[gmpi] Re: 3.9 Time Formats

  • From: "Koen Tanghe" <koen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <gmpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 22:29:05 +0100

On Tuesday, February 17, 2004 2:44 AM [GMT+1=CET],
Michael Stauffer <xxxmichael@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> I realize this is a specialized plug-in capability that would very
> much help my needs in particular, and perhaps very few others' at
> this point, if any at all. I don't expect it to be made a requirement
> just for me if there are reasons not to add it, but am hoping to
> flesh out if there's enough perceived interest to include it perhaps
> at least as an "ignorable" requirement so that there's hope for it in
> the future if not now.


> Koen, can you think of other scenarios for this kind of
> 'offline' processing?

No, I think you just summed up the things I would use it for in the offline
case (and have been wanting to do for a couple of years now...). Together
with my (real-time) tempo tracking thingie for live performances, it would
already be great to have the possibility in GMPI to make these things work.


I also don't think we're really the only ones who would use it. How many
people dealing with live recordings have found themselves fiddling with the
tempo in order to get a decent alignment of the musical time with their
recorded audio (which is in many cases not just a fixed tempo)? Of course,
there's the click track... but you can't expect musicians to be slaves to a
click track sometimes. I've heard performing musicians say: "what? that
sequencer can't understand my timing? how stupid..." and "no, you're not
gonna change my timing to that of your sequencer are you? I want my timing
to be the right one, and the sequencer should follow".

Recent music research has made some new things possible (tempo tracking is
just one of it), and it would be nice if well-designed working technology
makes it possible to make these things also available to a user.
As Michael said: it might be a bit new in this field, and if it's really too
complicated to impose it, maybe we should drop it. But some companies
already are doing efforts in this direction (like Plogue for letting plugins
send back tempo info to the host and more and more modular hosts allowing
flexible routings between inputs/outputs).

But I realize this is all much blahblah (and I should just shut up now).
I do wonder what will happen when users start to see that their host (and
not any other) can extract/follow tempo fluctuations in their audio/midi
playing and thus "understands" better what's going on in the music...

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: