Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bloom-beacon!oberon!nunki.usc.edu!sal49.usc.edu!wdao
From: wdao@sal49.usc.edu (Walter Dao)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: amiga PD digitisers ...
Summary: Spring break !!!!
Keywords: have a life, get out of your parents' basement !!!
Message-ID: <3198@nunki.usc.edu>
Date: 23 Mar 89 20:36:03 GMT
Sender: news@nunki.usc.edu
Reply-To: wdao@sal49.usc.edu (Walter Dao)
Organization: Trojan Land , City of the Angels , CA
Lines: 31

Hello, I have up to now, gotten from this net, 2 diagrams for 2 different 
sound digitizers. 
The first originated from GEnie and was graciously sent to me. (it is a really
simple circuit with very little number of components and wiring).
The second was s direct post from <forgot his name> but was called (SD0809) .
It was involving some greater amiount of components and would have involved a 
lonnger building time. 

now my question. 
What are the differences ? Better sound quality at a lower requording rate ?
(and therefore saving some precious MEM ?) 
I am asking those questions to the actual users of these beasts. How do they 
compare with actual commercial samplers (future sound, perfect sound, AMAS
 etc?) .

I mean, do they produce a sample with background noice like WHUP-WHUP-WHUP_ ?
or are those samples as pure as the original sound ? 

yes , I plan on building one but I dont want to be disappointed and find out 
that the sample made with the machine sounds like a dying cow when it should 
have sounded like somebody saying "hello" .... And also a sample that has to
much "scratch" sound in the Bckgrnd is not acceptable ...) 

something that sounds like what is being produced in those commercial games 
would be best. 

             yeah,    that's it .....   that's the ticket. 


  
                      DW .