GUS ACE: Good enough?

GUS ACE: Good enough?

Post by Edwin L » Thu, 16 Jan 1997 04:00:00



Hello everybody.

I can get my hand on a used/second-hand/pre-owned Gravis Ultra Sound
ACE (1MB) for $40.  

The question is:  Is it worth it?  Another question:  Is there any
gotcha, like some programs that may have problems with non-SB stuff,
etc., ?

I have a legacy 486 non-PnP motherboard and only runs Linux.  (No
Win95, so my system is not so legacy after all :-)  I can get a SB-16
compatible for $29 but it is PnP and so is every new sound cards out
there :-(.

Also, I am not picky at all about the sound quality but I heard that
GUS is very decent anyway (dunno about the ACE though).

Any comment/opinion/BS welcomed! :-)

Cheers,
e.
--
_______________________________________________________________________________
Edwin _Lim_ Aun Whei  | Two roads diverge in the woods and I --

 
 
 

GUS ACE: Good enough?

Post by Phil Ro » Thu, 16 Jan 1997 04:00:00



>I can get my hand on a used/second-hand/pre-owned Gravis Ultra Sound
>ACE (1MB) for $40.  

        For $40?  That's a bit of a high price for a used GUS ACE.  I
would try to talk the seller down in price.  Especially cuz the GUS ACE is
a stripped down GUS (doesnt have wavetable or can't record of something
like that...not too sure).  I wish I could find someone to sell me a GUS
MAX.

Quote:>The question is:  Is it worth it?  Another question:  Is there any
>gotcha, like some programs that may have problems with non-SB stuff,
>etc., ?

        If you are running Linux, most everything runs through the sound
drivers so you probably wont have to worry about it.  In fact, The only
programs I've seen that are card specific are gmod and xgmod which only
work with the GUS.

Quote:>I have a legacy 486 non-PnP motherboard and only runs Linux.  (No
>Win95, so my system is not so legacy after all :-)  I can get a SB-16
>compatible for $29 but it is PnP and so is every new sound cards out
>there :-(.

        Well, you might be able to get the SB16 PnP to work with Linux.  A
lot of other people have gotten it to work.  And if you're not interested
in listening to modules (which are best played by gmod and xgmod) you wont
NEED a GUS.

Quote:>Also, I am not picky at all about the sound quality but I heard that
>GUS is very decent anyway (dunno about the ACE though).

        Well, my GUS Classic has GREAT sound, very low signal-to-noise
ration.  Unfortunately I was going to buy a GUS PnP and it was so noisy.
I dont kwo if the RAM was broken on it or what.  It didn't sound like bad
RAM, it sounded like it was picking up noise or something.  I just want a
GUS MAX.

                                                Good Luck,
                                                Phil

 
 
 

GUS ACE: Good enough?

Post by Tony Smol » Fri, 17 Jan 1997 04:00:00



Quote:>Hello everybody.

>I can get my hand on a used/second-hand/pre-owned Gravis Ultra Sound
>ACE (1MB) for $40.  

>The question is:  Is it worth it?  Another question:  Is there any
>gotcha, like some programs that may have problems with non-SB stuff,
>etc., ?

Yes,  I would say it's worth it.  (I bought my ACE for $89 new 512K)

The ACE was designed to compliment another sound card, i.e. it adds wavetable
capabilities, although you can use it by itself.  It has no Joystick port,
CD-rom interface or recording capability though. (because it assumes that those
exist on your primary sound card)

Ultrasound support exists in many DOS programs.  Win 3.1, Win95 and Linux will
have no problems at all since they all have Gus drivers.

The Gravis comes with a software program that makes it emulate an SB, for
programs that don't support the GUS directly.  There's only a handful of DOS
programs that won't work at all with it.

Quote:>I have a legacy 486 non-PnP motherboard and only runs Linux.  (No
>Win95, so my system is not so legacy after all :-)  I can get a SB-16
>compatible for $29 but it is PnP and so is every new sound cards out
>there :-(
>Also, I am not picky at all about the sound quality but I heard that
>GUS is very decent anyway (dunno about the ACE though).

The Ace works well with Linux, and it sounds a hell of a lot better than
a Sound Blaster (I have both)

Quote:>Any comment/opinion/BS welcomed! :-)

If you have any more questions, reply via email,

 
 
 

GUS ACE: Good enough?

Post by Tony Smol » Fri, 17 Jan 1997 04:00:00



Quote:>    For $40?  That's a bit of a high price for a used GUS ACE.  I
>would try to talk the seller down in price.  Especially cuz the GUS ACE is
>a stripped down GUS (doesnt have wavetable or can't record of something
>like that...not too sure).  I wish I could find someone to sell me a GUS
>MAX.

It HAS wavetable, that's its purpose in life.  It doesn't record.

Quote:>    Well, you might be able to get the SB16 PnP to work with Linux.  A
>lot of other people have gotten it to work.  And if you're not interested
>in listening to modules (which are best played by gmod and xgmod) you wont
>NEED a GUS.

For Midis you will.  They sound much better on the GUS, and the Linux
Playmidi program supports GUS patches.  Mods sound pretty much the same
on a GUS or SB clone, it's just that the Gus requires much less CPU time
for mixing, in fact it requires almost none.
 
 
 

GUS ACE: Good enough?

Post by Phil Ro » Fri, 17 Jan 1997 04:00:00



>It HAS wavetable, that's its purpose in life.  It doesn't record.

        Yes, I should have guessed that i has wavetable capabilities becuz
all the wavetable interface is is a directory full of 16bit patch files
that are mapped to midi instruments.

Quote:>For Midis you will.  They sound much better on the GUS, and the Linux
>Playmidi program supports GUS patches.  Mods sound pretty much the same
>on a GUS or SB clone, it's just that the Gus requires much less CPU time
>for mixing, in fact it requires almost none.

        When I said modules sound better on a GUS I mean that in Linux,
the only player that plays modules well is gmod and xgmod.  Tracker and
MikMod and all of those that can use any card (not just the GUS as in the
case of gmod and xgmod) sound like *becaus they don't fully support
eahc module type, etc.  I havent tried the newest version of MikMod yet
but if it's anything like the previous, it doesn't satisfy me.

        And modules DO have better sound quality on a GUS if the player
does sample interpolation when playing on SB.    

                                                        -Phil

 
 
 

GUS ACE: Good enough?

Post by /proc/kco » Sat, 18 Jan 1997 04:00:00



: >It HAS wavetable, that's its purpose in life.  It doesn't record.
:       Yes, I should have guessed that i has wavetable capabilities becuz
: all the wavetable interface is is a directory full of 16bit patch files
: that are mapped to midi instruments.
:
:
: >For Midis you will.  They sound much better on the GUS, and the Linux
: >Playmidi program supports GUS patches.  Mods sound pretty much the same

The Timidity player allows the use of GUS patches even if you only have
an fm-synth card.

: >on a GUS or SB clone, it's just that the Gus requires much less CPU time
: >for mixing, in fact it requires almost none.
:       When I said modules sound better on a GUS I mean that in Linux,
: the only player that plays modules well is gmod and xgmod.  Tracker and
: MikMod and all of those that can use any card (not just the GUS as in the
: case of gmod and xgmod) sound like *becaus they don't fully support
: eahc module type, etc.  I havent tried the newest version of MikMod yet
: but if it's anything like the previous, it doesn't satisfy me.
:
:       And modules DO have better sound quality on a GUS if the player
: does sample interpolation when playing on SB.    

The newest MikMod also does interpolated mixing, and it supports every
file format just about (except IT but that's in the works).

Of course, a GUS is still a better card, so get it if you can.
Signal/noise ratio aside, the GUS will make things easier on your cpu,
which is good because then sound playback has less of a chance of being
interrupted during process switching.

 
 
 

1. Good Enough to Sleep With but not Good Enough to Marry?

I've touched on this subject a couple of times before, but I just wanted
to drive the point home.

There are many commercial companies out there that are benefitting off of
the use of Open Source Software with their products, especially Linux in
embedded devices.

Linux powers cell phones, PDA's, robots, routers, communications devices,
Pocket PC's, and a whole slew of other specialized devices.

The thing is, where these companies that use embedded Linux are
benefitting and profiting off of using Linux in their products, they
provide little or no support for users of Linux and their products.

I have personally experienced this with three seperate products I own that
are linux powered.

What is this about?  Are these companies hypocrites?  It's ok to reap the
all the benefits of using Linux to drive our products but they are not
willing to make a committment to the community by providing support for
Linux users with their products?

I know that there is of course the financial aspect of it, but it still
seems to be negligent and hypocritical on the part of these companies.

That's my take on it anyway.

--
rapskat  -  1:25am  up 4 days, 11:09,  4 users,  load average: 0.07, 0.04, 0.01
drop the hot to mail me

Shit Happens. -- Forrest Gump (?)

2. : irda-usb Rx path cleanup + no clear_halt

3. When good enough is good enough

4. dual celeron or single P-III

5. Deep thoughts...Good Enough Is Enough

6. Broken Telnet (and ping) to Un*X from W95

7. GUS ACE auf SuSE 6.1 (neben AWE64)

8. IMAP server for Linux

9. Simultaneous recordng and playback on GUS 3.7 (no GUS MAX)

10. pmod, GUS, Voxware and /dev/gus

11. Is java good enough?

12. Considering Linux: Is my hardware good enough?

13. What is good enough for the Enterprise?