10 Mar
2003
10 Mar
'03
12:58 p.m.
Richard Seymour wrote:
luis jure wrote:
replying to my own post... I think I completely misread the thread.
Don't mind my pedantry.
-Rich
el Sat, 8 Mar 2003 14:01:32 +0400
Guy Daniel CLOTILDE <guy.clotilde(a)wanadoo.fr> escribió:
The way I look at the word "per" is to just turn it into a divisor
sign, so that a 60 bpm song would be:
60 beats
--------
minute
a 120 bpm song is twice as fast, and hence has twice as many beats in
a minute, etc.
-Rich
explanatory PS: 60/bpm would equal 60/beats/minute == 60 minutes/beat
which would actually be 1/60 beat/minute , read as one sixtieth of a
beat per minute. At least that's the way I would read it...
On Tue, 4 Mar 2003 12:38:32 +0000
Tim Hall <tim(a)glastonburymusic.org.uk> wrote / a écrit:
no, it's 60/bpm
you know bpm means "beats per minute", so the duration of a beat is:
60 (seconds in a minute)
---
bpm (number of beats in a minute)
at a metronome marking of 60, each beats is a second long (60/60).
the higher the mm, the shorter each beat: for mm=120 each beat is 0.5
seconds (60/120); for lower mm, beats are longer, for mm=40 each beat is
1.5 seconds (60/40)
each beat lasts 60/bpm seconds,
I don't understand. Is it 60 bpm/s ?