11 Dec
2002
11 Dec
'02
3:10 p.m.
On Wednesday 11 December 2002 18.26, Steve Harris wrote:
On Wed, Dec 11, 2002 at 04:35:16 +0100, David Olofson
wrote:
I dont see how, its more like having a string and int
representation of the same thing.
No, not unless the string representation is supposed to translate in
a number of different ways, depending on what character table you use.
In code, for linear_pitch:
actual_pitch = linear_pitch;
whereas for note_pitch (simplified; no interpolation):
actual_pitch = scale[note_pitch];
There is only one valid relation between actual pitch and linear
pitch, while the relation between actual pitch and *note* pitch is
user defined.
//David Olofson - Programmer, Composer, Open Source Advocate
.- The Return of Audiality! --------------------------------.
| Free/Open Source Audio Engine for use in Games or Studio. |
| RT and off-line synth. Scripting. Sample accurate timing. |
`---------------------------> http://olofson.net/audiality -'
.- M A I A -------------------------------------------------.
| The Multimedia Application Integration Architecture |
`----------------------------> http://www.linuxdj.com/maia -'
--- http://olofson.net --- http://www.reologica.se ---
Maybe. My
objection to converters is more that they imply two
parallel representations of frequency (in the broad sense of
the word), which seems like a mistake.
They are not parallel. One actually *is* frequency, while the
other expresses pitch in relation to a scale.
It's like comparing inline code with calls through function
pointers, basically.