Re: [LAD] 64 bit tempo-based time stamp

On Tue, 2012-02-07 at 19:29 +0100, Pedro Lopez-Cabanillas wrote:
> On Tuesday 07 February 2012, David Robillard wrote:
> > Hi all, seeking opinions:
> >
> > I have to choose a way to represent beat-based tempo time in 64 bits.
> > Uses are many, but the main one is event time stamps for plugins.
> >
> > Requirements:
> > * No odd data sizes (for performance / programmer ease)
> > * High precision (ideally close to sample accurate for most tempos)
> > * Fits in the same space as two uint32_t's
> >
> > Questions:
> > * Is "bar" needed?
>
> Probably not, for most use cases. Bars are required for notation, and useful
> for rhythm matters, but the important rhythm element is the beat, and with
> beat count and tracking time signature changes you can calculate the bar
> numbers very easily.

True. For some things you will need proper transport information
anyway, so perhaps it's not a good idea to complicate *everything* so
make the bar available, when no matter what certain things are going to
need to work with a real meter/tempo map anyway.

> > /* D (high range/precision, but no bar) */
> > double beat;
>
> This would be my preferred option. It would be similar also to Apple's
> AudioToolbox framework:
>
> MusicTimeStamp. A timestamp for use by a music sequence.
> typedef Float64 MusicTimeStamp;

We use this internally for sequences in Ardour, as it happens.

> Working directly with beats (and
> fractions) would be more natural for applications like
> quantization/groove/humanization/swing, or other rhythm effects.

This is true, and a very compelling argument, since this is the sort of
thing plugins are most likely to do.

Thanks,

-dr

_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Received on Tue Feb 7 20:15:01 2012