|
Tap |
Post Reply | Page 12> |
Author | |
Kirek
Newbie Joined: 18 Dec 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 11 |
Quote Reply
Topic: Tap Posted: 18 Dec 2008 at 11:43pm |
Can you please add in a tap function?
I've held off asking while learning the product.. but with some songs it's just too useful to mark sequences quickly. |
|
deweycooter
Development Joined: 14 Oct 2007 Location: League City, TX Online Status: Offline Posts: 674 |
Quote Reply Posted: 19 Dec 2008 at 7:14am |
IMO - it's quicker, and more accurate, to mark a beat at the beginning and another a ways further into the song, and then use the split function. Provided the song is a constant tempo and you position the first and last event lines - you'll nail ALL the beats in between DEAD ON instead of having to tweak every one.
Needless to say, I haven't missed the tap function. :) |
|
LightChristmas
Beta Testers Joined: 15 Oct 2007 Location: Equality, IL Online Status: Offline Posts: 993 |
Quote Reply Posted: 19 Dec 2008 at 7:17am |
First - welcome to the addicition!
Check Pt.2 of the video tutorial - you'll see why a tapper is not needed, or even wanted anymore. |
|
Pony_God
Senior Member Joined: 01 Sep 2008 Location: Naples, FL Online Status: Offline Posts: 551 |
Quote Reply Posted: 19 Dec 2008 at 8:23am |
I do hear the same request many, many times though... I'd like to see a pol of users that have been using Aurora, if they still want it.
SInce it is a high request, I would thing that it would be agood idea, but I wouldn't want to put something in there just to make it esier up front, but hinder as people become better sequencers. Better to not have to wean them off later.
|
|
LightChristmas
Beta Testers Joined: 15 Oct 2007 Location: Equality, IL Online Status: Offline Posts: 993 |
Quote Reply Posted: 19 Dec 2008 at 8:56am |
My biggest concern is "breaking the camel's back". How many bells and whistles with the app take until we end up with a Spectrum/LSP-esque program that requires a system that a gamer would envy?
The primary reason I dumped Spectrum was just that - a P4D couldn't run it without jumping - making the accurate placement of markers nigh impossible. Then we have the whole creativity issue that was broached. Sequencing IS an art-form. The minute we start getting lazy and wanting the app to "do it all", we instantly have an over-priced "Lights and Sounds" box. When any schmuck can dump music into the app and get a full-blown sequence a few minutes later, is the day our hobby dies. The day that either one happens, I'll go static. |
|
LightsOnLogan
Admin Group Joined: 11 Oct 2007 Online Status: Offline Posts: 3187 |
Quote Reply Posted: 19 Dec 2008 at 8:57am |
My present thoughts on this...
I'm in the experimental "wait and see how it goes" group at this time. In other words, it may or may not make it into Aurora as I have not decided yet.
Part of this problem is due to the fact that I haven't written any training/documentation on properly using the Spectrogram yet. Everything needed to place absolutely perfect timing marks (and to do so very quickly) is contained there. All of that said, there are currently three groups of people when it comes to reading the Spectrogram:
Group #1) This group has had some experience with live sound reinforcement, recording, and/or at least some musical training.
Group #2) Certain people are simply "wired" to quickly understand what the Spectrogram shows after a couple playbacks even without any prior exposure to one.
Group #3) The Spectrogram looks like a bunch of noisy jibberish. Unfortunately, this probably accounts for somewhere around 25% of Aurora users at this time.
While the URL to the interactive guide with musical instruments and frequency ranges combined with some occasional pointers is probably adequate as a "getting started" for groups 1 and 2, it does nothing for group 3.
It is arguable if a tapper would be anything more than a crutch for group 3 (and to mislead groups 1 and 2 due to bad habits from other software packages). If you aren't a drummer (we do have a few around here I understand), then it is unlikely that you will ever be able to consistently tap the beats within 1/10 second of where they belong. Anyone with Spectrogram training can hit them perfectly with 1/100 precision every time with just their eyes though. With even moderate practice the difference is amazing.
On the other hand, it would be possible to make an "intelligent tapper" that could combine the user's taps with the beat detection marks to automatically "snap" the taps to the closest beat detection in the event it is within a certain time window.
As I said before, I'm sitting this out at least until we get some good Spectrogram documentation together. There may be a place for it, but it certainly should not ever be used as the tool of first resort due to its non-precise nature. Edited by LightsOnLogan - 19 Dec 2008 at 8:59am |
|
Kirek
Newbie Joined: 18 Dec 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 11 |
Quote Reply Posted: 19 Dec 2008 at 9:41am |
I agree that for most songs you don't need tap... but with some songs the autodetect for the beat doesn't work very well, if at all. I've especially noticed on songs like "Snoopy's Christmas" from the Guardsmen. Having a tap there would be sweet.
I would like to add in that as a former spectrum user... Aurora is much better for marking timing, but I still miss the tap... though on songs like TSO's Wizards... you just don't need it. As far as drummers.... us Tubist do very well hitting the beat thank you very much! |
|
Pony_God
Senior Member Joined: 01 Sep 2008 Location: Naples, FL Online Status: Offline Posts: 551 |
Quote Reply Posted: 19 Dec 2008 at 9:54am |
I sould add one comment that _some_ people just want better music and more channels than the Lights and Sounds can do, but just don't know computers/music enough to ever be happy sequencing. I think that it _might_ be nice for a parrallel program that uses the beat markers as a basis, and applies minimal logic to X input channels and spits out a basic 64 channel L&S-esq show.
Would I ever want that? oh, friggin no. But I wonder if people are scared off by the 3 hours/min of a song. I know two friends that would probably go away from the L&S if they didn't have to sequence.
I know that's a bit off-topic, but this topic (I think) is a entery-level animated-ligting-user type of topic.
If we want to maintain Aurora as a light and clean application, there could also be two runtimes. One that doesn't need a Spectragraph and does tapping, auto-show, and basic commands for people that just can't sequence well. Then the other could be the advanced mode/exe, that Aurora is now that has all of the advaced options and details.
The files from both would be the exact same, just the UI wuold be different.
|
|
ChrisL1976
Beta Testers Joined: 01 Sep 2008 Location: Kankakee, Ill Online Status: Offline Posts: 1341 |
Quote Reply Posted: 19 Dec 2008 at 10:33am |
I agree, you really dont need the tapper BUT.......Getting people to
switch from LOR or keep them from away from Lightshowpro....(spectrum
with a new name) without it may be harder. I'll do all I can to recommend Aurora to people looking for sequencing softare. Unfortunately, most people
tend to resists change. If you have always used a tapper, you love your
tapper function, the tapper is your sequencing confort zone, your not
going to switch to something else that doesn't have a tapper function.
The software may get you a beer while your sequencing, pat you on the
back when you finish a sequence, and be the worlds best sequencing
software available, but
a certain number of people will just not purchase unless it has a tapper function. May have to do
some research and see from a business stand point if adding it may
just increase sales. I dont know the exact numbers. Coming from Spectrum and always using a tapper, I know in the beginning,
I wished it was available. Its the difference of being forced to change how you do things and being able tp try new sequencing methods out on your own while still being able to resort back to ways you already know.
Just my 2 cents. Edited by ChrisL1976 - 19 Dec 2008 at 10:39am |
|
Chris
www.lightsonsixth.com |
|
LightsOnLogan
Admin Group Joined: 11 Oct 2007 Online Status: Offline Posts: 3187 |
Quote Reply Posted: 19 Dec 2008 at 11:17am |
I agree which is why I have changed my position on the issue. At one point the answer was simply "no". It wasn't going to happen. Now I'm monitoring the request and considering it for 2009. There still isn't a guarantee, but it is on the table, espically a tapper that can auto-snap to the beat detection marks. I'm curious about the 3 hours per minute statistic... has this gone up due to the copy/paste issues? I just recently completed a 210 channel sequence running at around 3:40 in 5 hours.
Of course, having written the software I'm very familiar with the best/optimum way to use it. Information on what "bad habits" are out there would be useful for writing training materials for Aurora classes in 2009.
|
|
Post Reply | Page 12> |
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |