Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] XAP: Pitch control
From: Steve Harris (S.W.Harris_AT_ecs.soton.ac.uk)
Date: Wed Dec 11 2002 - 18:17:39 EET
On Wed, Dec 11, 2002 at 04:25:56 +0100, David Olofson wrote:
> > (1/12)/note makes more sense because theres /is/ someting very 12ey
> > about 12tET notes (the clues in the name ;), whereas there is
> > nothing 12ey about octaves. At all.
>
> There is nothing 12ey *at all* about notes if you're into 16t...
>
> So, 1.0/note makes sense, (1/12)/note does *not*. :-)
Well I was only talking about 12tET, if youre working in 16tET then its
1/16. If your working in a non ET scale then its non trivial, but we know
that.
Your piano argument is not really a problem as its the piano mechaism that
generates the off-notes, that would be done at the midi->pitch stage,
sureley? By the time it reaches the oscilators its allready been shifted.
Maye I'm thinking at a different scope to you, but I view things like big
complex sequencers as working outside this API, for ont thing it will have
the same GUI issues as LADSPA.
- Steve
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Wed Dec 11 2002 - 18:21:59 EET