ST v Amiga

MIDI

Borrrrrrrrinnnnnng, not another ST v Amiga comparison, for the love of god I thought my playground days were over! OK, OK, however the simple facts are that the Amiga can deal with MIDI easily via external peripherals. However the ST often gets the accolade as the music machine simply due to its built in MIDI ports. This meant that a lot professional music software was produced for the Atari, as it was utilised by many studios during the 80s, 90s and beyond. You will often read musicians such as Jean Michelle Jarre and Fatboy Slim used the Atari ST, however the Atari ST adorned many studios during its heyday, it unequivocally became the musicians weapon of choice.

Notable professional software and hardware companies include Hybrid Arts, Steinberg, C-Lab / Emagic, Dr. T's, Geerdes, Digidesign and SoundPool to name but a few.

The Amiga didn't quite catch on in the same way, though professional MIDI software was created for it, it wasn't the obvious choice. That said, the Amiga was used in the Techno, Jungle, DnB and House scenes with the very nice and powerful OctaMED tracker for example, and granted it spawned a reasonable library of music and MIDI based software.

Sound

ST

Wait a minute, my Amiga 500 is so much better for sound than the Atari ST, we all know that don't we?

The Amiga both looks and sounds great for games, and quite often this is the context used when people talk about the Amiga and sound. The Amiga's Paula chip is a sample based Pulse Code Modulation (PCM) chip capable of synthesis, this is why the Paula sounds good for games, and why it gave birth to sampled based trackers, aka digital trackers or MODs.

In the context of sound synthesis however, don't discount the ST's YM2149F so readily, a chip which was thought to be backwards thinking at the time of its inclusion in the Atari ST. I certainly understand why given the advent of Yamaha's own FM synthesis based chips, and a chip of superior technical capability reportedly destined initially for the ST, subsequently dropped, and then considered in what became the unreleased Atari 65XEM and 65XEP. If only I had AMY in my life, AMY being an acronym for Additive Musical sYnthesis!

However take a look under the bonnet and you will appreciate the YM chip is a Programmable Sound Generator (PSG) chip, also referred to as a Software-controlled Sound Generator (SSG) chip, a chip design which I like in terms of computer synthesis, particularly for higher frequency tones. It is a chip which lends itself to chip based tracking, unlike the Amiga typically suited to digital tracking. The YM2149 on its own can simulate PCM, combining the noise channel with its three tone channels, but is more limited in its reproduction of the same than the Amiga. That said, the YM can sound very beautiful in its raw form, chip trackers like TTrak helps to emphasise this.

STE and beyond

The STE however diminishes the digital tracking gap between the Amiga 500 somewhat, given Atari added 8-bit DMA stereo sound supporting up to 50 kHz of sample playback. Gwem's MaxYMiser tracker exploits this nicely alongside YM chip synthesis.

When we get to the early 90s and the seeming 32-bit comparative machines however, the Falcon steps up to the plate where digital tracking is concerned, compared to the Amiga 1200 and OctaMED. Again MaxYMiser helps with this, as well as the tracking software based on the ACE engine, ACE Tracker and ACE MIDI. The ACE sound engine is indeed ace, and takes advantage of the Atari Falcon's sound architecture with a YM3439, a derivative of the YM2149F, and typically eight 16-bit audio channels, compared to the Amiga 1200's four 8-bit PCM channels. Of course these are opinions, but valid opinions nonetheless.

ACE image courtesy of myatari.net

Summary

Of course both the ST and Amiga can deal with MIDI and sound in a very pleasing manner, they just go about it in different ways. We should remember the Amiga is comfortable with MIDI, but perhaps not quite as strong due to the amount of software which became available for the ST, coupled with its integrated MIDI design.

Where sound is concerned, we would do good to remember that the synthesis architecture is again different between both the ST and Amiga in their non evolved state, and it is the YM chip which offers pure chip based tracking, aka Chiptune, as well as rudimentary digital tracking, making it somewhat diverse. Where I appreciate the Amiga often, and arguably deservedly gets the nod for being better for sound, primarily for its influence on creating the MOD and digital tracker genre, I for one (and I am probably the only one) don't think this is as clear cut when talking about both machines and sound synthesis as people believe. Moreover as the lens which is often looked through is restricted to games, when both machines were more than that.

In summary and in crude terms, both the Paula and YM2149F are almost opposites to each other in terms of their strengths, where the Amiga's sound architecture is akin to a basic PCM ROMpler, whereas the ST's sound architecture can be likened to a basic PSG synthesiser. Both offer basic synthesis to do the same job, merely in different ways. In reality this all comes down to personal taste, and of course nostalgia. However the YM2149F along with the Commodore 64's SID chip remain my personal favourite sound chips, closely followed by the Atari 8-bit POKEY chip. I am sorry Paula, it's me not you, I just don't think it is going to work between us!

Opinions aside, both faithful machines should be cherished for many reasons, their characteristics, innovation, their healthy rivalry, their respective communities and the memories and use they still give us. Still think these machines are a waste of time? Then hop on over and get an appreciation of some of the strengths of both machines from Pete Cannon. Or take a listen to Ultrasyd, forever an inspiration mon ami!

Bibliography: Sources not already linked include Atariki and the once atarimuseum.Commodore Amiga icon courtesy of Icons8

Google Sites

Report abuse