Cycling 74 » Topic: pitch calculations http://cycling74.com/forums/topic/pitch-calculations/feed Wed, 19 Jun 2013 09:13:49 +0000 http://bbpress.org/?v=2.2.4 http://cycling74.com/forums/topic/pitch-calculations/#post-46474 <![CDATA[pitch calculations]]> http://cycling74.com/forums/topic/pitch-calculations/#post-46474 Mon, 16 Nov 2009 14:44:24 +0000 coffeencigs hey…

i made this guitarloop in Reason (170Bpm) the notes are A,C and G

then i dropped this loop into mlr and it plays it (120bpm) at 1,43 speed..

and i think that this sounds much better then in original speed

but now if i want to add a bassline obviously i cant use A,C and G anymore..

is there a way to find out what the notes are now?

]]> http://cycling74.com/forums/topic/pitch-calculations/#post-167276 <![CDATA[Re: pitch calculations]]> http://cycling74.com/forums/topic/pitch-calculations/#post-167276 Mon, 16 Nov 2009 15:13:03 +0000 Luke Hall You’ve got the maths the wrong way around, you’re slowing it down from 170 to 120 bpm which means it will be playing at 0.705882 speed. Here’s a patch which should show you how to work it out. Unless my maths is useless too then it works out as being just a bit flatter than six semitones lower.

lh

– Pasted Max Patch, click to expand. –

]]> http://cycling74.com/forums/topic/pitch-calculations/#post-167277 <![CDATA[Re: pitch calculations]]> http://cycling74.com/forums/topic/pitch-calculations/#post-167277 Mon, 16 Nov 2009 15:58:31 +0000 coffeencigs oh yea..
i forgot to say…
of course.. just droping it in it would play at 0.7 but then i set it one octave higer.. so it plays at 1.4

anyway..
your patch is great, it told me exactly what i wanted to now. i know that this is not the last time iam going to use this…
so thanks a bunch

bye

]]> http://cycling74.com/forums/topic/pitch-calculations/#post-167278 <![CDATA[Re: pitch calculations]]> http://cycling74.com/forums/topic/pitch-calculations/#post-167278 Mon, 16 Nov 2009 16:14:05 +0000 Roman Thilenius
coffeencigs wrote on Mon, 16 November 2009 16:58
just droping it in it would play at 0.7 but then i set it one octave higer.. so it plays at 1.4

and this assumption is what is wrong: 1.4 times faster is not
an octave higher than 0.7 times as fast.

]]> http://cycling74.com/forums/topic/pitch-calculations/#post-167279 <![CDATA[Re: pitch calculations]]> http://cycling74.com/forums/topic/pitch-calculations/#post-167279 Tue, 17 Nov 2009 16:47:05 +0000 coffeencigs its not an assumption..
this is what mlr does with the playback speed of your file, when you set it an octave higher..

btw
played in 0.7 its D#3, played in 1.4 its D#4

at least thats what the patch says, and it sounds right that way

]]> http://cycling74.com/forums/topic/pitch-calculations/#post-167280 <![CDATA[Re: pitch calculations]]> http://cycling74.com/forums/topic/pitch-calculations/#post-167280 Wed, 18 Nov 2009 17:32:34 +0000 Peter Castine The answer to the original question is easily searchable on Wikipedia. See, for instance, the article on Musical tuning. But I’ll hand the answer to you on a silver platter anyway. The formula for calculating number of halfsteps (interval) from a given frequency ratio a/b is:

interval = 12*log2(a/b)

To get the interval in cents just use a factor of 1200 instead of 12.

I was going to write that your ratio of 17:12 was just a bit larger than a tritone (six half-steps/augmented 4th/diminished 5th) but when I did the math I realized it was only detuned by about 3 cents (1200*log2(170/120) ~= 603), a difference most people can’t hear in even highly controlled laboratory conditions.

Calculating the frequency ratio from a given interval is left as an exercise for the reader.

]]> http://cycling74.com/forums/topic/pitch-calculations/#post-167281 <![CDATA[Re: pitch calculations]]> http://cycling74.com/forums/topic/pitch-calculations/#post-167281 Wed, 18 Nov 2009 22:17:59 +0000 Roman Thilenius hehehehe … that was bad luck that it is so close!

try it with 0.8 and 1.6 and you will be put back on track.

-110

.

]]>