On Tue, 27 Dec 2016 15:29:08 +0000, David Sumbler wrote: >I don't really see how an "artificial" pulse can sound more natural >than a human one
In the context of using a sequencer with beats and bars, it sounds more natural, since it's nearly impossible to fit pulse played music into the resolution. Another solution would be to record even MIDI tracks by ignoring a sequencers measure and tempo, quasi use MIDI in the same way as a tape recorder. >What I wanted to acheive was simply to get the midi beats to correspond >(roughly) to the actual beats of the music itself - rits, accelerandos >and all. The purpose of this is just to make it easier navigating in, >say, qtractor: if I want to make a change at beat 3 of bar 246 then it >will be easy to find. Use markers. I don't remember in what way markers are supported by Qtractor, but usually you could set markers. Name markers "bridge", "refrain", "foo" or even "bar_1", "bar_2" and "bar_n". >As I said, I can probably do this with a Python program, but I didn't >want to spend time writing that if there is something available >already. The program would need a track consisting only of beats. > This click-track could be recorded before or after the first track of >actual music has been recorded - the pros and cons of that choice have >nothing to do with what I wanted to do with it. I wasn't suggesting >that I would necessarily want to play by trying to follow an artificial >click track: the click track could be recorded before or after the >recording of one or more music tracks. > >Anyway, thanks for your interest and comments. I guess we understand you correctly, but you misunderstand us. Regards, Ralf -- ubuntu-studio-users mailing list ubuntu-studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users
