Tap

Message Topic Search Topic Options Post Reply Create New Topic Printable Version

   just a simple tapper may work out fine at least to bring in new business unless LOR or LSP has something better.  Once they get here, they can learn new ways.  How hard is a simple tapper to write the programming for?    

I dont think the tapper will be "Value Adding" to Aurora as a program, but I think it will be Value adding to Aurora as a marketing tool.

Author	Message Topic Search Topic Options Post Reply Create New Topic Printable Version
ChrisL1976 Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Visit Members Homepage Add to Buddy List Beta Testers Joined: 01 Sep 2008 Location: Kankakee, Ill Online Status: Offline Posts: 1341	Quote Reply Posted: 19 Dec 2008 at 11:34am
	just a simple tapper may work out fine at least to bring in new business unless LOR or LSP has something better. Once they get here, they can learn new ways. How hard is a simple tapper to write the programming for? I dont think the tapper will be "Value Adding" to Aurora as a program, but I think it will be Value adding to Aurora as a marketing tool.
	Chris www.lightsonsixth.com

Pony_God Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Senior Member Joined: 01 Sep 2008 Location: Naples, FL Online Status: Offline Posts: 551	Quote Reply Posted: 19 Dec 2008 at 12:07pm
	Right, I don't feel it's value for the software, but valuable for ease of transition from other applications. 3 hours, well... 2 hours or so for me. FireFly takes a while since I have to determine both the effect and color. chases are slow because of the amount of time to find the start, then the end, then determine the number of notes in the shase, then split it not always using the "split" because the notes could be diferent lengths, then adding the ramp over a few timning marks to create the tail. Then possibly reversing the entire chase that was just done. After that, it's copy/paste if your lucky to have multiple chase-sceanes in a row. Wish Lizt took a long time because of the vast amount of notes that I have the mini-trees follow, and then at the beggining there are two seperate note/beats. UUUuuuhhhhhggggg..... Then there's the classic music... You tell me where a single 'beat' is in 'I'll Be Home For Christmas' and the Grinch drives me up the wall. Bough's of Holly went fairly quick, but it still took about 8 hours to add timing marks, then another 8 hours to add in the mini-tree movements, arch leaps, and Firefly notes/colors. Then possibly another 6 hours to add in misc. overall colors, fades, effects, and movements around the rest of the yeard. See, you have a nicely defined area to work with. Nice meta-tree, a grouping of mini-trees, leaping FF arches, and house edges. For us, we have 100' to you left, a dozen pine trees, each of a single color, then a large busy tree with 4 colors and 2 flood colors, a swingset, 3 colors on the roof, 3 colors on the tree in front of the office, 3 colors on the garage, 3 bells on the garage, 5 snowflakes on the roof, 12 panels of color on the ground, a scrub oak with 4 colors and a flood, and them more misc wrapped trees 50' to your left. There are only a few areas that are well defined, and dense, our display is spead out over our entire yard. Next year, we're getting more dense, so that I don't think will hurt sequenceing time. The next large problem we're going to have is when we start moving the 500' tward the main road, then we're going to end up with more misc, general, overall lights/actions/floods/misc. stuff that will become more complex to determine timing for. So it depends on the song, I think the fastest was 22 hours for a 3 min song, the slowest is.... 40 hours on a 4 min song, and I'm not even done. What song? -> The Grinch So I'm the slowest sequencer around, right?
	Fine. You're so smart you rig up the lights. D-Light users Unite!

bdkeen Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Visit Members Homepage Add to Buddy List Beta Testers Joined: 31 Dec 2007 Location: Easton,PA Online Status: Offline Posts: 380	Quote Reply Posted: 19 Dec 2008 at 2:03pm
	I fell into Group #3 and somewhat Group #1 when I initially started using Aurora. Had played around with Spectrum and could never really get the hang of it. Used Vixen and had some sequencing done - used the tapper then to lay down the basic beat. But since Vixen and D-Light don't play together this was just a learning experience. I understood the Spectragraph somewhat at first and as I used I came to rely upon it greatly and have come to be able to pick out a lot of things just looking at that blueish stuff. (but then I can still read the holes in 5 bit, 8 bit punched paper tape and IBM punch cards).. There may be times I'd like to use a tapper but for the most part I personally fouind that I don't need it. It would be on my list of 'if it were there I might use it now and then'. I'd sooner see the minor bug items in both Aurora and Borealis all get fixed first and the documentation have a chance to catch up a little to better help first time users. I found Aurora very intuitive and easy to use once I had just a little understanding of what everything is.


Bubba Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Visit Members Homepage Add to Buddy List DMX Joined: 27 Dec 2007 Location: Georgia Online Status: Offline Posts: 41	Quote Reply Posted: 19 Dec 2008 at 5:01pm
	Don't like the tapper and frankly if it slows down my computer one little bit I'm against it completely. After you learn the software you can sequence really fast. After the adjustment period of getting use to Aurora people won't want or need a tapper. Heck all a tapper does is place a vague reference to a beat which you must adjust to get right taking up loads of time. Well Aurora already marks the beats, you lay the lines where you want.
	www.brightonbrittain.com

rmonty Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Newbie Joined: 05 Nov 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 12	Quote Reply Posted: 20 Dec 2008 at 8:32am
	I'm a newbie, but also a musician and programmer and here are my thoughts. At first I couldn't stand placing the event markers for every beat and really wanted the tapper. I have gotten a little more used to not having it, but may I suggest why it would be useful. Sometimes the music has so many instruments or voices, that you really can't see where the downbeat is in the spectrogram. Singling out a specific frequency rarely works due to the changing notes (i.e. voices). Having a visual plus aural way of placing event markers would be ideal, however the only way to do this is to allow placing event markers during playback, or allowing a pause function during playback. Another drawback is just using the mouse to try to click and place something accurately (Ever notice how much space on a button you have to click in an application). Even if you don't add something to add event markers during playback a pause function would be awesome. It is annoying always having to stop and then playback from a certain point only to lose where I was when I stopped. Let me add that even if you add a way to place event markers during playback, the user can still go back and adjust (by dragging) the markers to match the spectrogram. Event marking during playback would allow for those songs that have changes in beat in the middle of the song which is quite common in classical music. Placing a marker at the beginning and end and then doing a split is nice, but doesn't work for all songs.

jberner Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Groupie Joined: 12 Sep 2008 Location: Ruther Glen, VA Online Status: Offline Posts: 85	Quote Reply Posted: 20 Dec 2008 at 9:17am
	I am very analytical but have no music training. I tend to agonize over adding timing marks. I have a very hard time pinning down on,on,on,off,on types of beats and aurora doesnt get them either on the spectrograph when voices and other 'busy' instruments are playing. I have figured out over time how to find many beat that aurora doesnt catch especially for bass but finding midrange instrument beats like guitars or flutes that are in the same ranges as vocals can be near impossible it see in the visualizer, especially when it is a singular event and not repetitious. I might listen to the same spot 10 times just to place a single mark. I dont know that a tapper would make that more accurate but it would get it pretty close. I have worked around this by just dropping the mark and sliding it around until it look and sounds right. Great for a one time event but a pain when a song might have 30 to 40 of them. At least the tapper would allow me to go throught the song placing marks where i need them in one swoop and then come back and tweak them. I spent 10 hours doing Wizards (my first show ever) and 3 hours tweaking a show i got from someone else, just on the timing events. Including timing marks I am averaging about 10-13 hours for a a 3 minutes song right now. I would love a tapper just to put close marks and then adjust, and then cut and paste them. I would also love it if the cut and paste function worked faster. Edited by jberner - 20 Dec 2008 at 9:30am

shawmc Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Newbie Joined: 28 Nov 2008 Location: Sac CA Online Status: Offline Posts: 7	Quote Reply Posted: 05 Sep 2009 at 6:45pm
	I'd like to add that this is my 2nd season using Aurora, and it is the only light sequencing software I have used. I have wanted a tapper from the moment I started using the program. Not for the basic beats of the music, that is usually very easy with the spectrogram and the split cell function. But for the melody or fills that may be hidden behind other instruments or vocals, sometimes it is near impossible to see something in the spectrograph. Honestly I'm surprised it is still a discussion point and not in the software already. The argument that it will dumb down the software and make it a "show in a box" is ridiculous. How is the W2E not the most "dumbed down" of all tools? As a matter of fact I sometimes use the W2E in place a a tapper when I don't have the time or patience to figure out a section perfectly. But that is a crutch not a fix, and its far from perfect. I would gladly give up the W2E for a tapper, since that is the only time I use the W2E.

Lightupky Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Newbie Joined: 01 Sep 2008 Location: Louisville Ky Online Status: Offline Posts: 19	Quote Reply Posted: 28 Sep 2009 at 7:15pm
	tapper i can live with out but i would like to be able to change the spacing between the top and bottom of the spectrogram.

Pony_God Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Senior Member Joined: 01 Sep 2008 Location: Naples, FL Online Status: Offline Posts: 551	Quote Reply Posted: 29 Sep 2009 at 7:56am
	What I would like to see is to be able to have the music looking, AND ability to move the timing lines. It's always been... listen, add, listen, adjust, listen, adjust, listen, adjust. I'll say that I don't "miss" a tapper, but would probably use it to get the basic layout of the song first. As for the beat-finder... Well, I ignore it. It seems to never find the beats or is always a hair off.
	Fine. You're so smart you rig up the lights. D-Light users Unite!