each audio wave is generated as such, but we don't take into account any environmental effects on the output as the intelligence signal passes through amplifiers or capacitive components (explaining why the original hardware's triangle wave is more of a shark's fin than that of an emulated system's triangle wave).
It all depends on how each programmer goes about their research & testing (& what platform they're programming on with respect to this). And with each different programmer using existing documentation that's been proven less than 100% reliable, I'd definitely expect to see no unified method of accurately emulating the system.
But enough with my derailing this thread; let's get back to the contest!
_______________________
Technology: the one thing that's hated & cursed at by all engineers, technologists, scientists & technicians!
That's much better; now, you're using all instruments except for 0A, bringing your total from 14 instruments in use to 16 (making it legit). But, you also have the rule:
kinkinkijkin wrote:
use every single instrument.
So, it's safe for you to delete instrument 0A.
Anyways, I had a look at your song & decided to add some volume control with Axx effects. Nothing special; a slow, simple fade-out with A01 & an ultra-rapid hade-in with AF0 (to bring the volume back to normal).
Worked on with FamiTracker 0.3.6 Beta 3.
_______________________
Technology: the one thing that's hated & cursed at by all engineers, technologists, scientists & technicians!
Well, we all know that there is no accurate way to emulate hardware from within a software environment. I personally think that the only way to accurately simulate the original hardware would be to find a die cast of the 2A03 (& all other chips) along with the original specs & schematics to try & rebuild the machine in software.
The sound drivers available to this day & age are programmed by different people who have researched the workings of the NES in different ways (mainly through physical testing of the finished product on a small number of test points & the use of non-reliable sources; sources from 3rd parties or sources that only relate to one aspect of a chip's functionality, contributed by others in the scene).
I have a schematic booklet of an NES console, but it states that it's a reverse-engineered schematic (& is, therefore, not completely reliable). All the sources we have on the 2A03's opcodes & operands are based on Rockwell 6502 documentation, yet we know that the 6502 component of the 2A03 behaves differently than a true 6502 (partly due to the audio generator component). We know through physical testing at the output of the console that each audio wave is generated as such, but we don't take into account any environmental effects on the output as the intelligence signal passes through amplifiers or capacitive components (explaining why the original hardware's triangle wave is more of a shark's fin than that of an emulated system's triangle wave).
It all depends on how each programmer goes about their research & testing (& what platform they're programming on with respect to this). And with each different programmer using existing documentation that's been proven less than 100% reliable, I'd definitely expect to see no unified method of accurately emulating the system.
No, I mean FamiTracker exports the incorrect modulation while all NSF players emulate the wrong modulation.
