5n argument for a metro

1. The note abbreviations 1n, 4n etc are just conveniences for people, they are by no means meant to be exhaustive. Use ticks. 1920 ticks (per bar) / 5 = 384.

2. Both.

-A

This is great.
Thanks a lot.

Quote:1. The argument 5n for a metro doesn't exist according to Max Documentation, so how can I have a metro playing quintuplets using this new Tempo Relative feature in Max 5 ?

Since triplets are possible by providing eg the argument 2nt, quintuplets according to this logic should be notated as 2nq and a septuplet as 2ns or something like that. Apparently this is not supported. But then again, who is going to be able to dance on quintuplets?

_
johan

For my second question, I really feel now a metro based on the object transport is more steady than a regular one based on a fixed ms value.

The idea of ns, nq... is nice. It would avoid to do simple maths by ourselves.
But sending the message n ticks to metro works perfectly.
thanks

ps : I can danse on quintuplets !

jvkr wrote on Tue, 08 September 2009 09:13But then again, who is going to be able to dance on quintuplets?

Me!
(I am starving, I die for it...)

I bet everybody can dance to "Take Five" easily...

The notation of xlets is not that important, they are translated to ticks anyway...

Hi guys, I realise this topic is a couple of years old now, but I'm now dealing with the following, related issue. As Andrew pointed out, a quintuplet can be achieved as follows: 1920 ticks (per bar) / 5 = 384. Nice integer.
However, a septuplet would deliver 1920 ticks (per bar) / 7 = 274,28571428571429… That outcome is a truncation anyway, multiplied by 7 again, it does not make 1920.
Anybody who has been dealing with this? What are the consequences of Max' limited temporal resolution?
Thanks,
JB

Hey JB!

Maybe with some kind of reset hack

Thanks Andrew!
I can see your point. That is not much fun but I guess it will have to be that way... ;-)
The only tuplet
1nq - Whole note quintuplet - 1536 ticks
2nq - Half note quintuplet - 768 ticks
4nq - Quarter note quintuplet - 384 ticks
8nq - Eighth note quintuplet - 192 ticks
16nq - Sixteenth note quintuplet - 96 ticks
32nq - Thirty-second-note quintuplet - 48 ticks
64nq - Sixty-fourth note quintuplet - 24 ticks

That leaves us with 7 and 9-tuplets, and above ten: 11, 13, 17, 19-tuplets, etc. - and multiples thereof.
While in composition, the above tuplets >10 are hardly ever used (Yes, ok, Ferneyhough), the 7 and 9 are very, very common.
Even then, the Midi resolution of a system would have to be ridiculously high to deal with these.
Other systems have this restriction as well. Logic Pro X for example, runs at 960 ticks per beat, that's 3840 per whole note - also not sufficient for 7-tuplets. Indeed, I did run into theoretical problems with DAW's in the past. I'lld like to stress "theoretical", since the workarounds are inaudible, which often has been, in the end, the aim of the developers.
The subject brings highly interesting filosophical issues regarding binary environments to the surface...