Chris Cannam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >On Wednesday 17 Dec 2003 1:40 am, William wrote: >> Instead of the time signature change window >> trying to estimate, sometimes wrongly, the time signature, why not >> use the nearest actual time-signature, if one exists > >Done. I concede that having a previous time signature to go on is a >far more likely case than a correct estimation. > >Actually, using the time signature before last (or something like >that) would be even more likely to be right, as it's quite common to >alternate between two time signatures. But it'd probably also be >rather confusing.
I'm not sure about using the time signature before last. When composing I find any change to the time signature is more often a small change away from the current time signature than it is a small change away from the time signature before last. I think it would be useful to start with the current value in the t.s. change window. William ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials. Become an expert in LINUX or just sharpen your skills. Sign up for IBM's Free Linux Tutorials. Learn everything from the bash shell to sys admin. Click now! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1278&alloc_id=3371&op=click _______________________________________________ Rosegarden-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] - use the link below to unsubscribe https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rosegarden-devel
