On 12/04/2013 05:57 AM, Filip Hráček wrote:
> I have been postponing this for months now, but today, I finally got to
> write down all the changes from the original specs. www.djnotation.org
> now contains what I've been using for a long
> time now (it's not a big change from version 1, though).
Awesome, thank you!
> Interesting. So, for example, *-#~-#=* could be written as *-#~-*=*? If
> that's the case, I don't understand the benefit. Am I missing the point?
> Could you please clarify?
Owen Williams was the one who suggested it so hopefully he'll chime in here.
> Totally. I designed the timecode notation so people can fill in any
> format they feel most useful inside the parenthesis. (Assuming the
> format makes it immediately – and always – obvious this is not time in
> minutes and seconds but something else.)
I suppose the presence of a colon would be sufficient to determine
whether it's time or something else. I'd like to assume no colon and
integers means measure numbers (with negative numbers to mean measures
left in the track) but is that a safe assumption? I.e. would anyone want
to use bare integers to denote something else? Or can we claim them for
this now? :)
Of course, a time signature is required to properly denote measure
numbers, so how could that be denoted? If a slash is present within
parentheses with integers on either side? e.g. (4/4) (6/8) (3/4) etc.
A track that denoted this would need to have such a designator at the
beginning of the DJ notation line, e.g.
+(-6:08)#(-2:57)~(-2:27)#>(-0:15)-
would become:
(4/4)+(-6:08)#(-2:57)~(-2:27)#>(-0:15)-
Using (fudged) measure numbers, assuming the example was 6:30 long and
120BPM it would be:
(4/4)+(11)#(106)~(121)#>(187)-
If the signature changed mid-track (at measure 110 in this example,) the
notation could just state that like so (measure numbers adjusted for the
new signature):
(4/4)+(11)#(106)(110)(3/4)~(124)#>(212)-
Or should it have an extra hash between the two location points like so?
(4/4)+(11)#(106)#(110)(3/4)~(124)#>(212)-
So a time signature would still be optional when using time
elapsed/remaining location designators but would be required if using
measure numbers.
> I'm curious about the measures as means of tracking time. Is this user
> facing?
Only in that Mixxx could much more accurately display the different
track parts, such as by shading the waveform with different colors for ~
vs - vs # and so on.
> Do DJs out there really keep track of their position in a track
> using measures? (Just curious. It would make a lot of sense, but I
> haven't seen it yet.)
I seriously doubt it since the standard method is by remaining track
time. I'm just looking for a standard way to interchange precise track
notations so that once users mark these points in Mixxx (or if it
auto-detects them in the future, using simpler DJ notation as a hint,)
it could export the information to such a DJ notation tag in the song
file (or to a text file) for use elsewhere, such as on your database (or
the Backstage infrastructure we're working on) for others to grab. And
of course for the really meticulous among us, there's nothing stopping
them from counting measures and writing the notation by hand, which
would then allow instant use within Mixxx.
Thanks again for your time. I look forward to hearing your thoughts.
Sincerely,
Sean M. Pappalardo
"D.J. Pegasus"
Mixxx Developer - Controller Specialist
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sponsored by Intel(R) XDK
Develop, test and display web and hybrid apps with a single code base.
Download it for free now!
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=111408631&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Get Mixxx, the #1 Free MP3 DJ Mixing software Today
http://mixxx.org
Mixxx-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mixxx-devel
