You have to convert the VGM to a BIN file, using VGM_Play.
Btw, great news: A new version of VGM_Play will be included with DefleMask, with full support of the new DefleMask format, and by pressing "Save ROM" inside DefleMask, you will get a rom ready to be listened on a Genesis. :D
This seems incredible, I like to sound like FM synthesis can be done. I consider this a thorough and seems to get back to you as soon as possible.
Do you plan to eventually increase the impact of the column / effects, or hardware that is not possible? And yes, even if the screen does not look bad, it gets boring after a couple of times open.
Good job on this, I look forward to continuing its development.
Btw, in a few days the 3.95 version will be released with great news :D, a "Save ROM" button, shrink/expand buttons and Note OFF for samples are some of them.
Shiru's VGM tracker is alot easier to use, plus it has the greatest instrument editor ever, so Za, I have to disagree. However, Deflemask has a ways to go, so it can only keep getting better. Delek, I kindly suggest focusing time spent on Deflemask on improving the interface. Adding a toolbar, tabs to switch from the pattern editor to instrument and DAC sample editor and still improving the instrument editor itself would be fantastic. Once people see Deflemask become easy to use, more people will use it. I am hopeful that one day I can use Deflemask too because I am very interested in using it, however, for now I can't bring myself to use it seriously.
If VGMMM is a lot easier to use for you than DefleMask, then use VGMMM, it is a cool tracker too. (I will not go into detail and, like you did, list those things that DefleMask has better than VGMMM).
But, btw, there are MANY people saying that DefleMask's interface is cool and easy to use. So I think it's a matter of HABIT to an interface type, rather than a "bad design".
Maybe if you spend more time using DefleMask you will understand how the interface works. I used a LOT of trackers to make my music, and I found DefleMask's interface very solid, fast and easy to use.
Ok, first off I'd like to say, I don't think Deflemask has bad design. I don't intend on making you mad here so anything I'm saying that sound cold, don't take it personally.
Now then, I'm really doing a bit of comparing. Deflemask compared to VGM MM. See, I used to think VGM MM was hard and complicated as well. It still is in some cases, but I manage to get around it. Last night and right this moment, I am trying to seriously understand and use Deflemask properly. It's easy to get around after tinkering with it a bit and I could definately use it to make music. The point is, since VGM MM is easier to use, why use Deflemask? Well, Deflemask has alot of things that VGM MM does not, and a very important thing is NTSC support. So, I could very well use Deflemask, and as I said, I'm really interested in it and want to use it, that's why I was and still am trying to understand it. I'm very interested in both the YM2612 and the YMU759. But, what I'm saying is, Deflemask can still be improved from what it is currently and I still find it really hard to use, so I am inclined to use VGM MM instead even though it's PAL only for now. In the end, it's probably just preference or nitpicking, but I honestly feel alot more can be done with Deflemask as it stands currently, after all, it still is relatively new. I'm just trying, in my own way to better help the development of Deflemask by offering to you my whining and advice. That's really all it is.
Edit: Well, it seems I can't use Deflemask even if I wanted to. At all buffer settings, none of them play correctly. From the largest setting to the smallest, when I go to play a song, it always plays back wonky. Additionally, There are missing effects that I saw while looking at the manual, like 9xx for example. See? These things are a great example of the incompletion I brought up.
Also, I found a bug. I try using C-5 with 484 vibrato and 103 pitch bending and fun stuff happens.
Well, the manual is very clear, about the effect 9xx it says:
9xx - Reserved for Set Sample offset
In a dark GREY color.
This means that it's not implemented yet, because I am trying to get the YMU759 sample offset command (remember that the YMU759 is reverse engineered by me), I would add this effect in the future. And it is hilarous, because that effect didn't even exist in VGMMM.
About the bug after mixing a portamento and a vibrato, thanks for the report. This bug does not exist in VGMMM because all the effects needs to be placed EVERY row, so you cannot mix effects.
In DefleMask, like in FT for example, you can put a portamento up and that effect would stay ON until a disable effect is sended. This make possible effect mixing, again, not present in VGMM (among other things).
I will fix this bug for the 3.95 release, thanks again.
Raijin wrote:
See, I used to think VGM MM was hard and complicated as well. It still is in some cases, but I manage to get around it.
Yeah I saw that about the grey commands in the manual. I was just backing my statement of Deflemask being new and that it will be improved in time. But again, I am still hopeful for this tracker. All you can do is improve from here.
By the way, you really seem to be putting in alot of time for Deflemask.
FYI, effects mixing is actually present in VGM MM from the beginning, because it was implemented in TFM MM in 2008. Also, it has an effect number 9xx (but it is not sample offset).
.png){kind=avatar}
