Note Input by Dubbing In Automatic Real Time?

I followed the link you posted, and I gave a shout-out back to this thread.

Am glad you liked #2 and #3. :)

Also, I kind of know what you mean re: #1, and I think I have an explanation on how to accomplish subdivisions. However, I just wrote it out, and it was so long and tedious - it's hard to know if my writing wasn't confusing. That said, I am almost certain I have the right idea, but I'm holding-off from posting the explanation until I have had a chance to review it for clarity. I'm pretty sure I can tell programmers how we could program subdividing, but I want to make sure it's crystal clear, or I fear I'll lose people's attention with respect to something that could really create something quite cool for everyone.

Bear with me a day or two, please. I'll post more on it soon.

Ty.

To accomplish an automatic recording in subdivisions, I am going to have to make some assumptions about the way ART-NI already works, and then try to build upon them. I'll also describe the way Fruity Loops Piano Roll works, as an introductory side item.

MuseScore seems to identify note input a few different ways. One way is via the Time Signature Values. I'll call them TSVn for the numerator "measure" value; and TSVb for the denominator "beat" value; and another is by what I'll call a "DNIV" for "Designated Note Input Value", which the user sets prior to recording.

At first glance, it might seem like the DNIV = the TSVb, but this is not true. In fact, the DNIV may be greater than, equal to, or less than the TSVb. In any case - for recording purposes - I am regarding the DNIV as the LCM (Least Common Multiple) unit of time, during automated recording. So, the DNIV = LCM.

To create a subdivision feature, I am proposing (based upon my speculations) a few different things.

The first would be to set a recording "while" loop, like in a video game, to log the input at regular chronological intervals. The rate of capture would thus be a chronological quantity expressed in terms of milliseconds as the LCM. This is the way Fruity Loops seems to capture input in their Piano Roll. It also seems an efficient way to avoid unnecessary processing time because it avoids nested loops during the scan process.

The second idea would be a quantization routine that would round the captured chronological input to nearest rhythmic values. That would account for odd stuff like triplets, etc. I do not sense the quantization need overwrite the chronological input, although it's obviously all editable.

But there might be a simpler way.

When we use ART-NI, we set the note input value, which - when complete - gets explicitly stated in the score in a sort of "additive' way. By "additive", I mean, ART-NI just kind of works like a regular old typewriter keyboard. Hit a key and it appends to the list whatever value the user designated. If the LCM of a manual typewriter is a letter, then the ART-NI value is the letter, and whenever you type a letter it all adds up to form a word.

It seems like only three or four values are in effect: 1.) the DNIV, 2.) the beat, and 3.) the number of beats per measure. I simply propose adding a fourth value, which I'll call an "NoS Value", for "Number of Subdivisions". The default NoS Value would just set NoS = 1 = DNIV = LCM, but, if the DNIV = quarter note and the NoS Value = 2, then the LCM would actually be an 8th note; or, if the NoS Value = 4, then the LCM is = 16th note.

It may not be as precise as recording in terms of milliseconds and then rounding to a quantized value at edit time, but a "NoS Value" could still do a lot.

What I'm trying to figure out is, the NoS Value would be the LCM, but - since it may or may not be used - how could it exist as a ghosted note, or as a note held over many times, yet be "silently overridden" so the user could focus on relating to a noticeable beat. The way it is now, we regard the DNIV as the LCM, and the user identifies the DNIV by either playing it, holding it over, or (in the event of a rest) typing the right arrow key. But the idea I'm proposing is to let the NoS Value almost impercetibly be the LCM - and then somehow use the perceived DNIV at a higher level in an outer loop. MuseScore already does something like this with respect to measures when it uses the lower note at the beat and the upper note value as the number of beats to proceed to the next measure. What I am trying (so ineptly) to propose is to let the NoS Value work like the UPPER TSVn number in a time signature, and then let the DNIV be like the time signature's TSVb "beat" value (in the LOWER position). If we can get MuseScore to record notes per measure and proceed to the next measure, then we should be able to do the same with recording subdivisions per DNIV note and proceed to the next DNIV. That's the idea.

I think those last sentences were as clear as I can get it, so I hope it makes sense. On the other hand, even if it does make sense, then it may not be doable or working in the right direction for some reason. But I'm pretty sure it should work. I just dont know how to implement it.

In either case, please let me know if I am barking up the right or wrong tree...