Richard Seymour wrote: > luis jure wrote: > >> el Sat, 8 Mar 2003 14:01:32 +0400 >> Guy Daniel CLOTILDE <guy.clotilde@xxxxxxxxxx> escribió: >> >> >> >>> On Tue, 4 Mar 2003 12:38:32 +0000 >>> Tim Hall <tim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote / a écrit: >>> >>> >>> >>>> each beat lasts 60/bpm seconds, >>>> >>> >>> I don't understand. Is it 60 bpm/s ? >>> >>> >> >> >> >> no, it's 60/bpm >> >> you know bpm means "beats per minute", so the duration of a beat is: >> >> 60 (seconds in a minute) >> --- >> bpm (number of beats in a minute) >> >> at a metronome marking of 60, each beats is a second long (60/60). >> the higher the mm, the shorter each beat: for mm=120 each beat is 0.5 >> seconds (60/120); for lower mm, beats are longer, for mm=40 each beat is >> 1.5 seconds (60/40) >> >> > The way I look at the word "per" is to just turn it into a divisor > sign, so that a 60 bpm song would be: > > 60 beats > -------- > minute > > a 120 bpm song is twice as fast, and hence has twice as many beats in > a minute, etc. > > -Rich > > explanatory PS: 60/bpm would equal 60/beats/minute == 60 minutes/beat > which would actually be 1/60 beat/minute , read as one sixtieth of a > beat per minute. At least that's the way I would read it... > replying to my own post... I think I completely misread the thread. Don't mind my pedantry. -Rich
