Re: [Rosegarden-user] Pitchbend bug

2020-04-10 Thread Ted Felix
On 4/10/20 4:17 PM, Lorenzo Sutton wrote: That makes sense, I wasn't aware it had always been sent and for some reason though CC 123 would take care of this, but thinking about it this doesn't make sense (I wonder if CC 121 would, but again an explicit pitchbend is probably better with many

Re: [Rosegarden-user] Pitchbend bug

2020-04-10 Thread Lorenzo Sutton
On 10/04/2020 19:13, Ted Felix wrote: On 4/10/20 4:07 AM, Lorenzo Sutton wrote: Unfortunately it seems now the bug seems to still be there, but sending out a pitchbend of 8192 - this is in r15766   That is working as designed.  8192 is the correct number (in the 0-16383 system).  That means

Re: [Rosegarden-user] Pitchbend bug

2020-04-10 Thread Ted Felix
On 4/10/20 4:07 AM, Lorenzo Sutton wrote: Unfortunately it seems now the bug seems to still be there, but sending out a pitchbend of 8192 - this is in r15766 That is working as designed. 8192 is the correct number (in the 0-16383 system). That means no pitchbend at all. So, from a fresh

Re: [Rosegarden-user] Pitchbend bug

2020-04-10 Thread Lorenzo Sutton
On 09/04/20 02:31, Ted Felix wrote:   I just pushed a fix [r15764] for a rather serious pitchbend bug.  At playback from the middle of a segment, a pitchbend of 0 (-8192) would be sent out on every channel.  This would shift the pithces downward depending on the instrument's response to

[Rosegarden-user] Pitchbend bug

2020-04-08 Thread Ted Felix
I just pushed a fix [r15764] for a rather serious pitchbend bug. At playback from the middle of a segment, a pitchbend of 0 (-8192) would be sent out on every channel. This would shift the pithces downward depending on the instrument's response to pitchbend. If you've been running from