Okay tried more things now. but I am having trouble getting precise values for those bpms, 102 and 103. I cant get those 2 precise enough.
What I did was first calculate the right sample length in an app called Music Math. I have it for Mac, but not for windows, sorry. Maybe you can find an old free version on the web, but they upgraded it to a paid version, so the old free version can be hard to find.
Anyway, I calculated the right sample length in Music Math, those are the values called "Sample length goal" in the patch.
The I made an algorithm, that calculates sample length based on the ticks from the clock, which I then tried to match the "Sample length goal" I got from the Music Math app. You can change the dial on the clock and get new values. Then I manually tried to match them. Yes I know kind of backwards thinking again, but it does work in some cases.
As said some bpms, I seem to be able to set precisely, like 100, 120, 180 bpm. But those more "obscure" bpms like 102 and 103, I can't get precise.
Here is the patch I used for the tests.
Bpm-Precise 1.1 .axp (6.1 KB)
I just wanted to find out i it was possible to make precise bpms. If we could get the precise value for all bpms, we could make a look up table, with the precise bpms. But yeah, not sure it would work, now that I can't get the right values.
Will think a bit more about it. I am thinking maybe something can be done by converting everything to floats first and then do the math and then back to Axoloti math variables. Need to think a bit about this, though.
Anyway, play around with it and see if you can make something out of it