Hi Michael, On Fri, 7 Aug 2009, m.wolkst...@gmx.de wrote: >> IN THE DISTANT FUTURE[1], I would like to be able to precisely set >> lead/lag settings by: [snip] >
> don't know how this will work. ticks have a really big resulution and in > moment we use 192 ticks in 4/4 or 48 ticks for every 1/4 beat. if > leadlag works with ticks we can remove the whole function. why? if i > disable the grid in patterneditor, i can edit notes on every tick in a > pattern. this method is much easier as slide into the leadlag note > property's. so, imo we need no lead lag if its based on ticks. because > this lead lag resolution is not fine enough and there is a more easy way > to edit this as the leadlag slider. Hmmm... maybe I should have said "floating point ticks." The idea is that "snare drum hit is just a tad before beat 2." This is the way I think when editing a pattern. I don't want to tweak the grid resolution so that I can manually put the note a tad before. And I want to be able to set it "1.2 ticks before beat 2." If I have a high-hat marking 8th notes... I don't want to manually set the lead on each note by carefully clicking on the grid. I would rather say "give me 8th notes... lead the beat by 2.7 ticks." > maybe here its a good idea to raise ticks up to 420. than we can divide > grids in tuplets 5 and 7, triplets 3 and normal 4. and also the ticks > based lead-lag resolution is smaller. Support for ticks_per_beat other that 48 is definately planned. :-) >> [3] There could be a few cases where a tempo change will push >> the note out before frame 0... and of course, there's >> nothing we can do about that, so they'll get cut short, >> too. > in moment this is a problem with trunk transport. and not only on frame > position 0. its a problem on every bar. if tempo changes on pattern tick > position x, all notes exactly in change position will sometimes played > twice. this happens only if tempo change from high to lower values. [snip] > low. what ever. this is off topic, but imo, for the 0.9.4 release maybe > a look into the lookahead function is no bad idea. I might if I get time... but I'm sort of "done" with the current transport/scheduling code. :-) Peace, Gabriel ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with Crystal Reports now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july _______________________________________________ Hydrogen-devel mailing list Hydrogen-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hydrogen-devel
