18 Dec
2002
18 Dec
'02
9:50 a.m.
David Olofson wrote:
[TIMEBASE, aka ppq]
all of them.
rhythmn is always based on one integral periodic 'pulse'. if
time is not divisible by this atom, there is no musical time.
the float meter proposal is like using floats to count your
fingers.
Either way, it's *still* floating point. Why use
1.0 when you can use
something else and get something slightly more logical (maybe...)
than 1.0 ticks/beat, and that allows you to express *lots* of values
in exact form?
the only thing i object to is that you want to assign a fixed
value. it is a severe limitation, but it gains us absolutely
nothing. at least you don't give a reason why it needs to be
fixed.
please,
please, please, ask your favourite musician friends.
read good books about it. listen to indian, jazz, techno,
blues, classical western, classical indian, japanese, rap,
whatever music: rhythmn is integral.
Well, which ones qualify? If you really *want* a bar that's shortened by a
fractional beat
(which is not all that unusual, even in pop music), what do you
do...? How do you ensure that plugins that beat sync don't freak out
when you multiply the meter to get integers?
if you shorten, for example, 4/4 by 1/16, it's 15/16. if you
shorten it by 1/32, it's 31/32 etc.
if you want to shorten 4/4 by, say, 1/16 + 0.00212266328763,
you're violating the very principle of the organization of
musical time. you're better off simply inserting a new meter
where the shortened measure ends.
and what seems to be the problem with beat sync? the relation
of the meter to TIMEBASE is part of the tempo information, so
all info you need, you have.
*
again, i strongly recommend you do some research on music and
its theory and then round off your studies with some sequencer
implementation reading, or even better, writing.
please excuse the harsh word: your assumptions about these
fields lack in realism.
tim