[done] More Precise Bpm Setting

Yeah, it’s not a high priority feature, sure, but Renoise definitely should support fractional BPMs at some point, like any ‘mature’ sequencer should.

i really don’t understand this kind of response, it’s not like anyone would force you to use fractional bpm,
the request appeared after new timing structure has been introduced and which would surely make fractional bpm much easier to introduce. “use other tools” is really not an answer, besides, it would be nice to have things like timestretch introduced in advanced sample editor sometime in future.

I don’t think so: fractional BPM could have been introduced in older versions with the same effort than new one; I mean: what should be the benefits of new timing regarding this problem? If you are able to set 180.5BPM instead of 180BPM, you are done, regardless of timing engine, we are not talking about recording resolution here.

Well it’s like this.

I’m a developer. Distraction sucks. If i’m spending effort working on an existing build of an application, and that application has serious biz like bugs or broken features that need fixing, stuff that the open majority have no use for gets put waaayyy down the list.

I’m saying if it costs the developers even a modicum of effort to include this particular feature, then i’d rather they spend that modicum of effort elsewhere.

This is the Renoise 2.0 prerelease suggestion forum after all.

yeah that s true!! it s not like asking the hell!!
you added the name of vst companies on the list onv2.0 … hemmm it was less usefull than fine bpm for example

Hey guys, I wanted to add my 2 cents to this one. I’m a hip hop guy and make my music by sampling records. I’ve spent my career using hardware samplers, mostly E-MU SP1200 and Akai MPC 60 / 3000.

I realize I’m not the typical renoise user, but I have used it a fair amount and although I really love it, I was never able to make it my centerpiece sampler for a few minor reasons. The more organic timing options in 2.0 are a huge help and I’ve been revisiting it over the last few weeks.

Having fractional BPM is one more tool that is invaluable for making chopped samples from records work right. Its a must for remixing too. Renoise doesn’t do time stretching (which I prefer), so changing the pitch of samples to make them fit can be undesirable for tuning reasons. Sometimes it comes down to needing a tiny bit of BPM control to make samples work properly.

Also, certain hardware pieces like the SP1200 drift badly, so they are better as slaves. Gotta have fractional BPM for that! My work around thus far is to have Renoise slave to an MPC, still not ideal but it helps.

Djing records with fractional BPM is not a problem at all, that’s what pitch control is for. I DJ with records that have human players all the time.

I like Renoise because it hasn’t tried to be everything to everyone, but since it is now a BPM based sequencer, you gotta have decimals.

Thank you for all the hard work on 2.0, I may switch completely to Renoise yet!

Would it make sense to at least be able to enter more precise values in the small BPM box? So you would see what you see now but can, if you want, enter a more precise value when double clicking the BPM value.

The floating BPM problem is just a visual/GUI problem we have to solve. The player already accepts, can handle precise BPM values.

Personally, I don’t mind that the interface doesn’t actually display the entire value. After all, we might be dealing with a fractional value of .025 bpm. How would we display that, it’s twice as many digits?

I suggest that we simply put a dot after the value, to indicate that it has a fractional part, such as “125.”

Then, you can see the value, either by displaying the tooltip, or by doubleclicking the field itself, going into input mode…?

Maybe the BPM should be in italics if it’s a decimal point?

Or maybe just add a decimal point at the end if a precise bpm is entered? There seems to be room for it.

and how would the fractional bpm (after the decimal point) be controlled on the pattern via F0xx commands ??
there needs to be an automation control for fine tuning…

like i suggested earlier: why not have an automation in the master track that manipulates the defined bpm?

it could be like the panning automation graph: the middle is the defined bpm.
top most value = double bpm / bottom most value = half bpm.

Thats great and how it should be, but unfortunately too much for a beta, sorry.

Alright, lets try this and see if this works…


Just think what you could do with that and a bunch of LFO… :w00t:

Now that’s a very valid reason. I had to do stuff like that more than once, and had to use odd BPMs all the time to keep the stuff in sync. Stretching/ compressing the video is not an acceptable solution - or at least that’s what the director or editor will tell you. ;)

BTW: Hi there everyone, first post, Renoise is great, bought it a few hours ago, probably the best 60 bucks I’ve ever spent, love the beta, keep up the good work, etc… :)

It should not even be a discussion whether we need more precise bpm settings or not. Should have been implemented ages ago.

That, and a tap (bpm) button.

When musicians taps their tempo it often results in a bpm setting with four desimals and so on.
I try to use Renoise in every possible setting, but it’s bpm inaccuracy is forcing me to timestretch stuff I really DONT wont to timestretch.
There are great timestreching tools out there, but it really should not be necessary…

Well it is implemented now, so it is all good. :guitar:


I like the dot solution, but it “rounds up”, in the display: 90.5 becomes 91. Is this on purpose?

It just seems more intuitive to me if 90.5 was shown as 90. What do you think?

ermi: See: http://www.renoise.com/board/index.php?showtopic=18347

Seems to be fixed for next version.