Hi all, thanks for all replies. I will not enter on the merit of what can be perceived by ear or not at a reasonable tempo, we already have plenty of that in the audio parameter wars (44100 vs 48000 Hz, 16 vs 24 bit, etc.) But akin to those, it's a fact that modern DAWs have much higher MIDI tick resolution by default than what LilyPond outputs, and since these files have insignificant sizes (in particular in the context of hard drive sizes today) and given that modern sound cards can play them back with ease (unlike , I just don't see why to limit the MIDI outputs to a lower value than the 'standards' you find out there.
Also keep in mind that tick resolution is given in pulses per quarter note (PPQ), not seconds. This means that a slow piece will have a lower resolution /in true time/, i.e. ticks per second. Finally note that the reference is a quarter note, so if you have 384 PPQ, you then have 192 ticks per eighth note, 96 per sixteenth note, 48 per thirty-second-notes. Given that contemporary music can very much look like the image below, I think there is a strong case for higher PPQ in order to have decent representations of tuplets of very short note values: <http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/file/t4165/maxresdefault.jpg> My 2 cents. Cheers, Gilberto -- Sent from: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/User-f3.html _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
