
GUS Musician's Digest       Sat, 30 Oct 93  3:29 MDT     Volume 1: Issue  11  

Today's Topics:
                   GUS Game Support Petition [long]
                      GUS MAX??? [ Watch Out!? ]
                     GUS Musician's Digest V1 #10
                            GUS revisions.
                           NEW PIANO PATCH
                    something wrong with archives
                             Stereo Mic.
                     This post is not filtered...

Standard Info:
	- Meta-info about the GUS can be found at the end of the Digest.
	- Before you ask a question, please READ THE FAQ.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1993 14:27:50 -0700 (PDT)
From: roberts@brahms.amd.com (Dave Roberts)
Subject: GUS Game Support Petition [long]

This is being reposted for those that missed it the first time (and
there seem to be many from the numbers of letters that I'm getting
asking for it).  I'm posting this to both the GUS General Digest and
the GUS Music Digest.  I apologize to those readers of the Music
digest that are offended by this.  I know that many of you have
unsubscribed from the GUS General Digest to get away from all the
questions related to games not working.  Unless you use the GUS for
ONLY music, you will probably still be interested in this.  If not,
thanks for your patience.

Dave Roberts
david.roberts@amd.com

================

I am a very satisfied GUS owner who has been reading the digest since
I got my GUS in February.  During my time of reading, I have watched
with interest as various email campaigns have been proposed to the
game companies to voice support for the GUS.  I know that often times
all that happened was that a bunch of product support people working
for the companies got ticked off.  In the best cases, people got
prewritten form letters back.  Like you, I would like to see the GUS
supported in more games.  I think that voicing our support for the GUS
is a very good idea, but we can't be as haphazard about it as we've
been in the past.

BACKGROUND:
===========

Although email is easy for us to write and just about every
interesting company is connected to it via either the Internet,
Compuserve, or some other online subscriber service, very rarely do
the top executives/decision makers read the email that comes in
through those publicly known addresses.  If we're lucky, we're
alarming the support people enough to make them bring it up at the
next team meeting.  From there it might get escalated to someone who
cares.  Rarely does it make it to a decision maker and may in fact be
counter productive because we GUS owners end up being labeled as a
"vocal minority," and nothing more.

Being a semiconductor marketing person, I look at this situation as
equivalent to getting a design win with a chip.  Right now, Creative
Labs owns the socket on the board and we want in too.  This is a
strategic decision for all of the game companies because they are
going to have to expend perhaps considerable resources writing,
testing, and supporting the GUS, should they choose to include it.
They may have to possibly delay schedules of products already in the
works.  This is not a decision that a single software engineer or
support person can make.  This has to be driven from the top, down to
the bottom.  We have to change the minds of the decision makers and
make them see that the GUS offers a very wonderful future for gaming
products.

WHAT WE NEED TO DO:
===================

Okay, let's realize that Gravis and Forte are already working pretty
hard on just this very problem.  As consumers, what we need to do is
create the pull.  Of course, that's what we've already been trying to
do, but it hasn't been coordinated.

I propose that we write a petition to the executives of the various
game companies that we are interested in.  This petition will start
off with a cover letter of why we think the GUS is a valuable
soundcard to support.  It will have attached the names of every GUS
owner that can be found (see below).  It should be sent on paper
through the standard postal service.

Second, we need to keep score.  That is, we need to lay off the
companies that have announced GUS support and reward them with our
purchase money.  We also need to know who is not performing up to our
expectations so that we can stay away from their products if we feel
so inclinded.  To this end, we need to keep a list of game companies
that we care about.  We need to make public their responses to the
petition sent to them and "score" them on their current progress.  I
can envision this list being posted to the GUS digest every two weeks
or so as we update it.

Finally, I don't think we should accept help from Gravis for this
venture.  I want Gravis to be able to look a game company executive in
the face and say with a straight face that they neither organized this
nor instigated it.  This is from us users, not a simple ploy by a card
manufacturer to get its hardware supported in future releases.

THE COVER LETTER:
=================

The following is the cover letter that I propose we send.  Feel free
to comment on it and suggest things.  Note that it's pretty long right
now, so I don't want to keep adding things that aren't really
specific.  Think before suggesting something randomly.

Dear [xxx],

The following pages of this letter list names of Advanced Gravis
Ultrasound sound-board owners.  We are writing to you to tell about
the Gravis Ultrasound, what it offers to the computer entertainment
industry, and to encourage your support for this hardware in all your
future titles.  This letter was not written by Advanced Gravis, nor
written at their request.

First, what is the Ultrasound?  Simply put, the Ultrasound is the best
sounding sound board under $200 on the market today.  Older technology
FM-based sound boards (the Creative Labs Sound Blaster, Sound Blaster
Pro, Sound Blaster 16, Media Vision Pro Audio Spectrum, etc.) can cost
much more than the superior sounding, 16-bit, stereo Ultrasound.

The reason for the Ultrasound's great sound is that it uses newer wave
table synthesis technology rather than older FM technology.  Wave
table synthesis uses samples of real instruments to recreate music, as
opposed to FM's algorithmic approximation of instruments.  What this
means in simple terms is that an Ultrasound will play the sound of a
real sampled piano while an FM-based card will play a poor
Nintendo-sounding interpretation of a piano.  The difference between
the two, in terms of sound quality, is great.  All sound board
manufacturers are now rushing to produce wave table synthesis cards in
order to keep up.

Now, given that wave table technology is far superior to FM technology
in sound quality, what distinguishes the Ultrasound from the other
wave table-based cards coming to market?  Two things: cost and RAM.

In terms of cost, the Ultrasound is very inexpensive compared to the
other cards it competes with.  On the street, the Ultrasound sells for
between $120 and $150 (US).  In comparison, Creative Labs Wave Blaster
(a wave table synthesis daughter-board for the Sound Blaster 16) costs
$240 and requires a Sound Blaster 16 to attach to (another $210),
bringing the total to $450.  Although other wave table-based cards are
less expensive than the Wave Blaster/Sound Blaster 16, they are still
more expensive than the Ultrasound (in the $180 range for a ViVa
Maestro 16, Aria-based card).  In spite of this, they still don't have
the sound quality of the Ultrasound.

The second distinguishing feature of the Ultrasound is the fact that
it uses RAM to hold its samples.  Many of the other wave table-based
cards store their samples in ROM.  The Ultrasound stores the samples
on disk and then uploads them to the card when they are needed.  There
are two advantages of this method over ROM-based cards.  First,
samples can be changed.  For instance, if an owner of the card doesn't
like the violin sample, she is free to replace it with another that
someone else (perhaps even she) created.  With ROM cards this is not
possible.  The second advantage to using RAM to store the samples is
that only the samples actually used for a given application have to
reside on the card when the application is being used.  To keep costs
down and yet store all the needed General MIDI instruments in a ROM,
many other wave table cards use lower quality 8 or 12-bit samples
usually totaling one megabyte or less.  The Ultrasound ships with over
five megabytes of high quality, 16-bit instruments samples on disk.

Now that I've explained what the Ultrasound is, I'd like to explain
what it offers you, the entertainment industry.  In past years,
publishers have often included support for the high-end Roland SCC-1
or MT-32 sound boards in their games.  Often, this was simply so the
composers could hear what their music was supposed to sound like
before they "de-rated" it to work on a Sound Blaster.  Additionally,
it gave the game an ideal "demo mode" which was often used at trade
shows and retail stores to show off the game.  In great proportion,
however, most purchasers of the software went back home and actually
used the software with a poor-sounding Sound Blaster.  The Ultrasound
allows the mass market to inexpensively have the sound quality of a
high-end Roland sound board.

The Ultrasound also offers software writers and composers two
technical benefits: hardware mixing and freedom from the General MIDI
instrument set.

The Ultrasound mixes samples in hardware.  This allows multiple,
overlapping sound effects (up to 32) to be played without having to
devote possibly critical CPU time to mixing the samples in software.
This allows a dramatic environment to be created for the consumer
without slowing the software down to a crawl.  Consumers are tiring of
in-order, one-at-a-time sound effects, and the Ultrasound is the
easiest and most dramatic route to an immersive aural environment
consisting of many simultaneous sources of sound.

Finally, because RAM is used to store instrument samples, if a
composer wants to change the samples for whatever reason they are
easily uploaded.  This frees composers from the shackles of the
General MIDI instrument set and allows many different styles of music
to be incorporated in the software.

The Ultrasound is already shipping and no action is required other
than you adding the support to your future releases.  This is not a
difficult process as the board is easy to program and software
development kits are readily available from Gravis (for free).  Gravis
has even written John Mile's Audio Interface Library (AIL) drivers for
the Ultrasound that can simply be included with your releases for
instant Ultrasound support (if your sound system uses the Miles AIL
system).  Some companies are releasing patches and drivers for their
sound systems to support their older releases.

Thank you for your time.  We appreciate your support, we'll be
watching, and we'll be voting with our pocket books.  Many other
leading computer entertainment companies such as Sierra On-Line,
Strategic Simulations, Maxis, and Activision have announced their
support of the Ultrasound.  We hope that you'll join them.

Sincerely,


Dave Roberts

The following list of people (representative of all Ultrasound owners)
think that having inexpensive, high quality sound for their software
is important.  We urge you to consider the Advanced Gravis Ultrasound
the vehicle to make this goal a reality.

[numerous GUS owners' names]

ACTION ITEMS:
=============

I'll volunteer to do the leg work here.  I'll accept help from other
people who wish to help out. :-) Please let me know.  Since this is a
petition, what's required of you individually is relatively little if
you just want to participate.  All I need is a very short email
message from you telling me some information.  See below for all the
details.

Before you do anything, please read all of these and then respond.
Since I could be getting at least hundreds of responses, I'll be using
some sort of electronic processing to help me with this.  Because of
this, you'll need to respond in an appropriate format that I'll
describe below.

1. I need a list of game companies that you care about.  In fact,
don't limit yourself to game companies.  Any company that writes
software that needs explicit GUS support should be targeted.  Note,
please limit yourself to the more major companies.  We don't want to
be sending petitions to every garage outfit everywhere.

To start off, I have collected the following list.  Please write me
and send me more names.  Note, some of these companies have already
said that they will be supporting the GUS.  I want to track these as
well, so if there are others that I've left off, please send those to
me.  This list will be use to both track the progress of the various
companies and form the basis of who gets sent the petition.

Access Software, Inc.
Accolade
Activision
Apogee
Dynamix                                   
Electronic Arts
Epic Megagames
ID Software
Interplay
LucasArts                                 
Maxis
MicroProse                                
Mindcraft
New World Computing
Origin Systems                            
Sierra On-Line
Sir-Tech                                  
Spectrum HoloByte
Strategic Simulations, Inc.               
Strategic Studies Group
Three-Sixty Pacific
Virgin


2. For each of the above companies, I need standard surface mail
addresses of their headquarters.  Additionally, I need names of either
presidents, vice-presidents, or major decision makers.  You'll have to
go off your knowledge of this and I'll be relying on people who work
either in this industry or live in the fringe to help with this.

3. I need you.  I need names of GUS owners to put on this petition.
To make the point that I/we didn't make this up, I'd also like
paper-mail addresses and email-addresses for each person who responds.
I'd like everyone who reads the GUS digest to add their name to the
list.  I know that this goes out to several hundred direct email
addresses throughout the world and gets relayed onto many BBS's and
FidoNet connections.  I also know that many of you may know people who
own GUSes but don't read the digest.  Please ask them to respond as
well.  If they don't have email, please send it in for them.  Ideally,
I'd like to reproduce an exact copy of Gravis's registration list. :-)

That's all!

RESPONSE FORMAT:
================

Please make the subject line of your message contain [GUS petition].
Then, please use the following format for your response.  Put this
stuff first.

NAME: Dave Roberts
EMAIL: david.roberts@amd.com
ADDRESS: 40802 Capa Dr.
ADDRESS: Fremont, CA 95054

[use as many ADDRESS lines as you need]

If you have additional information about various things, put this
*FOLLOWING* your name and address.

XTRA:

Blah, blah...


The system works as follows.  First, I save all the incoming messages
that have [GUS petition] in them into one big file.  I then run a
script on the file to search for all the NAME, EMAIL, and ADDRESS
lines.  As these are found, they are added to the name file.  When the
XTRA line is found, it causes the script to save that individual
message into another file that I read by hand to get any sort of
messages.  If you don't have anything to say other that your name and
address, don't include the XTRA keyword.

That's it.  Start sending those names and addresses in.


Dave Roberts
Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
I/O and Network Products Division
david.roberts@amd.com

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Oct 93 11:05:43 EAT
From: styx@aho.cis.nctu.edu.tw
Subject: GUS MAX??? [ Watch Out!? ]

Hello folks,

Attached is a article posted by a guy in the BBS in Taiwan. Can Advanced
Gravis (Matthew, John?) or anybody else (Phat?) confirm all the content
for us?  Or what we can do is just stop purchasing any GUS but wait for the
GUS MAX release?

PS. GUS costs about US$250 each piece here. :~~~

Styx

----- The article starts -----

Headline: To who want to buy UltraSound: WAIT!!

Content:

  I am an engineer of the official distributor of GRAVIS, the maker of
UltraSound. I know many of you don't like our price and are ready to mail
order. I have NO opinion about your decision, because IT'S YOUR FREEDOM
  Besides the risk on mail-order, I have one heartly suggestion-- WAIT.
The NEW UltraSound MAX is going to be out. In fact, I will get a beta
test verion of MAX next week from GRAVIS. According to the information
from GRAVIS, the MAX will have:


 -All characters of UltraSound
 -16 bit recording function (for the option on GUS, the price is $130,basing
                             on the mail-ordering catalog)
 -SCSI II CD-ROM interface
 -Filter built-in
 -Mixer built-in
 -1024k DRAM on-board
 -Many other new software bundle in package (Voice-Rec,MIDI..)
 -Fixed bugs in UltraSound v3.4

Just provide some information -- from GRAVIS (not in INTERNET, but in the
FAX from GRAVIS)
Oh,the most important, List Price :US$299

----- End -----

Shouldn't we stop purchasing GUS right now and wait for GUS MAX if above is
true? Who does like the BUGS in UltraSound v3.4??

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 29 Oct 93 17:28:44 GMT
From: james@maths.exeter.ac.uk
Subject: Re: GUS Musician's Digest V1 #10

>From: deraud@power.amasd.anatcp.rockwell.com (Robert Lee DeRaud)
>Subject: Filters? Need 'em, gotta have 'em, can't do 'em...
>
>> -> Filtering a digital waveform is as simple as performing a discrete
>>    mathematical convolution on the waveform.

>This is a classic case where special-purpose hardware really is better/
>more cost-effective than software at the current technology level: note
>that it is a non-trivial problem even with programmable DSP chips,
>at least at the cost-point of the GUS.
>As far as prefiltering the wavetable is concerned, this is the *problem*, 
>NOT the solution: the real-time dynamics (pitch-independent filter sweeps 
>etc) that give the high-end synth its "character" are missing. [Long- 
>time readers will remember several previous (lengthy) posts from me on 
>this subject...:-)]

though my posting in the same digest might seem
to contradict Roberts highly sensible thoughts I did take notice of the earlier
postings he mentions and agree that it is impossible to emulate something with
dynamic filters which can be altered on the fly.
However, if a particular envelope of filtering which alters with time is all
that is wanted then using csound to make the samples for a wavetable certainly
seems like a doable option.

Summary: the gus isnt a mini moog and never will be.
-- 
James Andrews, Computer Development Officer, Exeter University Maths Dept

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1993 10:59:51 -0400 (EST)
From: "Matthew M. Nordan (SY 1997)" <mnordan@minerva.cis.yale.edu>
Subject: GUS revisions.

I've seen the term "GUS 3.4" mentioned in the digest--i assume the
hardware has undergone some revisions.  Does anyone know what has been
changed?  I have a very, very early GUS and think some of my
timing/WAV-file problems could be solved by new firmware.  Do i need to
get an upgrade, and if so, how do i go about doing this?

                   Matthew M. Nordan  OOO OOO  
        mnordan@minerva.cis.yale.edu  OOOOOOO 
                                      OO O OO  Yale College heartily endorses
                                      OO   OO  every opinion expressed herein.

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Oct 93 00:33:17
From: jason.lin@support.com
Subject: NEW PIANO PATCH

To: gus-music@dsd.es.com
Subject: New Piano Patch

I found that the new piano patch does not sustain long enough when the
corresponding MIDI note is off.  This shortcoming makes many of my piano
MIDI sequences rather choppy because they were written for GM modules
with echo/reverb effects.  The old Eye & I patch would at least sustain
for 1/2 second. Also the attack rate of the new patch is a bit unreal
compare to a real piano.  Will there be an improved new piano patch?

---
   ______        __
  (__  __) ~CG~ / /     |  Internet: jason.lin@support.com
 _  / /        / /      |            izzyvu9@mvs.oac.ucla.edu
( \/ /        / /__     |
 \__/ASON    (_____)IN  |  Fidonet:  1:102/837

  "...he's a liar and he thinks he's the Messiah walking around the
   face of the earth.  There's only One Power up above, brother and
   that's the way it is!"
                                       - Randy Savage on Hulk Hogan
                                         (c) 1993 Monday Night Raw

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 29 Oct 93 11:09:18 EDT
From: echen@media.sra.com (Eugene Chen)
Subject: something wrong with archives

 i just tried to get the multitrack HD recorder
 from the archive.orst.edu site
 
 the ..sound/mod/util directory was there
 but there were no files!
 
 i was suprised.

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 30 Oct 93 02:29:20 -0400
From: hal wayne black <sylk@mik.uky.edu>
Subject: Stereo Mic.

Hello!
   I have been having problems getting the GUS to record in stereo in Windows,
namely, it will only record to one channel.  I have factory setttings, 1mb,
2.06a disks.  I have tried CoolEdit and GoldWave, but only the "top" channel
gets any waveforms.  On occasion, there are minutes blips on the other line.
  I have an Electret from Radio Shack, with an 2 1/8inch-mono to 1/8inch-stereo
converter plugged into the microphone in on the ultrasound.  Brand new
batteries, that work.
  One thing: I can't record (except for REALLY small traces) in Windows unless
I go to the ultrasound Mixer, and enable the Mic. first. 
  To see if this is Windows, or just my hardware, can someone name a program
that samples in stereo in DOS?  I may have gotten the wrong adapter from radio
shack.
  Thanks for your help.  I am new to most of this sound stuff, but I am
starting to get into it.


-- 
| sylk@mik.uky.edu | hwblac00@ukpr.uky.edu | Entitlements kill |
(tastefully short signature)

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 29 Oct 93 06:15:32 PDT
From: deraud@power.amasd.anatcp.rockwell.com (Robert Lee DeRaud)
Subject: This post is not filtered...

>From: james@maths.exeter.ac.uk
>Subject: Re: GUS Musician's Digest V1 #9

>The snag is that most of these packages only supply a static filter ie you
>set it up and it can cut out mains hum or hiss or whatever.
>What is needed for voicing is a dynamically controllable filter.
>Fortunately, the csound package can do this and has a huge selection of filters
>( resonant, comb, vocoder ) but unfortunately its flexiblity means its a bit
>tricky to set up.

Two points:

1. I've fiddled a bit with csound on the Sparc: the software is VERY 
   impressive, the hardware it's playing through (8-bit ulaw, 3" speaker)
   somewhat less so.  If a PC version is available, I haven't been able 
   to locate it.

2. It is decidedly non-realtime, at least in the interactive knob/slider 
   sense.

If I'm wrong on either of these points, PLEASE tell me! A realtime 
csound playing through the GUS would come very close to my dream synth.

>From: brian block <bblock@newservr.engr.uidaho.edu>
>Subject: What we need...

>I have been a GUS owner for about 3 months now and have found
>the card to have very impressive musical capabilities. 
>Unfortunately, I also found that this potential is not being
>realized with the current software available.

and...

>From: David Mitchell <davidm@hparc1.aus.hp.com>
>Subject: GUS sound filtering

>I was hoping this might trigger a discussion...

Well, on THAT note (no pun intended), the following is a repost of some 
thoughts of mine from awhile back...some of it email and some of it on 
the SDK digest, so not everyone here may have seen it:

**** start of included ramblings ****

>From dantonio@magick.tay2.dec.com Tue Aug 10 08:12:01 1993
>Return-Path: <dantonio@magick.tay2.dec.com>

>>(I asked this question (in a somewhat roundabout way) in the SDK digest and
>>got totally ignored, so I'll try again here...)  Do any of the GUS gurus or
>>patch experts know how to convert sample files from pro samplers (EMU, Roland,
>>whatever) to GUS format?  I know there are some limitations/incompatabilities
>>but it has to be a better way to go than using home-brew 8-bit samples.  The
>>idea here is to be able to use the ENORMOUS patch/sample libraries available
>>(albeit expensive) for the pro gear. 

>The trouble is that there aren't very good docs on just what a Gravis patch
>file looks like. I'm waiting for Francios's PATCHGOD program to see what it
>can do. Francios probably knows more about GUS patches than most people at
>Gravis! :-)

What we REALLY need is source code to the Windows driver.  We're getting 
hung up on the "conversion" problem when there is really only a very 
loose connection between the (current) GUS patch format and the ultimate 
capabilities of the underlying H/W model.  I'm very much afraid that the 
GUS will get locked into a patch model without layering, velocity 
mapping (using different sample sets or subpatches as volume increases) 
and other such stuff that (I think) the H/W will support.

For what it's worth, here's the diatribe I posted awhile back to the SDK 
digest:

------------------
One of the main problems with sample-playback synths (at least those 
without extensive and expensive back-end signal processing) is that they 
cannot emulate classical analog synths worth a damn. The kind of beast 
I'm talking about typically has MiniMoog somewhere in its gene pool:

    Signal Generator ---> VCF ---> VCA ---> Output

along with LFO's, controller wheels, envelope generators, etc  providing
"programmable" control inputs to the VCF and VCA.

The GUS can do a decent enough job of emulating the VCA since amplitude 
ramping is available, but it cannot handle the VCF at all: the frequency 
content of the output is ENTIRELY controlled by the sample being played.  

The next part of this conversation typically goes like: "Well, get a 
MiniMoog or Prophet or whatever and sample it!" WRONG! With the 
exception of some (optional) keyboard-follow effects, the control inputs 
to the analog synths VCF are INDEPENDENT of the note being played.  In 
particular, the LFO frequency and envelope generator time constants are 
usually fixed. Playing back the samples at various pitches makes these 
emulated controls appear to follow the pitch. E.g. if the sample is 
played back an octave higher than recorded, the LFO seems to be running 
twice as fast and the envelope reaches its release point at half the 
expected time.  The only way out of this is to multi-sample AT EVERY 
NOTE! (So when is the 8MB "SuperGUS" coming out?)

[An aside: anyone truly serious about synthesizers owes it to 
him/herself to sit down and fool around with an older analog synth at 
least once. But be warned, the knob/slider twiddling can be truly addictive!]

So...the whole point of this is the question: can a GUS emulate a VCF by 
using what amounts to a two-dimensional sample? If we have a bunch (say 
512) of small, simple waveform tables (say 512 samples each), that's one 
256K memory bank.  Each table has a different frequency content, i.e. it 
corresponds to a different VCF setting. The idea is to switch from table 
to table while the note is playing to emulate the VCF, in the same way
that the amplitude is changed to emulate the VCA. But can the sample 
base address be twiddled this way without generating an ugly assortment 
of clicks and pops? (Note that the table OFFSET is not modified, so 
there is a reasonable continuity in the output sample stream, assuming 
the wave tables are properly constructed.)

[Another annoying aside: I THINK this is how the Fairlight worked, but 
since they cost >$30K, I never got one to use at home :-)]

Comments?
--------------------

**** end of included ramblings ****

(I went away for awhile, but I'm back now...I've never been accused of 
 conserving bandwidth.)

This whole subject is an ENORMOUS can of worms, especially as regards 
compatability - I stayed away from it in the (old) digest, not wishing 
to provide irresistable flame-bait to the gamers, MOD fanatics, and SBOS 
twiddlers. :-)

************************************************************************
Lee DeRaud                             Will program Windows for food.
Rockwell Int. AESD                    (Hey, I'm easy but I'm not cheap!)
 -----------------------------------------------------------------------
      My own opinions only, not those of Rockwell International.
   (Yeah, right: like anyone around here cares what *I* say...NOT!)
************************************************************************

------------------------------

End of GUS Musician's Digest V1 #11
***********************************

To post to tomorrow's digest:                        <gus-music@dsd.es.com>
To (un)subscribe or get help:                <gus-music-request@dsd.es.com>
To contact a human (last resort):              <gus-music-owner@dsd.es.com>

FTP sites:                archive.epas.utoronto.ca       pub/pc/ultrasound
                          wuarchive.wustl.edu     systems/msdos/ultrasound
                          archive.orst.edu             pub/packages/gravis
FTP mail server:          mail-server@nike.rz.uni-konstanz.de

Hints:
      - Get the FAQ from the FTP sites or the request server.
      - Mail to <gus-music-request@dsd.es.com> for info about other
	GUS related mailing lists (general use, programmers, etc.).


