Re: [Gtick-devel] feature request

[Roland Stigge]

Hi,

Steven Ruppert wrote:
> I was thinking something like this
> <http://img218.imageshack.us/my.php?image=screenshotgtick034ad2.png>.
> The tabs could be renamed somehow, and if you clicked on the tab bar, it
> would make a new tab(profile). The tab bar itself could be disabled in
> the preferences or something. The tab bar could also be at the bottom,
> or below the visual metronome.

Nice idea! Personally, I would prefer preset-buttons (like programmes in
a (car?) radio) to switch through, rather than tabs (which technically
duplicate all the widgets inside (i.e. under) the tabs. You could save
with a save function (context menu on button) and restore by just
clicking on the button.

Further, I'm not so sure if the general volume should be included in the
profiles. Finally, we are adjusting the volume to general environmental
properties which won't change between profiles, but when we want to
change them, most probably generally (not for individual profiles).
Therefore, in a profile, I would include the "Beat" settings (including
Accents, ...) and "Speed".

> Also, an additional feature request I thought of. It'd be nice if you
> could set eighths, sixteenths, triplets, and other subbeats to play
> without changing the base tempo and adding accents.

Also interesting...

Generally, we would need something like an "infra-beat", subdividing the
actual beat. This would derive drastically from traditional metronome
functionality. I was often thinking how much we should derive from the
"original" metronome, on the way to a complete drum machine. Also, we
also need to care about beginners and "featuritis" scaring people away.
Therefore we are already hiding some functionality be default. If the
latter is well accepted we can follow on this strategy.

> For instance, if
> your song was at 160, but you wanted to practice a 16th note run, you'd
> have to set gtick to tempo to 640 bpms with an accent on every four
> beats.

:-) Is this a good example? I wonder how many of us are regularly using
a metronome actually beating at ~ 11Hz? I think there is a reason why
traditional metronomes don't support much about 200bpm. And instead of
practicing with half-time beat, you couldn't make use of much more than
400bpm, I guess...

What do you (and the others) think?

Thanks,

Roland