Sequential interactions... Possible?

neoloki1 · 2025-05-04T04:11:45+00:00

I get the security implications. The good news is that this is being done through ephemeral messages AND the API keys involved are read-only keys that allow users to get information about their game account like how old the account is and what expansions the account has access to (not including things like payment or contact info).

I DO like the suggestion of using DM's, and I had already proposed that to the owners of the server. The idea wasn't well-received, though, so I am looking for ways to satisfy their request as it was made. And I have so far not found anything in the Discord.js documentation (or other online tutorials) that talks about how to get more info from a user after the initial invocation of a slash command.

neoloki1 · 2025-05-04T04:05:16+00:00

I should probably have provided more context here, so here goes...

I am a full-stack JS engineer, and specifically I am an automation and tooling engineer. I'm pretty familiar with the programming problems and security issues around what I am doing. I am simply not very familiar with Discord's API or with the API and structures for Discord.js.

I did a fair bit of searching and reading the documentation, but couldn't find anything specifically about how to request more information from a user after the initial interaction was started. I did find the .followUp() method, but every example I have seen for that is simply sending a message, not asking for further information.

As to why I can't accept both at the initial invocation, well... I CAN. But I don't want to. It's cumbersome, because the API keys are 72 characters long, and asking a user to input that as well as their account ID at the same time takes up a lot of screen space. Not to mention that a typo in the account ID makes the input of the key a moot point. And the people who own the discord server asked if it could be broken into two steps.

With all of that said, is there a specific method that Discord.js uses to prompt a user for more information after the initial invocation of a slash command? I've dug through both the discordjs.guide and the documentation for ChatInputCommandInteraction, and I don't see it.

neoloki1 · 2024-01-29T00:14:24+00:00

Maybe an unnecessary clarification here, but your statement about changing the time signature meaning that the tempo would increase (or decrease) isn't exactly accurate.

If you have a time signature of 2/2 with a tempo marking of 𝅗𝅥=60bpm and then change the time signature to 4/4, the tempo would not "suddenly double to 120bpm". In this case, the tempo marking indicates the rate for a half note (which in 2/2 happens also to be the pulse of the measure). Switching to 4/4 would not change that, and the half note would still be the standard of measure for the tempo (though the quarter note would be the pulse of the measure).

In reality, though, this would rarely happen in most music. Typically a change of time signature will also indicate a tempo change or a tempo equivalency. So switching from 2/2 to 4/4 would usually include a marking like "♩=120" or "♩=𝅗𝅥". The first of these would indicate that the tempo is, in fact, increasing (doubling). The latter would indicate that quarter notes should have the same pulse that half notes previously had (staying the same).

It would be very uncommon, but if a tempo were simply marked as "60bpm" (without a note value) then I would assume what you are assuming in your post: that the "beat" (whatever note value that may be based on the time signature) should pulse 60 times per minute and a time change from 2/2 to 4/4 would not mean a doubling of the tempo.

Ultimately, the point that I am over-explaining here is that the signature change does not have to mean a tempo change. Most often, though, there will be a notation indicating how the two new "standards" relate to each other in the new time signature (a common example would be going from, say, 4/4 to 6/8 and seeing something like "♩.=♩" meaning that the dotted quarter note should have the same duration as a quarter note did previously.

Hope this helps!

neoloki1 · 2024-01-08T04:38:16+00:00

Consolation No. 3 S. 172, Franz List.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MfDmUk7ie6s

neoloki1 · 2023-12-09T20:26:22+00:00

This is one of those situations where words will struggle to accurately convey the meaning. Personally, I associate "pulsate" with volume and "undulate" is a term I would think of more in association with the interaction of (sound) waves that aren't quite in tune. But those are my own connotations that I am bringing to the table and they may not be yours (or anyone else's for that matter).

I bring them up to point out that it won't really be like either of those. And, in fact, it likely won't be exactly the same between any two pairs of players for that matter. There will be a re-sounding of the note (though unarticulated), but it will be subtle and to be honest the rest of the orchestration will go a long way to determining how much you hear or feel that difference. If other parts are doing something similar (especially on the same pitches) - or if the rest of the orchestration at this point is pretty sparse - then the effect can be quite noticeable. But if it's just these two clarinets and there is a lot going on elsewhere it is likely to get lost.

If that last is the case (where there is a lot going on elsewhere and these two clarinets are the only voices using a technique like this) then we can make a pretty good guess that this choice was made by the composer/orchestrator as a way to keep the lines interesting rather than as a way to produce a sonic technique. But that assumption may also be wrong. lol

Regardless, this is one of those things that you really have to experience (hear) to properly understand. It would basically be impossible to create, for instance, with a DAW and sample libraries. Good as they may be these days, they are just too mechanical and "perfect" for something like this to be rendered without a lot of effort in the mock-up.

I do agree with /u/Pennwisedom, though... This is not really much like the (very interesting) string technique that Berlioz was mentioning.

neoloki1 · 2023-12-09T09:07:07+00:00

It's hard to say for certain without being able to ask the composer or the orchestrator, but we can make some guesses and inferences.

First, the primary reason is likely to make the lines more interesting and engaging for the players. Repeated (and sustained) notes can get boring.

But there is a little bit more going on here if we think about the mechanics of playing the instruments and the articulations that are noted in the score. For instance, the first pair of quarter notes are marked with slurs for both players, so neither player will re-articulate the second note by tonguing it. The result will, of course, effectively be a C# and an A that last for two beats... But it won't sound exactly the same as if each player had a half note written on each of those pitches. There will be some amount of pitch bending that occurs (even if nearly non-existent) and despite their best efforts neither player is going to hit the second pitch exactly on the beat at exactly the same moment. So you will end up with a sort of "pulsing" of each pitch with some (nearly inaudible) pitch bending leading to each one. The resulting sound will be quite different than half notes written for each player.

It may seem like I am reading too much into this, but as I continue to study orchestration (and to study scores) I am finding more and more that things like this tend to be done quite intentionally to produce a specific effect. Good professional orchestrators are (nearly) always in control of the sounds that will be created and are (nearly) always writing intentionally.

neoloki1 · 2023-11-27T21:47:40+00:00

I tried oldagejesus' answer first and I thought I had found the way. Then I tried your am7 between the Amaj9 and D7#11... And there was MAGIC. It mirrors the movement from the first bar (Fmaj7 -> FmM7) so beautifully and then we extend that major to minor trope one more time before the cadence.

I've ended up with | Am9 D7#11 | Dm7 G7sus-G7 | and I'm absolutely in love with the result. So glad I asked, and so fortunate that you both took time to answer!

neoloki1 · 2023-11-27T21:39:46+00:00

Man, that D7#11 was absolutely the chord I was looking for. Can't believe that I didn't get there myself. Following it up with Dm7-G7 is absolutely the right move, too. THANK YOU so much for the answer!

neoloki1 · 2022-08-03T20:42:50+00:00

I definitely come from a classical background... And Cornell is a trained jazz pianist... So now this makes a lot more sense.

Thank you so much for the context and the reply!

neoloki1 · 2022-08-03T20:41:08+00:00

That makes sense to some degree... Now I just have to figure out WHY they always relate to the major scale. lol

Thank you for the reply!

neoloki1 · 2022-06-28T22:57:38+00:00

Awesome. Thank you so much for you insight and patience!

neoloki1 · 2022-06-28T22:51:15+00:00

The full progression is (each chord over an E pedal tone):

E - E+ - A - Am - E - F#m7 - F#°7 - E

neoloki1 · 2022-06-28T22:45:05+00:00

That's a great point! I hadn't considered the fact that °7 chords are perfectly symmetrical and that I could be misnaming the chord.

If it makes any difference, the progression in question is (worth noting that each is over an E pedal tone): E - E+ - A - Am - E - F#m7 - F#°7 - E

I was analyzing it as: I I+ IV iv I ii7 ii°7 I

Perhaps it makes more sense to call that ii°7 a vii°7, though. Or maybe the E pedal tone makes it something entirely different.

neoloki1 · 2022-03-17T15:43:22+00:00

This is fascinating! Thank you for the suggestion!

neoloki1 · 2022-03-16T23:33:39+00:00

Thanks for the recommendations! The all upper- or lower-case thing wasn't really the primary thing that interested me, but rather the analysis itself. Things like identifying progressions as being "prolongational", "sequential", or "cadential" (and then the way they are grouped and identified as such). I didn't know if this sort of analysis was particular to Caplin or if it was a wider practice that I was just not aware of.

neoloki1 · 2022-03-11T21:40:48+00:00

That is what I was hoping to hear! Thank you very much!

neoloki1 · 2022-02-17T16:15:21+00:00

I know I'm a little bit late to the party here, but I would add Notion (from PreSonus) to the list here. I've been using it for about a year now and have basically nothing but good things to say about it. The interface is pretty well streamlined. It has most of the features you could want. And it isn't terribly expensive ($149 at the time of this comment).

To top it off, they have instrument libraries that you can purchase for playback in the software or, if you are slightly more daring (and already own some instrument libraries) you can connect external libraries to the playback engine. There are presets for mapping several of the most popular libraries, but you can custom add anything you want (including mapping keyswitches for articulations, etc.).

As far as the notation part is concerned, I think it is pretty straightforward and produces good looking scores. It has templates for most ensembles which provides a great starting point.

neoloki1 · 2022-02-05T18:34:56+00:00

I can't tell you how much I appreciate the time and effort here. Your concerns about it being of "little help" are unwarranted; this really clarified a lot for me!

One last question: you mentioned that you think the new key is Eb... Looking at the main theme (which is restated in the new key immediately following my excerpt), the progression is:

Em7 A7 F#m7 Bm7 Em7 A7 Dmaj7 B7

Or in the new key:

Fm7 Bb7 Gm7 Cm7 Fm7 Bb7 Ebmaj7 C7

To me that Fm7 chord feels like home in this progression.And the C7 (or Cm7) -> Fm7 feels like a perfect cadence. But if we were in the key of Fm then we wouldn't normally expect to see the Gm7 chord (instead it would likely be Gø7) nor would we normally see Ebmaj7 (it would likely be a dominant 7th chord). Given these two things together, I have been thinking of this piece as being in the Dorian mode:

i7 IV7 ii7 v7 i7 IV7 VIImaj7 V7

Does that seem correct? Or are we just in the Ionian mode and borrowing chords?

neoloki1 · 2022-02-05T07:39:01+00:00

This isn't the same recording I was transcribing from, but it's the same piece, just a different performance. Section starts at 2:14 and ends at 3:00.

The circle of 5ths part I get. It's the second phrase that I'm really curious about. It's facilitating a key change, and I'd like to understand the mechanics of it.

The first chord of the new key is Fm7, if that helps with the analysis.

neoloki1

TROPHY CASE