By the MS synth, I did mean the GM synth thing. I don't use it, so I was writing the question from a vague memory. > -----Original Message----- > From: directmusic-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > [mailto:directmusic-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Saul Bottcher > Sent: 31 January 2003 13:06 > To: directmusic@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: [directmusic] Re: Survey > > > > Hi, > > > Our PC versions play everything back through the MS synth > > Stupid question - does anybody not do this? > > > I've never had any complaints about the CPU hit except when I had a bug > > which was something to do with my band being redefined every time any > > segments started, which was solved by defining a global band at > the start > > and taking the band tracks out of all other segments (you could adjust > > individual instruments as necessary if you wanted to of course). > > If your project has a large number of segments, stripping out the band > tracks can also save you considerable disk/RAM: I was working on > a project > where dynamic loading wasn't acceptable, and for simplicity I > decided to use > a single band for each song. When I stripped the band tracks out of the > segments, if I remember correctly, it was saving *per segment* - and I had > about 300 per song. Since my RAM budget was only 4MB to begin > with, it was > a pretty crucial difference. > And on that topic - is there, or will there ever be, a way to create > (within a segment) a *reference* to a band, rather than pointlessly > duplicating it? DM allows the abstraction of linked parts, why > not linking > of other objects? Updating all your bands after making a single > change is a > real joke! Plus, I don't know how many people have used part-linking as a > space-saver, but the results can be significant. With some people working > under tighter budgets (*cough* X-Box) it would seem like any measure that > saves wasted space would be a great feature. > > Saul. > > > >