Deprecated: mysql_connect(): The mysql extension is deprecated and will be removed in the future: use mysqli or PDO instead in /storage/content/49/145849/famitracker.com/public_html/forum/classes/dbHandler.php on line 29
FamiTracker
"900 BPM" songs have surfaced occasionally within the FamiTracker community but I've never really understood why. I mean, it's great and SUPER FAST and all but it doesn't make much sense.
In most cases, a speed 1 song can be reproduced exactly by using a higher (slower) speed settings and creating several instruments. I believe such a module is more presentable, less tedious in the long run (no copy-pasting long fine pitch effect chains for vibrato) and makes future revisions much MUCH easier.
The only circumstances in which speed 1 should be used is if the module requires very intricate detail (e.g. sound effects utilising hardware sweeps) or if using instruments is impossible (e.g. NSF import).
In addition, the name "900 BPM song" is completely false - none of the songs produced are actually 900 BPM. The only reason "900 BPM" is displayed on the status bar is because the row highlighting has not been changed from 4/16. "Speed 1 song" would make a lot more sense.
I never got why these modules became so popular, but I believe those making them prefer this style because it provides more flexibility than simply using instruments. You're not bound to whatever that instrument dictates forever, you can always alter that vibrato effect a little to avoid a nasty phase reset or such.
I personally never had the patience to get into it because I want to have fun using Famitracker and slow tedious processes such as this aren't my cup of tee. Kudos to those making them but I'd never be able to pull off something like this.
I track at speed 1 because I find myself able to add more to it. It's certainly more flexible to be able to use one instrument for everything, and add very small and intricate details in the sections that I feel matter most.
Also, I personally completely ditched the chains of Pxx for 4xx and 3xx. Overall, speed 1 has become the easiest for me to work with.
I love Modules. No matter the speed. I myself will mostly use Speed 2. It's more fun to look at, and you still have most of the freedom or control to do as you please.
It DOES get annoying to have to create 2-3 of the same instruments but with minor tweaks.
_______________________
[url=http://soundcloud.com/fezuke/sets]My 8-Bit Soundcloud
[url=http://soundcloud.com/fezuke-2/sets]My Other Project Soundcloud
Speed 1 is when you need interleaving melodies in one channel as arpeggios, or elimination of Gxx effects, or elimination of 0xy effects, or more instrument slots in multichip FTMs, or rarely precise tempo control.
the other causes are more likely than not redundant due to the advent of release envelopes and fixed arpeggio
Sometimes, though, you need it for using certain chips (VRC7 and 5B), and fixing phase reset.
Though I agree, when at all possible, I avoid speed 1.
_______________________
"im going to continue making this crazy stuff then after a while my style will be so sick that you will be like damn suuun that shit is so sick i dont even get it. i will be like bro its ok.. you dont have to." -omgdonut
[quote=ipi]the name "900 BPM song" is completely false - none of the songs produced are actually 900 BPM[/quote]
[quote=ipi]"Speed 1 song" would make a lot more sense.[/quote]
I want to first note that this is simply [b]not true[/b]. "Speed 1" would be how fast Famitracker renders the notes, Though 900BPM measures how fast the notes are. I'll admit that there are no true 900BPM songs, in the musical sense. It's simply never been done, and probably never will. But the fast remains the same. I mean, 3/4 timing in famitracker is almost [b]never[/b] true 3/4. It has 3 measures in a frame, sure. But most people don't bother changing the row highlight, and therefore, there are still [b]4[/b] notes in a measure. Yet they are still 3/4 timing songs. But in the musical sense, these songs are not "3/4", but they are "musically incorrect".
As for [b]why[/b] make 900BPM songs, the answer, in my own humble opinion, is thus;
1) acuracy is greatly improved: you can do pretty much [b]anything[/b] with a 900BPM module.
2) more fun to look at. Simple as that. Though, to be honest, I basically just said that looks are important in a song
3) It is much simpler to use 1 or 2 "blanks" for each chip than it is to have a thousand instruments given names like "SQUARE#592". You simply have no idea what SQUARE#592 does.
I made a 900BPM song before. It didn't work out very well, but nonetheless I rather enjoyed it. It give you a sense of accomplishment when you see those notes go by and think to yourself "I did this. Little Wheatly did this." (wait, what?)
Some other places I've tried to conquer:
[url=http://chipmusic.org/ch3dd4r]Le Chipmusic
[url=http://battleofthebits.org/barracks/Profile/CH3DD4R/]Le BattleOfTheBits
It [b]is[/b] more appropriate to call this FTMs with new words like "frame-precision" or "ultra-fast", because speed 1 does not imply the proper tempo value (150 by default), and 900 BPM (3600 rows per minute) does not imply a clock speed of 60 Hz, otherwise the FTM ceases to guarantee the same maximum resolution and consiatency in every row. Note that in other trackers it is fine to call their modules "speed 1" if tick duration is independent from tempo (IT, S3M, LSDj etc.).
In general "speed" and "tempo" in FamiTracker only work in tandem to give a wider selection of module speed. What FamiTracker algorithmically obtains as BPM does not always determine the BPM of the actual song.
For convenience sake the FTM does not even need to be purely 150 tempo and speed 1; a sequence of repeating Fxx effects could generate more tempo values that would result in a bar spanning 64 rows.
At speed 1, tempo 150, and 60 Hz engine speed, the maximum longest song you can make is 9 minutes long. For some that would be long enough, but for others it'd be terribly restrictive.
With my experience with the 900 BPM (incorrect, true, but that's how I always named it and it shall remain that way for me), it came down to my personal disappointment with what I made. When I was restricted to instruments of simplicity, my covers became...well, not as good as I wanted them to be. Thanks to the quick speed and detail coming from patience, I found that the product was, personally, more satisfying.
Of course, it comes down to personal preference. Some people would rather use many many MANY instruments at a slower tempo, while others prefer to have complete control on the board. It's also cool to see how, in the channels, each one changes through the effects and pitch changes, etc. I always considered the 900 BPM the "Hard Mode" of Famitracker and when I ask my friends about that term, they look at me and just go "I don't know how you keep up with all that, but it definitely looks harder than the traditional format everybody else does." When you work on something for a single hour and it sounds alrght, it's not as good of a feeling. After hours--even days at times for me--to get something perfect and it turns out better than you thought (like with me and Plug Man), you get something even the maker can't stop listening to.
Plus, as I see it, only a select few prefer 900 BPM over the other modes. To be honest, I've become one of them ^_^
_______________________
Smogon, Famitracker, YouTube...
So many places, so little creativity left...
[quote=ipi]it doesn't make much sense[/quote]I'm glad someone finally said it.
It really boils down to personal preference... and my preference is to not bother looking at those kinds of modules; what a headache.
Just give me the NSF, please. :P
Most everything done at Speed 1 can be replicated at higher speeds. I simply don't understand the desire to make one's workflow more cumbersome with tedious tasks like copying and pasting volume and effect macros for every note just for a sense of fine detail that could have been done with instruments, anyway.
Sincerest apologies if my words are a bit sharp; I guess I harbor some ill-will towards this subject. Don't mind me. XD
And yes, "900 BPM" is a misnomer, but I think we're stuck with it.
BPM doesn't really have as much to do with note length as it does beat length. You can have lots of really short notes without resorting to instruments, but the song's time signature and the number of rows-per-beat are what ultimately decide the tempo. "900 BPM" is just there as a helpful guideline under the default assumption that you will have 1 beat per 4 clock cycles, which is just silly. :D
_______________________
The only things certain in life are death and uncertainty.
This is pretty much a "haters gonna hate" thing, I think. Composers who would rather have everything in the tracker itself will prefer full-speed tracking over traditional tracking. Likewise, people who would rather avert all the fine-tuning and copy-pasting that come with full-speed tracking will fall back to conventional tracking. Both camps will insist on throwing stones at each other, calling the other's methods "insane", "crazy", "useless" or whatever negative adjective they can think of.
Such is life.
Personally, I've tried both, and I still prefer traditional tracking, as I think there's no real finesse involved in full-speed tracking. I like to cram as many frames per row as I can, but that's just me.
_______________________
Follow me on [url=https://twitter.com/jrlepage2a03]Twitter.
I record (some) NSFs on hardware. Feel free to [url=http://www.famitracker.com/forum/posts.php?id=3633]request a hardware render.
[quote=jrlepage]This is pretty much a "haters gonna hate" thing, I think. Composers who would rather have everything in the tracker itself will prefer full-speed tracking over traditional tracking. Likewise, people who would rather avert all the fine-tuning and copy-pasting that come with full-speed tracking will fall back to conventional tracking. Both camps will insist on throwing stones at each other, calling the other's methods "insane", "crazy", "useless" or whatever negative adjective they can think of.[/quote]
+1.
As a side note, my personal preference depends on the circumstance. For certain situations, such as a phase reset, VRC7, or 5B, I will use full-speed "900 BPM"; otherwise, I usually stick with conventional speed.
_______________________
"im going to continue making this crazy stuff then after a while my style will be so sick that you will be like damn suuun that shit is so sick i dont even get it. i will be like bro its ok.. you dont have to." -omgdonut
.png)
