Okay, here's an example. Listen to the two songs in this FTM.
The first one is integral, the beats are even.
The second one is not, you should hear a skip on every 5th row or so.
You're right, I do hear it now. I guess when you have 7+ tracks playing at the same time it's hard to make out, especially when the skip happens when no new note is input.
Still, I don't see how it affects the musical quality of a track, especially if the skip is barely audible, if at all.
this is why i tend to stick to Fxx commands only for changing tempo these days (ranging between F01 and F06 usually.) i haven't had any uneven sounding playback since i did that instead (and that's all i care about really -- that the song doesn't sound screwed up.) it's usually not a big deal to get the tempo I'm looking for.
note delay/triplets can still be a bugger sometimes though.
Here's my thoughts: (pretty much a long-winded agreement with Dave).
I always use t150 + Fxx commands.
Here's why: Say I used t=156. Some of my 8th notes, 16th notes, and triplets are going to be slightly shorter than others. But I won't be able to see which ones they are! Maybe I'm using a lot of Gxx commands -- I won't know if G04 is any different than G03, because I won't know exactly how long (in frames) each row lasts! If in t=150, I make each quarter note last 23 frames, that gives me a tempo of 156.52, but now I can see where all the skips are.
This is especially important with fast notes, and echoes. For instance, say I'm doing a really fancy arpeggio that's jumping all over the keyboard. But I want each note to last 3 frames, or it will sound uneven. It's going to take so much trial and error to achieve this with an odd tempo. But it's simple with t150. And you're able to get many many different tempos with clever usage of the Fxx command.
In fact, this is the main reason why I find FT superior to ppmck. I always want to know how many frames my notes last!
Sorry for the long winded explanation. I don't even know if you will find this useful or interesting. But I hope it helps.
-tadpole
I think it's perfectly fine to use t != 150, but I'd call it an extended technique since the famicom isn't supposed to do that (well, do it well I mean). Methinks the unevenness can be solved by changing the clock speed.
I think a neat project would be to make a chart of matching Tempi and Clock speeds that result in integer frames per row. I might just calculate at speed 6 and speed 1.
Which I forgot to mention in my last post, earlier I posted how blank is sometimes inferior when it comes to instrument definitions. But when you do a 900bpm track, it's totally negligible...(though Pitch and HighPitch still might necessitate instruments).
Thank you for your enlightening answers, guys. Very much appreciated.
nicetas_c wrote:
jrlepage wrote:
Still, I don't see how it affects the musical quality of a track, especially if the skip is barely audible, if at all.
Now you'd be trolling.
For you flagged me as a purist I shall flag you as an impurist.
If by that you mean I value musical quality over technical quality, then yes, I guess I am a bit of an "impurist". The difference is, I don't force it upon other people, and I accept that other people work differently than I do. The same couldn't be said of you - it's like everyone has to use FamiTracker the exact same way you do, otherwise anything they do is shit.
Look. You're a talented chiptune artist, that much is obvious. And if going for the "100% accuracy" approach and otherwise restraining yourself to the limitations of the system you write for are things that work for you, then that's just fine, everyone's happy, myself included. Just don't go forcing those things down other musicians' throats.
If other people (like myself) want to use the bloody program the way it lets them, and that includes (but is not limited to) using tempo values that fall outside the capabilities of the Famicom, then that's their own decision. If their track is musically excellent, I see no good reason to criticise it by saying that decision "ruins the classic style" of the rest of the tune, like you did here in this very case. That's just not constructive criticism - that's useless nitpicking, and nobody needs that sort of attitude here. So I strongly suggest you make drastic changes your attitude from now on.
I rest my case.
This thread has strayed significantly from the original topic. It's been an interesting discussion and I invite anyone who has something relevant and insightful to add to it to continue contributing to it in a new topic. It would be nice if fluidvolt could have his thread back. Cheers.
Ha, I don't really mind the digression, and actually found the discussion on "integrality" quite interesting; I didn't even know frame skipping was an issue with certain tempos. I'll always care more about the musical ideas rather than technical issues, but I think both sides have their place.
Now of course I'd rather have feedback on the actual musicality of the piece, but I'll take what I can get.
I'll always care more about the musical ideas rather than technical issues, but I think both sides have their place.
That's exactly how I feel! I'm a musician first, but I also care about the technical aspect of the chiptunes I write - it's definitely an important one, or else we'd all be writing MODs and ITs.
I'm definitely not against NSF artists who strive to be absolutely true to the NES's capabilities and limitations - nicetas_c's SuperAccurate Cover of Crucifix Held Close from Haunted Castle, for instance, is one of the grandest covers I've heard so far, both in terms of musicality and technicality - but one needs to remember different composers have different priorities. Putting musical quality in front of technical precision is an example of this.
You couldn't possibly be more besides the point. I'm not against being a perfectionist, I'm against you degrading and otherwise insulting everyone who isn't - and their work. Make an effort to get that into your head.
Thanks for relevant tempo formula; we can do without the rest.
I took the liberty to split the topic in two, that way fluidvolt can get the feedback he deserves while nicetas_c gets the attention he wants.
If other people (like myself) want to use the bloody program the way it lets them, and that includes (but is not limited to) using tempo values that fall outside the capabilities of the Famicom, then that's their own decision.
I've seen this idea thrown around a bit, and just want to clarify that this is clearly not "outside the capabilities of the Famicom" if it can be played on a Famicom. There's a difference between "it can't do it" and "nobody did it back then." :P
Kind of like how Strobe uses crazy DPCM in some songs, or SuperNSF... they're possible, but not feasible in a game. However, "irrational tempo" or whatever is totally feasible in a game, just again, nobody did it (Mega Man 3 Top Man makes me think something was going on there though, as it delays a frame every 25 seconds or so...)
