On 29 Sep 2005 at 22:24, Mark D Lew wrote:
On Sep 27, 2005, at 7:10 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
Well, that prompts a thought. Why not make the first note a tuplet,
but a 16th note in the time of three 32nds? Then with the MIDI tool,
reduce the duration by 1/3.
Would that actually
On Sep 27, 2005, at 7:10 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
Well, that prompts a thought. Why not make the first note a tuplet,
but a 16th note in the time of three 32nds? Then with the MIDI tool,
reduce the duration by 1/3.
Would that actually work?
Have you tried this yet? Sounds to me like it
On Sep 26, 2005, at 12:18 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
Well, that's exactly the kind of fussiness I'm trying to avoid --
it's the way I've done these things in the past on a larger scale,
and now I want a simpler method.
I think we all agree that there's no good way to do this, but there are
On 27 Sep 2005 at 17:38, Mark D Lew wrote:
On Sep 26, 2005, at 12:18 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
Well, that's exactly the kind of fussiness I'm trying to avoid --
it's the way I've done these things in the past on a larger scale,
and now I want a simpler method.
I think we all agree
David W. Fenton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't understand how a rest in another layer will delay the 2nd
16th-note in the first layer by 1/32nd rest, which is the desired
result. I need the sound of 16th note, 32nd rest, 3 16th notes. I
don't know how that can be done without putting the
On 26 Sep 2005 at 19:12, Ken Moore wrote:
David W. Fenton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't understand how a rest in another layer will delay the 2nd
16th-note in the first layer by 1/32nd rest, which is the desired
result. I need the sound of 16th note, 32nd rest, 3 16th notes. I
