> I don't exactly know when a change become a radical one so maybe I'm
> totally
> wrong, but here is an other way which could solve the problem and is, I
> think,
> more user friendly.
OK, I'm glad to hear other possible approaches.
> What we need is a way to multiplex the controllers over the midi channel.
> Each time the sequencer reads an event, it should be able to read the Id
> of
> the related segment.
> Then the sequencer may maintain a table of the current controllers for
> each
> segment, a table of last controllers on each midi channel and memorize the
> segment of the last event written on each midi channel.
> Each time the sequencer gets a new event it compares its segment to the
> segment of the last controller sent of the midi channel and, if necessary,
> sends again a controller from the table related to the segment just before
> the
> event.
So if I understand it, this is creating a virtual channel for each
segment. So the user can pretend each segment has its own dedicated
channel. Right?
But does that work? If (say) two notes are playing on the same MIDI
channel and we send a pitch bend that's meant to apply to just one of the
two, won't they both pitch bend?
Tom Breton (Tehom)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure
contains a definitive record of customers, application performance,
security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this
data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-novd2d
_______________________________________________
Rosegarden-devel mailing list
[email protected] - use the link below to unsubscribe
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rosegarden-devel
