Averaging a Tempo Map??

A “How do I best . . .” question.

I detect tempo from 1 or several audio events.

Creates a very nice tempo map.

The tempo is fairly constant except for the human variations.

So . . .
What I want to do is select a start point on this tempo map and an end point and then AVERAGE the tempo between those 2 points.

Same number of bars, beats, and time - just a constant tempo from A to B.


Thanks in advance for any help.


This is something I have been requesting for ages :wink:
There’s no really easy way, but here’s what I’d do (I’m sure it used to be easier in the old Cubase VST_5!)…

  1. Make sure there is a tempo node at the start of the desired section.
  2. Switch the main Ruler to “Seconds” rather than “Bars + beats”
  3. Place a Marker at the end of the desired section, and select it, so that you see its time location in the Info Line.
  4. Make a note of it.
  5. Make sure that the Marker track is set to Musical Timebase rather than linear Timebase.
  6. Duplicate the Tempo Track Version, and delete all the intermediary tempo nodes between the start of the desired section and the Selection end.
    (The time location of the Marker should now be completely wrong :wink: )
  7. Open the Tempo track Editor window, and select the tempo node that is at the start of the selection, so that you see its tempo value in the Info Line of the Tempo track Editor
  8. Pure trial and error!.. change that tempo value until the time location of the Marker in the info line of the project window gets back to the value you had noted.

Please let there be an easier way! :stuck_out_tongue:

If I remember correctly, there used to be an “average” tempo in previous versions of cubase when the Hitpoint concept was still fairly new. Not sure why it was removed.

Vic - Thank you.
You are one of those people - and there are a few here - who, when somebody has a complicated issue, takes the time to jump in and offer a detailed solution.
And you seem to have an extremely in depth understanding of Cubase.

And . . .your solution worked.

But I kept thinking there must be some way to do it automatically with “Process Tempo”.

I used your method and recorded the results and then backed up and wasted a lot of time.

With the inspiration from your approach I ended up with this:

  1. Made sure all Tracks were in Linear mode.
  2. Set the ruler to seconds and noted the duration from the first to the last Tempo node. Also noted the total number of Beats (this was 4/4 with 2 measures of 5/4 which I deleted cause I didn’t want to deal with that).
  3. Set the Marker Track to Linear and dropped a marker at the start and end of this section - just thought I might need them - maybe to reset the Locators.
  4. Set the Locators to the Start and End points, also.
  5. Deleted all the Tempo Nodes except for the first and last.
  6. Opened Process Tempo. At this point the process range already showed the correct number of beats - so I simply set the “New Range” for the correct time duration and processed.

It worked. And material following was still in time.

I’m not 100% percent clear on the method - but I think it will work in most situations with some variation as to “Process Range” and “New Range” Settings.

Thanks Again for your help!


:slight_smile: That seems like a better method :wink:
However, for me, that only works if I keep the tracks (including the Marker track) in Musical Timebase :wink:… I just did a quick test on a new project, with tempo changes between bar #1 and bar #6, and put a marker at bar #6 (its time position was 00.17.498). While staying in Musical mode, I deleted the intermediary tempo nodes, then opened the Process Tempo dialog of the Tempo track Editor window, and set the New Range Time to 00:17:498 (the range length was, as you said, already correct). It gave me a new, constant tempo of 96.011, and, when looking at the time position of my marker (which was still on bar #6, because in Musical Timebase), its time position was once again 00:17.498.

Anyways, that one’s a keeper! :slight_smile:

Of course, you’re correct.

And in 99.9% of cases one would want existing tracks to conform to the new, more constant tempo.

My case was an unusual situation where I didn’t want the original sloppy tracks touched - just wanted the new consistent tempo for later tracks.