Subject: bad replen in PTK

From: asle
Date: Wed Jul 5 04:39:34 2006

To: UADE-Developer-discussion
Hey Michael,

 A quick question for you. While ripping the entire amigascne.org for Zeg and his website, I found this odd PTK example [url=http://asle.free.fr/WILDFIRE-InFullAffect-1.mod]here[/url]. A song by Twilight and Doc Holiday of Wildfire in 1991. The song is claimed to be composed on PTK 1.1. Here's the disturbing part :
[code:1:e5e1be36eb]
TITLE &#58; approximity
FORMAT &#58; Pro/Noise/Star-Tracker

WHOLE SAMPLE SIZE ..... &#58; 216246
HEADER SIZE &#40;HEAD+PAT&#41;. &#58; 31804
FILE SIZE ............. &#58; 248050
CALCULATED SIZE ....... &#58; 248050

NBR  - NAME                     SIZE VOL FINE LSTART LSIZE   &#40;Nbr times used&#41;
&#91; 1&#93; - wfc.synth03             16496  64   0      0      2         &#40;17&#41;
&#91; 2&#93; - wfc.Blast.Quadro         6082  64   0      0      2         &#40;288&#41;
&#91; 3&#93; - wfc.Loop.Replay2         5646  64   0      0      2         &#40;18&#41;
&#91; 4&#93; - wfc.Loop.Hihats          7778  37   0      0   7778         &#40;126&#41;
&#91; 5&#93; - wfc.modulsynth1          1924  64   0      0      2         &#40;40&#41;
&#91; 6&#93; - wfc.modulsynth2          2270  64   0      0      2         &#40;44&#41;
&#91; 7&#93; - wfc.modulsynth3          2118  64   0      0      2         &#40;58&#41;
&#91; 8&#93; - wfc.modulsynth4          2108  64   0      0      2         &#40;54&#41;
&#91; 9&#93; - wfc.modulsynth5          2246  64   0      0      2         &#40;58&#41;
&#91;10&#93; - wfc.modulsynth6          2250  64   0      0      2         &#40;58&#41;
&#91;11&#93; - wfc.modulsynth7          2066  64   0      0      2         &#40;50&#41;
&#91;12&#93; - wfc.drum.hihat           6904  64   0      0      2         &#40;103&#41;
&#91;13&#93; - wfc.zzap                 1064  48   0      0      2         &#40;208&#41;
&#91;14&#93; - Warp.WareSnare          28346  64   0      0  58332         &#40;8&#41;
&#91;15&#93; - wfc.dsnare.drum.hi       6728  64   0      0      2         &#40;132&#41;
&#91;16&#93; - wfc.dsnare.hihat         6752  64   0      0      2         &#40;224&#41;
&#91;17&#93; - wfc.acid02                954  64   0      0      2         &#40;80&#41;
&#91;18&#93; - wfc.HIHAT2               1388  64   0      0      2         &#40;259&#41;
&#91;19&#93; - wfc.acid                 1226  64   0      0      2         &#40;246&#41;
&#91;20&#93; - wfc.POWER3               5200  64   0      0      2         &#40;51&#41;
&#91;21&#93; - wfc.string.mega         24512  64   3  12880  11632         &#40;9&#41;
&#91;22&#93; - wfc.drum                 2858  64   0      0      2         &#40;54&#41;
&#91;23&#93; - wfc.drum/wirbel          4176  64   0      0      2         &#40;55&#41;
&#91;24&#93; - wfc.Bass01               1742  48   0      0      2         &#40;200&#41;
&#91;25&#93; - wfc.boomchack            6364  64   4      0      2         &#40;1&#41;
&#91;26&#93; -                             0   0   0      0      2         &#40;2&#41;
&#91;27&#93; - hca-princebeat          27058  64   1      0      2         &#40;20&#41;
&#91;28&#93; - wfc.dancenow            12572  64  -2      0      2         &#40;2&#41;
&#91;29&#93; - wfc.Noise.Quadro         6332  37   0      0      2         &#40;191&#41;
&#91;30&#93; - wfc.sample.chance       12408  64   0      0      2         &#40;8&#41;
&#91;31&#93; - wfc.sample.dance         8678  64   0      0      2         &#40;7&#41;
[/code:1:e5e1be36eb]
So, you noticed the replen of sample #14 ... . Any idea how this could happen and if the PTK 1.1 replay took care of this ?.

Cya
Sylvain

---

From: shd
Date: Wed Jul 5 10:48:12 2006

To: UADE-Developer-discussion
[quote:56b10a4773="asle"]A song by Twilight and Doc Holiday of Wildfire in 1991. The song is claimed to be composed on PTK 1.1.
...
So, you noticed the replen of sample #14 ... . Any idea how this could happen and if the PTK 1.1 replay took care of this ?.
[/quote:56b10a4773]

It may have been composed with PTK 1.1 (or not), but it was modified afterwards. Any number of bugs in ripping software could have done that. Also, one alternative is that authors broked the data deliberately to make proper ripping harder. The answer lies in the code used for the original release. If the code there is standard PTK then this is bad ripping or very unlikely data corruption.

---

From: shd
Date: Wed Jul 5 10:52:21 2006

To: UADE-Developer-discussion
[quote:d8e63c2d26="shd"][quote:d8e63c2d26="asle"]A song by Twilight and Doc Holiday of Wildfire in 1991. The song is claimed to be composed on PTK 1.1.
...
So, you noticed the replen of sample #14 ... . Any idea how this could happen and if the PTK 1.1 replay took care of this ?.
[/quote:d8e63c2d26]

It may have been composed with PTK 1.1 (or not), but it was modified afterwards. Any number of bugs in ripping software could have done that. Also, one alternative is that authors broked the data deliberately to make proper ripping harder. The answer lies in the code used for the original release. If the code there is standard PTK then this is bad ripping or very unlikely data corruption.[/quote:d8e63c2d26]

Another unlikely thing comes to my mind. Sample 14 was originally longer and was replaced with a shorter instrument but the editor failed to shorten the loop length, so it would be a bug.

---

From: mld/uade team
Date: Tue Jul 18 08:02:35 2006

To: UADE-Developer-discussion
yes that could be the case here. It definitely looks from the instrument layout like a protracker (finetune, empty instruments with replen 2)...

Or it was started on a plain old Soundtracker with the replen in bytes and resaved with Protracker with replen len in words.

mld/uade team

---

From: asle
Date: Sun Jul 23 00:22:43 2006

To: UADE-Developer-discussion
[quote:b0abf8e87b="shd"][quote:b0abf8e87b="asle"]A song by Twilight and Doc Holiday of Wildfire in 1991. The song is claimed to be composed on PTK 1.1.
...
So, you noticed the replen of sample #14 ... . Any idea how this could happen and if the PTK 1.1 replay took care of this ?.
[/quote:b0abf8e87b]

It may have been composed with PTK 1.1 (or not), but it was modified afterwards. Any number of bugs in ripping software could have done that. Also, one alternative is that authors broked the data deliberately to make proper ripping harder. The answer lies in the code used for the original release. If the code there is standard PTK then this is bad ripping or very unlikely data corruption.[/quote:b0abf8e87b]
In fact it's a manual rip as this replen hangs my prowiz. And the provided file is as it was found, untouched. So, I guess you're right. The answer is in the code but I guess that's a bit too much for me.
Well I merely showed this as a curiosity :).