davidizquierdo82 wrote:

Fannon wrote:

Is it possible to display the chord quicker? I'm not sure if this is caused by the animation or by the detection itself,. But other chord detectors display the played chord practically instantly.

That's another minor issue I'm also dealing with, I've since ever wondered why is it so sluggish at showing chords.. hopefully we can see some more improvements in this field

Also, version 8.0.4 is still not showing my chords (and I guess many other chords alike)

it's probably sluggish compared to other programs because it's spending a lot of CPU to produce sound and isn't budgeting as much for the detection.  that's fine with me.  it should be throwing as much CPU as possible at the model.  chord detection programs don't have to deal with this.

Actually, chord detection should not need much CPU at all and it's done already. After all, there's no sound processing involved, just taking MIDI data in and calculating the chord(s), maybe with a bit of time interpolation? The challenge is probably more with writing the code that does a good job at it. And maybe the chord detection is already instant and it's just a UI animation which makes it appear slow? In that case, it'd be an easy fix.

Fannon wrote:

Is it possible to display the chord quicker? I'm not sure if this is caused by the animation or by the detection itself,. But other chord detectors display the played chord practically instantly.

That's another minor issue I'm also dealing with, I've since ever wondered why is it so sluggish at showing chords.. hopefully we can see some more improvements in this field

Also, version 8.0.4 is still not showing my chords (and I guess many other chords alike)

it's probably sluggish compared to other programs because it's spending a lot of CPU to produce sound and isn't budgeting as much for the detection.  that's fine with me.  it should be throwing as much CPU as possible at the model.  chord detection programs don't have to deal with this.

miiindbullets wrote:

I've noticed it won't register any extensions beyond the 9th. Here's a Cm11, for example, which registers in Chordie but not Pianoteq:

Have you seen, that your example is working now in Pianoteq 8.0.4?

Awesome!

Is it possible to display the chord quicker? I'm not sure if this is caused by the animation or by the detection itself,. But other chord detectors display the played chord practically instantly.

That's another minor issue I'm also dealing with, I've since ever wondered why is it so sluggish at showing chords.. hopefully we can see some more improvements in this field

Also, version 8.0.4 is still not showing my chords (and I guess many other chords alike)

https://www.modartt.com/pianoteq#changes

Just another minor suggestion: Is it possible to display the chord quicker? I'm not sure if this is caused by the animation or by the detection itself,. But other chord detectors display the played chord practically instantly.

Thanks for the suggestions, I wasn't clear on the chord either but felt like it should be shown by PTQ anyway, that's the advantage of IA after all I guess..

Looking out on the internet I've found a simple website that showed all kind of shords, entered the notes of mine above and it showed this:

https://www.scales-chords.com/chord/pia...3%2Badd(7)

So my chord does exist even it's not the most common one (and many others I guess), food for thought Moddart in case you'd like to improve your chord engine

I think that's the point of showing chords within PTQ, to identify the more complex ones easily and not for every single chord of a typical progression IMHO

miiindbullets wrote:

I've noticed it won't register any extensions beyond the 9th. Here's a Cm11, for example, which registers in Chordie but not Pianoteq:

Have you seen, that your example is working now in Pianoteq 8.0.4?

nice.  how about a 13th

I've noticed it won't register any extensions beyond the 9th. Here's a Cm11, for example, which registers in Chordie but not Pianoteq:

Have you seen, that your example is working now in Pianoteq 8.0.4?

Regarding chord identifying in Pianoteq, is it possible that a solid chord must be played for it to work, that is, not arpeggiated? Come to think of it, how can a software recognise notes played one after the other, as a chord? We know music is dealt into phrases, and there are rests between the phrases, that's how they're dealt up.

I mean, how can some program know when a chord ends, or begins? If more than a quarter rest is between the notes, and less than half a rest (the rest equal in time to a half note)? Just wondering.

If I'm right, this chord is mostly a Cmin9, there's an additional C# which makes no other combinations anyway, so it can be omitted for the case, I'd be happy to see Cmin9 rather than nothing at all..

Alternatively, it could show something like +Cmin9 inferring that there's some useless note/s added to the chord, just an idea

the problem is it's "mostly" a lot of things because it's so dissonant.  not that this is a bad thing, au contraire it's quite a nice chord.  there are many ways to spell it, especially if you consider other roots not in the chord.  it could be read over C, over Eb, over A, over B, ...

to see more examples of stuff like this, just take almost any chord out of a piece like Catalogue d'oiseaux by Messiaen or something similar. 

personally i would rather not have PTQ try to pin it down by eliminating notes.  i would rather it just say nothing.  but if it's a more typical chord like the min11ths it should be able to say something.

davidizquierdo82 wrote:

Here's a quick one I've just come accross, I know this might not be a listed chord by itself (although it's still a chord) but PTQ could display the closest/strongest option at least..

the other examples are totally standard (min11ths) that PTQ should certainly be able to detect.  but what are you expecting for this one?  i can think a few different ways to spell it, but none of them are very useful and they all imply rather different contexts.

If I'm right, this chord is mostly a Cmin9, there's an additional C# which makes no other combinations anyway, so it can be omitted for the case, I'd be happy to see Cmin9 rather than nothing at all..

Alternatively, it could show something like +Cmin9 inferring that there's some useless note/s added to the chord, just an idea

Here's a quick one I've just come accross, I know this might not be a listed chord by itself (although it's still a chord) but PTQ could display the closest/strongest option at least..

the other examples are totally standard (min11ths) that PTQ should certainly be able to detect.  but what are you expecting for this one?  i can think a few different ways to spell it, but none of them are very useful and they all imply rather different contexts.