FL Studio 12 Released!

[Robert Randolph]

In Reaper, it doesnt' change the BPM when you change timesig denominator - it changes the rate at which the metronome ticks. It works as it should.

In Logic the score is in relation to the BPM in the interface, which is always in quarters. Ie. 60BPM is 120 eights in the score notation. See image..

I can't see any way to make the 'B' in BPM to be anything but quarter notes in Logic.

Change the time signature to 4/8 ... You may need to do it in a new project (and make sure you're not automating the time signature. I had both of these issues)

I had issues with this in an existing project.

[spaceman]

In Reaper, it doesnt' change the BPM when you change timesig denominator - it changes the rate at which the metronome ticks. It works as it should.

In Logic the score is in relation to the BPM in the interface, which is always in quarters. Ie. 60BPM is 120 eights in the score notation. See image..

I can't see any way to make the 'B' in BPM to be anything but quarter notes in Logic.

Change the time signature to 4/8 ... You may need to do it in a new project (and make sure you're not automating the time signature. I had both of these issues)

I had issues with this in an existing project.

Nope, I tried a new project, selected 4/8, 120BPM
Score still says eights=240

Metronome obviously ticks 4 eight notes, as expected.
Real tempo is still 120 quarter notes per minute though.

[tony tony chopper]

On something of a different note. Gol, could you check the FL Wrapper compatibility with the following Tone2 plugins: Nemesis, Rayblaster and Saurus 2? They all require fixed size buffers to work properly. This obviously seems like an issue on Tone2's part, but I know that Synthmaster also required fixed size buffers until the FL 12 update where it mysteriously stopped needing it to function properly (Synthmaster hadn't been updated since FL 12)

I don't work on the wrapper (that would be for Fred), but yes it's normally a bug on the plugin's side.

One reason that could lead to a plugin not working in FL11 & working in FL12 would be a different setting in FL 12, like "align tick lengths".

Some plugins will just ignore the length that they're asked to render, that's plain wrong & clearly a bug.
Some others will process, sometimes because of paralellization, blocks of 4 or 8 samples, and may go wrong with non-multiples either by mistake of because the programmer didn't care.
So there are some plugins which mysteriously work when FL has this "align tick lengths" option on (that's just there to spare a tiny bit of CPU).

[Robert Randolph]

In Reaper, it doesnt' change the BPM when you change timesig denominator - it changes the rate at which the metronome ticks. It works as it should.

In Logic the score is in relation to the BPM in the interface, which is always in quarters. Ie. 60BPM is 120 eights in the score notation. See image..

I can't see any way to make the 'B' in BPM to be anything but quarter notes in Logic.

Change the time signature to 4/8 ... You may need to do it in a new project (and make sure you're not automating the time signature. I had both of these issues)

I had issues with this in an existing project.

Nope, I tried a new project, selected 4/8, 120BPM
Score still says eights=240

That's interesting.

I'm not really keen on messing with Logic enough to see what is causing this (as I had the same behaviour the first try).

Let's say 7/8 that I've tried work 'correctly' thusfar then.

[spaceman]

In Reaper, it doesnt' change the BPM when you change timesig denominator - it changes the rate at which the metronome ticks. It works as it should.

In Logic the score is in relation to the BPM in the interface, which is always in quarters. Ie. 60BPM is 120 eights in the score notation. See image..

I can't see any way to make the 'B' in BPM to be anything but quarter notes in Logic.

Change the time signature to 4/8 ... You may need to do it in a new project (and make sure you're not automating the time signature. I had both of these issues)

I had issues with this in an existing project.

Nope, I tried a new project, selected 4/8, 120BPM
Score still says eights=240

That's interesting.

I'm not really keen on messing with Logic enough to see what is causing this (as I had the same behaviour the first try).

Let's say 7/8 that I've tried work 'correctly' thusfar then.

Metronome obviously ticks 4 eight notes, as expected.
Real tempo is still 120 quarter notes per minute though.

[tony tony chopper]

Just checked Studio One, and it works as it should. (beat value is the beat in BPM).

must be a language barrier, but when I read "beat value is the beat in BPM", I would expect 120 beats for a tempo of 120.
Yet, that's apparently not how it works in other sequencers and that's what the whole debate is about.

Just tell me, if the time sig is 8/8, and you read "♪ = 120", how many ticks should the metronome play, per minute?

Do we at least agree that, in most sequencers, 120BPM would always mean "♩ = 120"?

[murnau]

Gol, most people here only reply if they find something (they think) they can niggle about.You can be certain that the same people will not reply if your post have a point they can't rip apart. Not all members but many. If you keep that in mind you will have a wonderful time here.

[Robert Randolph]

Just checked Studio One, and it works as it should. (beat value is the beat in BPM).

must be a language barrier, but when I read "beat value is the beat in BPM", I would expect 120 beats for a tempo of 120.
Yet, that's apparently not how it works in other sequencers and that's what the whole debate is about.

Uh, there is definitely some confusion happening here then....

Just tell me, if the time sig is 8/8, and you read "♪ = 120", how many ticks should the metronome play, per minute?

It plays 120 BEATS per minute. For a total of 15 measures per minute with each measure having 8 beats of 8 eighth notes.

I can see where an issue could coming in here, because the word 'ticks' is not as well defined as 'beats' is. A tick can refer to midi clock 'clock' pulses, ppq, a 'beat' etc.. I've seen the word 'tick' overloaded to imply a ridiculous number of things.

Do we at least agree that, in most sequencers, 120BPM would always mean "♩ = 120"?

If the time signature is 4/4, yes.

[Robert Randolph]

Gol, most people here only reply if they find something (they think) they can niggle about.You can be certain that the same people will not reply if your post have a point they can't rip apart. Not all members but many. If you keep that in mind you will have a wonderful time here.

Uh, he has more posts here than you do. Not to mention, you know, he's one of the most active DAW developers on discussion forums.

Pretty sure he's aware of how forums work

[tony tony chopper]

Just tell me, if the time sig is 8/8, and you read "♪ = 120", how many ticks should the metronome play, per minute?

It plays 120 BEATS per minute. For a total of 15 measures per minute with each measure having 8 beats of 8 eighth notes.

Ok, & thus, if the time sig is 8/8 and you read "♩ = 120", it will play 240 ticks per minute, correct?

Which is why it doesn't surprise anyone here that a sequencer showing 120BPM will play a metronome 240x/min.
Question is, how is it wrong, instead of better, in a sequencer for a timesig of 8/8, to assume a tempo not labelled as "♩ =", but as "♪ ="?

I read things like "metronome then plays twice faster, as expected", but as expected by who, following what convention? The one that an unlabelled tempo is always in quarter note in a sequencer - but is that carved in stone?

[tony tony chopper]

Do we at least agree that, in most sequencers, 120BPM would always mean "♩ = 120"?

If the time signature is 4/4, yes.

ok, how does this not conflict with the others saying that a sequencer's tempo label was defined in quarter notes, regardless of the time signature?

[Robert Randolph]

Just tell me, if the time sig is 8/8, and you read "♪ = 120", how many ticks should the metronome play, per minute?

It plays 120 BEATS per minute. For a total of 15 measures per minute with each measure having 8 beats of 8 eighth notes.

Ok, & thus, if the time sig is 8/8 and you read "♩ = 120", it will play 240 ticks per minute, correct?

Which is why it doesn't surprise anyone here that a sequencer showing 120BPM will play a metronome 240x/min.
Question is, how is it wrong, instead of better, in a sequencer for a timesig of 8/8, to assume a tempo not labelled as "♩ =", but as "♪ ="?

I read things like "metronome then plays twice faster, as expected", but as expected by who, following what convention? The one that an unlabelled tempo is always in quarter note in a sequencer - but is that carved in stone?

I see what you're saying.

I have no answer to your questions currently. The idea that BPM is displayed in quarter notes is actually a bit silly. It shouldn't be necessary to do the mental conversion to this implicit value before you know what to expect.

I had read that the issue was with the conversion from ♩= 120 to the time signature's value, and a great deal of misunderstanding of what time signatures even are did not help.

[BMoore]

I'd rather see requests for Snapchat integration than time signature whining.
Why invest time and money in a DAW missing "essential" features you "need"?

[Robert Randolph]

I'd rather see requests for Snapchat integration than time signature whining.
Why invest time and money in a DAW missing "essential" features you "need"?

I can answer that for myself. I like to learn, and a great way to learn is to experience things that aren't what you 'need'. Try to see how other people do things, how other people's tools work and experience new ways of doing things.

Pretty sure we all do that when we do things other than eat, drink, breathe and take shelter.

This is also an interesting discussion, minus me unnecessarily being an asshole when I first joined it.

[KingTuck]

Wait, is tony tony chopper the Gol from the flstudio team?

Yeah.

How do you even get this far not understanding how time signatures work.

It's amazing how adamant he is about being wrong too

Believe it or not, it's not musicians who write software, it's programmers.

And the only thing I have "understood" about time signatures is that there was nothing to understand, only an illogical convention to know about.

I don't even see how people can argue with this. Do people honestly not realize that music theory is hugely illogical and arbitrary? I find it hard to believe that the thought wouldn't have occurred at one point or another. It's use and application throughout the times is irrelevant. You can paint with a rock, but that hardly makes it a good tool. Even if some people are really good at it.