[gmpi] Re: 3.9 Time Formats

  • From: Tim Hockin <thockin@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: gmpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 11:26:38 -0800

On Tue, Feb 17, 2004 at 02:22:35PM -0500, Michael Stauffer wrote:
> >What I don't get is this:  Given that there is a significant
> >chance that any
> >lookahead will be *wrong*, why do it at all?  Why do people
> >keep insisting on
> >it?  I mean, I'm not AGAINST it, if it can be justified.  But if it is
> >unreliable AT BEST, what's the point?
> 
> If the host is not accepting tempo input from anywhere else (or depending
> on how it's all set up, if there's just a single tempo controller that
> has a *static* tempo map posted and designated for use), then lookahead
> will not be wrong. Ie, if there's a single static tempo map somewhere
> that's being used during performance, there's no chance it will change. I
> figure this is a common scenario.

That's a big set of "if"s.  I would think it would be more common for a host
to always provide the option to change the tempo, rather than disallowing
it.

My own projects rarely ever change the tempo, though I do fiddle with it in
realtime to find the best fit.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Generalized Music Plugin Interface (GMPI) public discussion list
Participation in this list is contingent upon your abiding by the
following rules:  Please stay on topic.  You are responsible for your own
words.  Please respect your fellow subscribers.  Please do not
redistribute anyone else's words without their permission.

Archive: //www.freelists.org/archives/gmpi
Email gmpi-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx w/ subject "unsubscribe" to unsubscribe

Other related posts: