aener

Shhhh. I've actually done some work today. You can't ask me to do more... I'm a student. Plus there's a few things regarding the actual coding I've yet to find out how to do, so there

Excellent. Many many many loves for you. I posted that thinking it was hopeless, and that I'd have to sign up to a maths forum and get told I was a f**king idiot a million times over. Thanks! I'll let you know how it goes. Had more than enough for today, but when I do it...

I got (Edit: -)3387, and mine rounds off to the nearest mS. I'd say that's pretty bang on. Was that the big complex'n'nasty one?

If you get a slightly higher budget, Pig Pro DH's are AWESOME. I'm just about to replace mine that's had at least four years of abuse, and that's not even due to the bearings. The top cup's worn having been in about twelve different frames. Really great headset. Another vote for hammer and wood.

Whatever you've using to get these figures... Can you pick a figure and state how much it estimates? I'll check it against the way I've been doing it in the DAW. Sample's a reversy-type sound anyway, so got a bit of leeway thanks to that.

and Ben Rowlands. I wouldn't even say anything.

I've got the sample in question in a DAW, changing the BPM, lining the end of the sample up with a bar line, going back two bars, the number of mS on the readout of that minus the mS when cursor's on the start of the sample. That make sense? I can draw a picture if not

It should be pretty simple so it'll run without any lag, but then it can be pretty nasty (up to a point). Something that'll give a return within +-50mS as a maximum should be fine, though within 10mS would be ideal. In the interest of helping you guys to help me, I did some extras (please note the correction I made in an above comment is also in here.) 60 -4000 80 -2000 100 -800 120 0 140 569 160 995 180 1333 200 1598 220 1815 240 2000 260 2152 280 2283 300 2400 320 2498 Thanks for this. "Lifesaver" is an appropriate term, I think. Edit: Majority of BPM usage will be in the 80-200 range. I put in the higher values in case it made calculating the curve easier. Edit2: Is that graph in the latter post the one from "delay = (4000*bpm-480000)/bpm"? It looks pretty damned close in the most likely uses!

Ah right - no... they were just the BPMs I could be bothered to find out by actually changing it and lining up manually. Would more be helpful? If it gets a decent result I don't mind rinsing a bunch of time on it. You were right though - the last one should be 2498 if that makes a difference. Looks like we'd've prefered it to go 98 the other way though

I'll check them again now, but I'm pretty sure. Would +4000ing make the task any easier? Can do that no trouble at all. Edit: that line you gave is the same one Excel gave me. I was hoping I'd done something wrong and that wasn't actually what I wanted.

Well that's not particularly important anyway - that was just the context of the problem. If you can solve the problem without the context the super-kudos to you! I made a graph in Excel - I looked around for ages for how to do that, but couldn't find it anywhere. Yeah - that's exactly it. A quadratic was just a guess from the rough shape of it. Don't know much about different types of lineation (if that's even a word), logarithmic? Whatever... I don't mind what it is, so long as I can express it in a language based around C. (Not the crazy triple layered things they have in the movies )

Hello. First off - I'm not asking you to do my maths homework for me. Those days are over I need to make an expression of some sort to calculate a variable to use in a piece of software. I'm making a software instrument, and one of the important aspects of the sound is a reverse-type sound, where the ending is more important than the beginning. I have a 4000ms sound file, which is exactly the right length at 120BPM (eight beats/two bars). Obviously, when it's a faster BPM, I'll need to get it to start playing X milliseconds in to the sample so that it arrives at the end of the sample after two bars and vice versa I've found a few values manually, but I need an expression so that when the user sets the BPM to whatever value they want, it'll work out how many milliseconds to leave before playing or chop off the start. Here are the values: BPM MS 60 -4000 80 -2000 100 -800 120 0 180 1333 240 2000 320 2400 If not having to deal with negatives makes it much easier, I can happily alter the sample to become 4000ms longer, and set 60bpm to the minimum. Been looking around for a while now. I can make a graph to show the trend, but I need to be able to calculate reasonably precisely the length of time with the BPM input. The short version: What is/how do I determine the equation of an inverse quadratic graph (specifically, the values listed above)? Really hope someone can help. It's the only thing holding me up at the minute.

I know it's a wasteful mindset - but it'll cost you more to fix up than it would to just buy a new one. Also - I'm reasonably confident there's no realistic way of putting sealed bearings in there. Not 100% on that, but somewhere around 98-99.

I can't do after Christmas. Staying with parents from evening of 24th to 30th, then going away for a week.

Possibly. My parents like me to go home before then normally, but I'll see if I can wrangle it ...Bit f**king early though Dan. It's only just November.

~£220 including "express postage". What a waste that was. Normal postage it would've been <£200. Really good value actually.

Booooooooooodiful.

Nice hoses Riding was sweet too.

...Josh told me Sunday. I arranged to see me parents tomorrow because of this Would you be up for Sunday too?

There's only so many ways to make a frame when they're all trying to do the same thing.

I'm falling out with him Really liked the riding in the first couple of videos, but it seems it's getting more and more obscure and less and less awesome in each video he brings out. Fakie down the stairs was cool, having said that.

Every f**king time... OP - do a search... There's a thread asking a similar question from not long ago which gives a very strong answer. Edit:

'Kinel guys! I was going to anyway, but I can take a hint, however subtle. Haha. Just gotta hope my time off a nice bike hasn't made me so shit I disappoint you all Sorry in advance.

See what you mean about the paint now... Should've left it at distance shots Carbon weave does make it look lush though.