If you're not satisfied with what the hardware can do then perhaps you should try a sample based tracker or a modern DAW.
+1. I have no clue why people demand more features that are out of the Famicom's scope to be added to Famitracker. It's for the Famicom, people. Not for the blasted sample-based do-whatever-because-the-limit-is-the-sky world!
For one, it's fun to do and if it runs on hardware then it should be done.
Attached is an NSF example made in FamiTracker by Strobe of TiTAN. He created a program that makes a custom *.FTM file with N163 instruments based on a single 16kB 8-bit PCM sample reduced to an 8kB 4-bit PCM sample spanned across 32 different instruments. Each instrument is used as a psuedo-offset of the sample. Being that it's N163, each sample can be played at a different frequency; so effects and pitch bends can be achieved. It even has almost better quality that DPCM. For 8kB, the sample size is negligible and this can even be paired with DPCM for additional fun. When multiple channels are used to play 256B offsets of samples there is a huge lag produced so maybe only 2 channels at most in the N163 would be wise for all of the sample swapping.
The capability is already in the current FamiTracker. So I don't know why people would even gripe about the ethics of doing it.
Have fun abusing and pushing hardware to its limits.
The N163 is essentially a set of PCM channels. Just, really really low-quality 4-bit PCM.
By the way, this NSF is super overclocked; I haven't tried, but I strongly doubt any sort of hardware player could play it at this speed. Still, it's a pretty cool experiment.
It's an NSF and the processor is ~1.74MHz. The NSF is clocked at 311Hz. I doubt how chubby the FamiTracker replayer is that it bloats the entire CPU for a single N163 channel.
You have an N163 cart and a TNS-HFC3 to dongle it into. I'd put money on this working on hardware.
How about a $1 USD wager? I'll supply my PayPal account once you wipe the egg off your face, Mr. JR.
Personally I don't think this bump was really worth it, but since I'm here...
I'm not that into N163 these days, and when I am I prefer using no wave macros, just like the actual games with the chip.
Only exception might be PWM instruments.
If you are talking about Namco, same as za909. I don't usually use wave macros except when I want to make a plucky instrument. If other sound chips are involved, then I'd say that I prefer blank instruments over macros because they give me more freedom when using the effects column and stuff.
Also, yeah, this bump wasn't really worth it. Instead of asking such question here, it would have been better to study other people's FTMs and then get to your own conclusions about what you like and what you don't like about them, along with practicing in the tracker by making your own songs. Getting your own style is something you do alone, not depending on other people to tell you what's best and what not.
There are not "most-favorable instruments". That's something you decide yourself as you gain experience with the tracker. If you feel more comfortable using instruments with macros, then go ahead, do that, but if you don't, you should better use a blank instrument as your main one and do everything else in the pattern editor by manipulating volume and effects manually.
.jpg)
