On 03/06/2014 09:45 AM, Raine M. Ekman wrote:
> Citerar Vesa :
>> Actually now that I think about this, I think this is one thing we could
>> do before 1.0.0 (since it will break backwards compatibility): modify
>> time signature so that the denominator is constrained to binary
>> exponents, like i
Citerar Vesa :
> Actually now that I think about this, I think this is one thing we could
> do before 1.0.0 (since it will break backwards compatibility): modify
> time signature so that the denominator is constrained to binary
> exponents, like it is on actual time signatures. Time sigs that LMMS
Thinking about this again, I'm starting to think it'd be best to just
keep native instrument volume as it is (0-200), keep the MIDI velocity
mapping at 100=127, and cap the velocity at 127.
This would mean that for MIDI instruments, volumes between 100-200 would
be exactly the same, but that's a m
On 03/06/2014 05:26 AM, Vesa wrote:
> I'm a bit of two minds whether we should do anything about this, I
> think LMMS's way may actually make more sense from the perspective of
> electronic music making... the lower part (denominator) could maybe be
> constrained to actual binary exponents, (1, 2,
On 03/06/2014 01:51 AM, Rob Kudla wrote:
> On 03/04/2014 09:35 PM, Vesa wrote:
>> I think we should rather move to a model, where instead of one global
>> time signature we could just allow setting a time signature for each
>> pattern individually - you could mix in 5/8 patterns at the same time
On 03/06/2014 12:31 AM, Stian Jørgensrud wrote:
> Well, the current implementation with a global time signature is probably on
> purpose but it doesn't allow for changing time signature easy. I had just
> the same in mind or something similar as you. Some bars in the timeline
> could be mapped to o
On 03/04/2014 09:35 PM, Vesa wrote:
> I think we should rather move to a model, where instead of one global
> time signature we could just allow setting a time signature for each
> pattern individually - you could mix in 5/8 patterns at the same time
> with 3/9 patterns, at the same time. This w
Well, the current implementation with a global time signature is probably on
purpose but it doesn't allow for changing time signature easy. I had just
the same in mind or something similar as you. Some bars in the timeline
could be mapped to one time signature and the rest of the bars in the song
w
On 03/05/2014 08:13 PM, LocoMatt wrote:
> Hello, I see this (bug?) since im using LMMS (0.4.15 I think it's older
> issue). So when I add any instrument to FX channel and when I play song most
> of time VU is full (sound isn't loud), that think don't help with setting
> instrument volume. In my opp
Hello, I see this (bug?) since im using LMMS (0.4.15 I think it's older
issue). So when I add any instrument to FX channel and when I play song most
of time VU is full (sound isn't loud), that think don't help with setting
instrument volume. In my oppinion there should be smaller amplification for
On 03/05/2014 05:45 PM, Raine M. Ekman wrote:
> Citerar Vesa :
>> I think we should rather move to a model, where instead of one global
>> time signature we could just allow setting a time signature for each
>> pattern individually - you could mix in 5/8 patterns at the same time
>> with 3/9 patter
Citerar Vesa :
> I think we should rather move to a model, where instead of one global
> time signature we could just allow setting a time signature for each
> pattern individually - you could mix in 5/8 patterns at the same time
> with 3/9 patterns, at the same time. This would be implemented for
12 matches
Mail list logo
