Fret Hand Positions

[firekorn]

I always generate then add/modify FHP over the one generated, this way can be really fast since many part are already quite correctly done with the automated generation. I don't really understand your issue their since i have never had any kind of problem by doing it the way i did so far.

[TomSawyer2112]

I always generate then add/modify FHP over the one generated, this way can be really fast since many part are already quite correctly done with the automated generation. I don't really understand your issue their since i have never had any kind of problem by doing it the way i did so far.

It all depends on the kind of music. I don't run into these with Linking Park, lot of repeating Power Chords.

I don't know about InFlames, doesn't sound or look like Buckethead scales ;) 

[firekorn]

it's not about complexity but about methodology. It seems like the way you want to work on FHP doesn't work out pretty well anyway so why not try out another way and see how it goes from there?

[TomSawyer2112]

I'm doing it just like you, but I'd like to avoid my manually FHP overwritten by the generated process.

It's not about complexity, arpeggio's without FHP change can be pretty complex.

 

As far as I analyzed, it's more about slides in scales, which may be simple,

but the generated process doesn't consider

that after a slide the FHP has changed, and after a 2nd slide, it gets worse.

The generated process suggests fingers, not natural, not rational to play.

 

This is an example of a generated FHP

http://www.mediafire.com/convkey/c217/fn4bcks8ag7kqlxzg.jpg

 

 

This is the corrected way to play it successfully

http://www.mediafire.com/convkey/1ae0/ssflyo5yo8fqof3zg.jpg
 

To prevent the generated process from destroying my manual FHP

I fix it in a ghost note (10) with a fingering 1

instead of simply adding a manual FHP

http://www.mediafire.com/convkey/a86c/q6ghf3u4mkqmzmbzg.jpg

[firekorn]

What i don't understand is that you only do the generation first then only modify it so there should not be any overwritten FHP...

 

I get what you want to obtain as a result i just don't get the step you take to have FHP overwritten at any kind of moment during the process because i've never encounter that issue ever the way i do it.

[TomSawyer2112]

When I do an update month later, I happen to forget my manual FHP, and sometimes EOF asks to correct the FHP before saving.

When wife and kids press me to finish :angry: , I happen to generate the FHP quickly, and gone hours of work of manual FHP setting.

By fixing manual FHP in a ghost note, I can generate FHP without a risk. But it would be easier if manual FHP weren't overwritten.

[TomSawyer2112]

Another rather strange issue is this chord: 

It shows a fingering 2-3 at FHP 3-4

 

http://www.mediafire.com/convkey/edf6/wc3snqyxbgqfh7lzg.jpg

 

The correct position is this, correction again fixed in a Ghost note

http://www.mediafire.com/convkey/7a07/l700244k87xc8xfzg.jpg

[raynebc]

Yes, sometimes when saving, EOF asks to correct FHP, and not always understanding what's wrong, I did execute the generate process. So yes, this is not a fully automated process.

If it finds errors in the FHPs that are already there (ie. a fret value lower than the FHP in effect), it will warn you and offer to show you where the error is so you can choose whether to cancel the save and manually correct the FHP. It should give specific reasons why it's complaining for each. EOF won't replace your manual FHPs in a track difficulty with generated ones unless you manually open the fret hand positions list for that track difficulty and click the "Generate" button. It will even warn you before removing any existing FHPs. EOF requires the author to be very deliberate when replacing FHPs with generated ones to ensure it doesn't happen by accident. If you ignored EOF when it warned about removing existing FHPs, there's nothing else it could do to prevent them from being replaced. It is not recommended to place FHPs and then substantially alter the chart because you risk having to edit the FHPs as well.

 

The short summary is I'm not going to add a complicated system for EOF to be able to tell apart which FHPs were automatically generated and which ones were manually entered. The logic isn't designed to add FHPs to a track difficulty that already has them. It really isn't feasible for the FHP generation logic to be 100% accurate in taking into account all possibilities regarding chord fingerings, since some players may stretch their fingers to avoid moving their entire hand and some may not. That's why the index finger can be defined for a note to control this. In your slide example, you could easily just define the fingering for the first note after each slide to use the index finger and that would cause the automated FHPs to offer something similar to what you're wanting. I can put some thought into how to improve the automated logic to treat slides, but it probably wouldn't produce better results than defining fingering to control the automation.

[TomSawyer2112]

About erasing FHP, warning is sufficiently given in this thread now, and how to avoid it with ghost notes.

The slide above is executed with the 3rd finger, so that the index is placed 2 frets lower on another string.

This is a very common technique, but not so obvious to see and to correct manually.

Not many charters care about it, that's why I asked about improving the automated logic.

I met much more illogical FHP, but I won't publish them at this moment, until solutions with slides have been found.

Thanks.

[raynebc]

It can be done without ghost notes, the only difference is that would cause the fret hand position change to be at the beginning of the note after the slide instead of at the end of the slide. The difference between these two methods is generally just aesthetic. For changing the automated FHP logic to recognize slides, just about the only good method I can think of is for EOF to move the FHP the same number of frets as the slide (ie. up two frets) as long as the FHP would be valid for the next note. Let me know what you think.

[TomSawyer2112]

I agree on the aesthetic, and considering the speed of the scrolling, it doesn't really matter, I just like to experiment to see what can be done to fool software. ;)  I checked a few examples, and can't see nothing against your logic, for slide up and downs with any fingers. 

Even if the FHP jumps back to the previous position after the slide, it tells the player he has to reposition back his hand.

[Alex360]

I have my 5 cents to fhps but I need to reread all the things so later, in evening, guys :)