This is a feature request. Feature requests can be voted up by supporters.
None
User avatar
Rhythm Incarnate
1,216 posts
Offline
I feel like this discussion is getting more complicated than timing the beatmap itself
Whistle Blower
28 posts
Offline
By the way Endaris you don't seem to be aware of that, but "beats per minute" basically means that you count the number of beat in one minute so... nonsense ?
It's basically what the autoBPM of osu does when you tap the beat, except that maybe it removes a few start and end beats if it makes the mean deviation too big (I'm not sure, idk how it's written but that's how I'd do it).
In any case, this is not appropriate in short time sections (like with maybe 16/24 beats or shorter) as it can't give you enough precision. However, if you spend a few minutes listening very carefully to the first and last beat of a section, you can precisely time it, and then be really procise on the BPM by counting the number of beats.

I agree _Meep_, and I deplore it. The reaquest is simple, but as apparently I'm not able to make myself clear enough in one post, I have to discuss with people "attacking" me to try and make myself understood. I still think that it'd be a great tool in timing for a lot of songs/musics.

Cheers :)

Edit: Endaris, if you could please not pollute the thread with your image, it's inappropriate.
User avatar
Rhythm Incarnate
667 posts
Offline
hey who WOULD count BEATS for a whole MINUTE for the bpm? LOOOOOL
can you clear up once again what do you want

btw electronic music is different from like irl played music
Whistle Blower
28 posts
Offline
Sorry for the obvious misunderstanding. I was just talking about "BPM" to point out that the primary method is counting the beats (which osu does for you in automatic mode) so that's not nonsense. Because a long as you're timing a short section (for example 5 ou 10 seconds), you can't rely on the precision of the auto BPM, which is of course pretty poor in this situation. Thus, you would indeed have to count yourself the beats.

Clarifying what I ask for :

In the timing panel, for each section, there are "offset" and "BPM" boxes. The idea is to replace the lonely "BPM" box with 2 boxes + 2 checkboxes. There would still be one "BPM" box, with its check box next to it. And the new box would be the number of beats before mext secion (if there is one, otherwise left blank), with its checkbox. The effect of the checkbox is that if the offset is changed, the checked box won't change value, but the other one will adjust automatically.
Example no. 1 : BPM box checked : If you change the offset, the bpm doesn't change, but then mechanically, the number of beats before the next section will change (increase if offset decreases and other way around in the other case).
Example no. 2 : Number of beats checked : If the offset is changed then the BPM will automatically ajust to keep the same number of beats before next section (which makes sense because usually if you barely change the offset, it's not to add more beats, but to adjust the beep sound to the beats). Then for example if the offset is increased, the BPM will decrease, and the other way around in the opposite case.

Is it clearer now ? Maybe I should have presented this like this earlier, instead of trying to motivate it.

Motivation : The point of this is that on a map hard to time, with a lot of short time sections when you can't rely on autoBPM, you will have to do trial and error by adjusting the offset often. With this new way, you won't have to recompute by hand the BPM every time.

Thanks for your interest.
User avatar
Beatmap Nominator
927 posts
Offline
I take a general but not in depth look of the whole thread, your concept and idea of making a new timing panel is really innovative, but it is unnecessary to do so:

Ordinary music, which accounts for the majority of the music genres, have constant and stable BPM, so as offset. One single red timing point (uninherited timing point) is already fine in timing the song.

While, there are indeed some scenarios that the music contains multi-bpm with different offsets. They can be well fixed by a really careful ear and mind, with the consideration of musical theory which involves in bars counting (not beats conunting). Bars counting is already achieved in timing panel, in F2. X:Y is located at the top right corner. X represents the no. of bars, starting from 0; Y represents the beats of a bar.

In time signature 4/4, 4 beats= 1 bar. In time signature 3/4, 3 beats= 1 bar. In the expression of music, usually 3/4 songs have different bars cutting edges which make the common '4 bars conunting method' not working. For example, https://osu.ppy.sh/b/1242057&m=1

Shifting of offsets (+- 15ms, a general acceptable range for offset) does not interfere the bars distribution and BPM at all. It is not really a big worry while timing a multi- BPM music.

Timing does not really require any musical theories, common senses should work well in common cases. The main concept of an accurate timing is that: the timing is beneficial for a mapper to put their notes as accurate as possible meanwhile the gameplay and mapping effect (you will know it later if you are involved in slider placement across multi-BPM red timing points) would not be on expense.
Whistle Blower
28 posts
Offline
Hey thanks for your interest, sorry It took me so long to answer, I've been busy.

Quote:
Ordinary music, which accounts for the majority of the music genres, have constant and stable BPM, so as offset. One single red timing point (uninherited timing point) is already fine in timing the song

Hmm, not a good argument imo, what abour Aall the other maps ? There are a lot of them. And it's essential to the osu! game.

Quote:
While, there are indeed some scenarios that the music contains multi-bpm with different offsets. They can be well fixed by a really careful ear and mind, with the consideration of musical theory which involves in bars counting (not beats conunting).


Hmm, bar counting is essentially the same as beats counting, since it's easy to go from one to another, it just depends on your signature.
But I don't know what you are refering to. Carefully listening is noting the exact start and end points of a section, I guess. And then ? You can't count bars since you don't have the bpm yet. The only way to proceed when you have the start and end point is to count the number of beats, and compute the bpm using BPM=(number of beats)*60/(duration of section). And applying this formula over and over and over when you just move your starting point by 5ms to adjust is painful man. Really. I have finished my map, it now contains approximately 120 timing sections, and a lot of trial and error went there, to adjust to the + or -5ms. With an automatically computed BPM based on the constant number of beats, I'd have saved A LOT of time.

15ms is way too much for imprecision imo. If I shit all my map by 15ms, it becomes unplayable.

Quote:
Timing does not really require any musical theories, common senses should work well in common cases.

Again, what about other cases ? And why should someone with theoretical knowledge not be able to enjoy it by fixing the number of beat if it's useful, and then find the accurate start and end points of each section to the 5ms or less ?

Thanks again.
User avatar
Rhythm Incarnate
667 posts
Offline
so you’re getting the bpm by counting all the beats in the song?
can you demonstate how you time a map, by recording a video or some sort?
i have no fucking idea how its done

nobody uses the tapping-to-the-beat for bpm function.
Whistle Blower
28 posts
Offline
I will definitely try to do that today, and I'll edit this message to add the link. Good idea.

Edit: I'm back! Before going through this long process of recording myself etc etc... I browsed a little bit on youtube, and found the perfect video to explain myself and show how useful my feature would be.
Look at this video on expert timing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pyat7XWe2kg
At 1:40 for example, you see he needs to adjust the bpm (or the offset in this case) so that the sections work well together. Doing this once is no big deal. But then, imagine he offsets a little bit the start of his section to line it up with the music. Now he'd have to AGAIN adjust the bpm of the section, and also the bpm of the section before ! So each offset change induces 2 BPM adjustments.
If the number of beats was kept constant, the BPM would auto adjust, and the would be just nothing else to do than fine tune the offset, with as many tries as you want in a very short period of time :)

Am I being clear enough? What do you think? I really think it could be a game changer for expertly timing some maps :D
User avatar
Rhythm Incarnate
513 posts
Offline
This is too complicated. I can already see the flaw in my point of understanding.

Not to discourage your point of view or something, but mapping a music with various BPM change is painful, especially classical music. From what I try to understand, you're trying to remove the accurate way of adjusting BPMs that vary, by adjusting the offset/BPM without repeating. This is mindblowing, but this method isn't accurate.
Whistle Blower
28 posts
Offline
Dear O2MasterFX,

I don't think you completly understood, because what I propose makes it easier to be very accurate.

You know how people are used to adjust the BPM with the little arrows in order that the last white tick of a section it exactly on the start of the next section ? Well, first of all, this is pretty accurate, but not 100%. Indeed, to get even more precise, you can compute the bpm by using the formula I described earlier. But that's not an obligation.
Secondly (and most importantly), the main point is that if after having this done, you listen to your timing and think "oh damn, this section starts a little bit too early, I have to add 10ms to the offset", then when you do it, you again have to adjust the bpm with the arrows so that the last white tick of previous section lines up with the new start of this section. And the same applies to the end of the new section with the start of the next one.
Whereas, if you had said previously to osu! that "there are exactly 8 ticks in this section", then adjusting the offset would automatically change the BPM so that the white ticks perfectly work together. This is in order to get more precision with fewer manipulations to do.

And I add, that the way I propose it to be changes nothing to the user who doesn't want to use that "advanced" feature. And for those who would like to use it, it's just a box to chekc, and a number of ticks to write.
Whistle Blower
28 posts
Offline
I invite those who are curious to see what my timing/mapping gives, to try the ap I just finished :)
You can find it here https://osu.ppy.sh/s/687770
If you have a comment on the map, I'd appreciate you notifying me on the appropriate thread of the map. And of course, if you like it, don't hesitate to let people know, and even "kudosu" it, it would mean a lot <3
***End of self-promotion***
User avatar
Rhythm Incarnate
667 posts
Offline
elie520 wrote:
I will definitely try to do that today, and I'll edit this message to add the link. Good idea.

Edit: I'm back! Before going through this long process of recording myself etc etc... I browsed a little bit on youtube, and found the perfect video to explain myself and show how useful my feature would be.
Look at this video on expert timing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pyat7XWe2kg
At 1:40 for example, you see he needs to adjust the bpm (or the offset in this case) so that the sections work well together. Doing this once is no big deal. But then, imagine he offsets a little bit the start of his section to line it up with the music. Now he'd have to AGAIN adjust the bpm of the section, and also the bpm of the section before ! So each offset change induces 2 BPM adjustments.
If the number of beats was kept constant, the BPM would auto adjust, and the would be just nothing else to do than fine tune the offset, with as many tries as you want in a very short period of time :)

Am I being clear enough? What do you think? I really think it could be a game changer for expertly timing some maps :D

my understanding is you’re wrong about something
changing the offset doesn’t change the BPM. the BPM is always constant. the reason to change offset in the first place is to adjust the accuracy of the beat landing on the actual beat of the song, and it doesn’t HAVE to line up with the next section.
Whistle Blower
28 posts
Offline
I now understand what you don't get from my perspective.
Imagine you have a timing section starting at 1:00.000 that is PERFECT, you won't ever touch that, ok?
Now imagine your first time section starts at 0:02.500, and you have a certain BPM. You're supposed to have the last white tick of your first section equal to the first of the 1:00.000 section for one simple reason: they both represent the same beat. Do yo agree with me until now? (I hope so :D)

Now, let's say you figure out that you're first section starts a little late, because the first beat is actually at 0:02.450. Now you have to change the offset of your first section, and sadly, the last tick of this section will be at 0:59.950, NOT 1:00.000, and it will not match the music. What's the solution then? Adjusting the BPM to this small change, that is recompute the BPM, either basing yourself on the number of beats, or by using the arrows (which is almost precise but quite as much), or by multiplying your previous BPM by (old duration of the section)/(new duration of the section) (this is equivalent to counting the number of beats in a way. It's just doing a ratio of the forumula involving the number of beats, but since the number of beat doesn't change it simplifies out, so do the '60').

In either cases, you have to change the BPM, and do it manually is OK, BUT it could EASILY be done automatically.

Actually, if the "counting the number of beats" is disturbing you, I think another way to implement this would be solely basing the computation on the previous duration of the section and the new duration. This would also work.

Thanks for continuing answering, so that the potential miscommunication can be overcome :)

By the way, you indicated on my map's thread that it should be single BPM, I totally don't agree, and if you're sure, I would like to see the BPM/offset you propose for your single section, so people (including me) could try and see what it gives. Thanks.
Reply 28 posts jump | prev  1, 2

Users browsing this forum: None


Jump to: