Hey, I'm a new user here, mostly an OPL3 chiptuner. I've noticed that there's an Adlib thing coming up, but I use Furnace. Is that not allowed? Even if I stick to only OPL2/3?

i'm not sure if there is a conclusive answer to this already

i'm inclined to say it's allowed personally, and have been wanting to try it out for the adlib format for a while myself. i'm unsure of whether the submission should be .vgm or just .fur - people send in .mptm over .vgm i assume to match how you are sending in modules (instead of exports) for RAD, AT2, and s3m, so i feel like there's a case for that, but .vgm might be a safer bet, too, and would probably be what i'd try first.

anyway i think there hasn't been a real convo about this yet so it's a great time to have one, and considering how long the list of other options is, until it's ironed out i'd say go for it

vgm Submissions to adlib are not allowed

alright .fur it is. the lyceum doesn't say anything about .vgm one way or the other so i didn't know

i thought maybe it could be accepted since argarak has exported .vgm from .mptm to do hardware renders

(which to me begs the question of "why not allow it" if they are hardware playable but i'm not knowledgeable enough about the format to know whether that's always the case or why)

http://www.oplx.com/code/ didnt yuzu link this a while back - about being able to use sbvgm get a vgm file to play back on an adlib compatible device (so long as you can account for recording the conversion given it might not be 1:1 from the vgm)
based on this why wouldnt .vgm be a suitable addition?

dami, i assume its because tracker files are what puke wants to see in adlib. i remember the question if vgm exports are fine in adlib, and puke said no. thats what im quoting.
source: discord chat a year ago

fair enough - it does match the filetype style of the a2m and rad submissions

with that in mind i'd say .fur is a safe bet for submission using OPL2/OPL3 only, and i might give it a shot too

edit: hopefully given furnace's relative instability there won't be too much difference for voters who happen to have older (or newer) versions, release or dev - i think that's an unfortunate aspect of that filetype atm

I guess the AdLib format here on BotB is a very strange case here where hardware dump files aren't accepted due to trackers on DOS that can play adlib tunes thru hardware if you have the right machine. However, it gets kind of weird when you see things like Furnace which can't playback sound on real OPL2/OPL3 hardware.

In conclusion: I don't understand why .fur submissions would be alright if Furnace (as far as I know) doesn't have any way to playback AdLib tunes on real hardware, when countless other chipist formats here are required to have that kind of submission. VGM files can be played back on real hardware from what we've seen, so that is also weird how that works.

SO MUCH GRAY AREA....

the same is true of .mptm but that's allowed; and both mpt and furnace *can* export .vgm which as far as i know is playable on hardware since argarak has done hardware renders this way (as in this battle). so, to me that feels fairly equivalent and allowable

you're right it's a very strange case, i'd say this and gameboy are the two most complicated formats in terms of available submission types

Wasn't expecting so many replies actually! :o

But with all of this in mind, I'll probably just hold off on submitting for the time being as I've tried other OPL compatible trackers and I don't really get along with them as much as I do Furnace. The way I'm able to use it and the features it offers for OPL especially are incredibly helpful for me to get the sound I want out of it. Trying other trackers left me either wanting or confused me too much to even get started. That being said, I enjoy listening to other folks' submissions

Autumn Brushtail - one quick note, there is also the wildchip format, which can be used for a variety of things, and a Furnace OPL3 track would be a perfectly good fit there also (you submit renders to this format).

That being said, I'd personally be in the camp of allowing Furnace modules as AdLib submissions in the spirit of inclusivity, especially considering there may be a viable path for getting vgms to play on hardware. It can be a tricky format and some of the available trackers that can do full OPL3 have a high learning curve and are lacking in some modern quality of life improvements. (Speaking as a fan of Adlib Tracker II which is fun, but honestly pretty weird to use)

i thought that the same issue happened on sap and sapx2 formats (supported on furnace), but i'm seeing on the lyceum that .vgm is only supported on sap and not sapx2 - https://battleofthebits.com/lyceum/View/sap%20(format)/ - https://battleofthebits.com/lyceum/View/sapx2%20(format)/

i wonder if that's because formerly (before Furnace) the only way to do sap x2 was Raster Music Tracker, and it could potentially be updated to include .vgm since i presume Furnace can do this. i don't know for sure, but that would seem logical

also .vgm was allowed for AYM as well further to furnace supporting this