[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [sc-dev] Event's sustain
Thanks James. It's really clear for me now.
On Dec 1, 2014, at 4:26 AM, James Harkins <jamshark70@xxxxxx> wrote:
> On December 1, 2014 10:21:12 AM James Harkins <jamshark70@xxxxxx> wrote:
>> At Sun, 30 Nov 2014 15:34:20 +0100,
>> yota morimoto wrote:
>> > But I was talking legato's relation to tempo and not faster rhythm in terms of subdivision.
>> At risk of flogging the proverbial dead horse... tempo is largely irrelevant here. The only thing that is relevant is the relationship between the "inter-onset interval" between notes (in Events, the \delta time converted into seconds, i.e. ~delta / thisThread.clock.tempo) and the envelope's attack and release phases. Tempo only *seems* to be relevant because it changes the inter-onset interval in seconds, but it isn't the only thing that changes the inter-onset interval. So, a "fix" for the issue that involves only the clock's tempo is not a valid fix.
> To be really accurate, the number of seconds of overlap is:
> releaseTime - ((delta - sustain) / thisThread.clock.tempo)
> If this number is > 0, notes will overlap. Your initial example with tempo = 3 beats/sec had overlaps because 0.3 - ((1 - 0.5) / 3) = 0.14-something, but no overlaps at tempo = 1 because the formula gives -0.2 seconds of overlap in that case. That test by itself seems to point to tempo, but it ignores other factors that are no less important.
> Sent with AquaMail for Android
> sc-dev mailing list
> info (subscription, etc.): http://www.beast.bham.ac.uk/research/sc_mailing_lists.shtml
> archive: https://listarc.bham.ac.uk/marchives/sc-dev/
> search: https://listarc.bham.ac.uk/lists/sc-dev/search/
sc-dev mailing list
info (subscription, etc.): http://www.beast.bham.ac.uk/research/sc_mailing_lists.shtml