so, to clear things out, let's start with this example baseline that is an extended version of G3N-es's:
and this are the tool settings to apply:
on the current 2nd implementation (v0.9.26.10), which honors the said "polyphonic" rule 4. above, we get the following results:
now, if we drop rule 4., making it a pure "monophonic" and 3rd. implementation, we shall get this results instead:
(the lighter areas represent the baseline, in both cases)
based on your recent comments, I now believe that it is the later "mono" mode what you've been asking for, from the start...
question is:
is it worth to make either of these modes, the later "mono" (no rule 4.) and the former "poly" (rule 4. applies), as an additional tool option?
thanks
ps. today's qtractor >= 0.9.36.11git.7b0f34 already features this 3rd implementation ;)
hi, everyone
so, to clear things out, let's start with this example baseline that is an extended version of G3N-es's:
and this are the tool settings to apply:
on the current 2nd implementation (v0.9.26.10), which honors the said "polyphonic" rule 4. above, we get the following results:
now, if we drop rule 4., making it a pure "monophonic" and 3rd. implementation, we shall get this results instead:
(the lighter areas represent the baseline, in both cases)
based on your recent comments, I now believe that it is the later "mono" mode what you've been asking for, from the start...
question is:
is it worth to make either of these modes, the later "mono" (no rule 4.) and the former "poly" (rule 4. applies), as an additional tool option?
thanks
ps. today's qtractor >= 0.9.36.11git.7b0f34 already features this 3rd implementation ;)