On 03/04/2014 09:35 PM, Vesa wrote: > I think we should rather move to a model, where instead of one global > time signature we could just allow setting a time signature for each > pattern individually - you could mix in 5/8 patterns at the same time > with 3/9 patterns, at the same time. This would be implemented for both > melodic and beat patterns. This would also pave the way for adding > other neat timing-based effects such as shuffle.
This would be ideal for me, since it's rare I write an entire song in one time signature, not being a dance music sort of guy, and polyrhythm support would be especially welcome. In trackers, I usually did it by changing the length of the pattern, since they didn't really have time signatures per se. Maybe that's how it could be handled internally: just choose a number of beats based on the time signature and number of bars of a given pattern, treat "time signature" as something that only exists for the GUI equivalent to syntactic sugar, and be done with it. Seems simpler than the automation track or whatever it was I used to change the time sig in the middle of the song when I tried to make a polyrhythmic song in LMMS, which caused the cursor to not line up with the current note after the first time sig change (note: this was at least 4 or 5 years ago, in a much older LMMS version.) As long as new patterns can be snapped to the end of the previous pattern to prevent discontinuity, I think it would be easier to deal with, not only from a user perspective but also codewise. Of course, the existing code is a sunk cost, but since it doesn't really work that well, something's going to have to be done with it regardless. Replacing it with something simpler that works seems like the way to go. LMMS is not as bad as my old all-in-one keyboard workstation, which simply wouldn't support anything but 2/4, 3/4 or 4/4, resulting in my having to step-enter my own drum "click tracks" reflecting what time sig I actually wanted to play in. But it could be better. I guess I ought to be putting my code where my mouth is, but I'm not even sure I can get LMMS to compile on my current Ubuntu 13.10 machine. Rob ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Subversion Kills Productivity. Get off Subversion & Make the Move to Perforce. With Perforce, you get hassle-free workflows. Merge that actually works. Faster operations. Version large binaries. Built-in WAN optimization and the freedom to use Git, Perforce or both. Make the move to Perforce. http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=122218951&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ LMMS-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lmms-devel
