Most of the chip formats supported by foo_gep low pass filter at hard configured rates, depending on the sample rate and on the console being emulated.
But your plugin only allows up to 96k sample rate, so disqualified.
Not only that, but it renders at 16 bit precision, always, so it's not really hi-res, either.
Quote from: kode54 on 23 June, 2017, 10:06:46 PMNot only that, but it renders at 16 bit precision, always, so it's not really hi-res, either.How about Emu de MIDI?
The MIDI plug in does seem to do 32-bit floating point internally. I doubt you'll find a soundfont that actually has samples sampled at 192 KHz. Not sure about VSTs as much but they're probably similar with their own samples.Emu de MIDI. This is probably something emulated at one sample rate natively then resampled to whatever the user wants.
Most of the chip based synthesizers in foo_midi are 16 bit precision. The only difference in precision is that the Adlib or OPL2/OPL3 based synthesizers are run at the native clock rate of the chip, then resampled. The MT32 emulator outputs at a super sampled rate of its own native rate.
Thanks for your detailed description. When the first time I listened to such emulators in Winamp, my first impression was, even without taking analog distortion (by recording the real hardware) into account, some emulators sounded much better than the real thing.I don't like to debate how an emulator should behave, as it is more or less affected by the preferences of developers and users. Take graphics emulation as example, how many 3D game console emulators allow customization of video resolution, texture filtering and other stuff? For example, if PCSX2 removed all improvements and only allows "native" emulation it will upset a lot of users for sure.The same goes for sound emulation as well. While the OP didn't ask for 24-bit at the first place in previous posts, as long as the test sample is music with a lot of high frequency variations, I don't see any reasons why it can't be used in this listening test since it is just a test about audibility of high frequencies instead of synthesizer quality.
To make myself clear, read Reply#23 carefully.What's the differences of:1. Download some 96/192khz flac files, resample to 44.1k and ABX2. Render some chiptunes to flac in 96/192khz, resample the rendered flacs to 44.1khz, then ABX the flacs?The generated flac files have nothing to do with any actual hardware or another emulator isn't it? The same goes for Emu de MIDI, if it is being used.
These files show why the output of an emulator is irrelevant. Because you can't tell the difference between 49,716 and 44,100 or 49,716 and 48,000, etc if properly resampled. However one rate if played with WASAPI or maybe a hardware MP3 player can result in it not playing at best and at worst it's anyone's guess what a specific device might start doing.One file is at the internal rate of the emulated chip, the other is resampled afterwards to a more usable standard rate.
You still don't understand what I mean?Read Reply#26 and get the file. The file "R-Type(HES).7z" is the source, inside of it is a 16-bit 96khz wav file. This *wav* file is resampled to 44.1k by SoX to another lossless format, like wavpack or flac. ABX file  and  by using the ABX plugin.Totally unrelated to what you said isn't it? The ABX log will contain the checksum of file  and .In case others would like to verify and reproduce the ABX test, file  and  will be used so that the checksum can be verified.Understand now? It is a comparison of normal lossless audio file like flac and wavpack, tell me how can you make "R-Type(HES).7z" change the sound completely by using SoX?
foo_abx 2.0.2 reportfoobar2000 v1.3.152017-06-26 19:17:40File A: [44k] Flying Battery Zone Act 2.flacSHA1: 04dbee201c45e5914510b6da64b933dac5acf152File B: [192k] Flying Battery Zone Act 2.flacSHA1: bb1b5abc8d76cf17afa6c485d071a5a051b2438cOutput:DS : Primary Sound DriverCrossfading: NO19:17:40 : Test started.19:18:19 : 01/0119:18:58 : 01/0219:19:09 : 01/0319:19:20 : 02/0419:19:29 : 03/0519:19:41 : 03/0619:19:51 : 03/0719:20:02 : 04/0819:20:10 : 05/0919:20:19 : 05/1019:20:26 : 06/1119:20:34 : 06/1219:20:41 : 06/1319:20:48 : 06/1419:20:55 : 06/1519:21:03 : 07/1619:21:03 : Test finished. ---------- Total: 7/16Probability that you were guessing: 77.3% -- signature -- 95f450798663bb439550dda8f55959a44d5a7bde