Editorial Policy

Who writes this site

Every page is written and reviewed by Jhon, who builds and maintains the site. There is no content team, no outsourced writing, and no ghost-written filler. More about the author.

How the tools are verified

Every calculation comes from a single shared file that runs both on the server and in your browser, so the values rendered into the page and the values that update as you type cannot diverge.

That file is covered by an automated test suite. Each formula is checked against hand-verified reference values at a spread of tempos including the permitted extremes, and relationships that must hold — three eighth-note triplets adding up to a quarter note, a doubled tempo being exactly twelve semitones — are asserted directly. The suite runs before any change ships.

Every formula is published in full, with its derivation and rounding behaviour, so you can check any number yourself.

How content is written

• The answer comes first. Each page opens by answering the question it is about, before any context or preamble.
• One page, one job. A page covers a single intent fully rather than half-covering several.
• Real numbers, not placeholders. Examples use tempos people actually work at, and the values are computed by the same code that powers the tools rather than typed in by hand.
• Length follows the intent. No word-count targets. A short page that fully answers the question is finished.

Separating fact from convention

This is the distinction the site cares most about getting right.

Some values are definitions. Milliseconds per beat is 60,000 divided by BPM, exactly, always. An octave is a doubling of frequency, by definition.

Other values are conventions. Reverb decay ranges, genre tempo bands, and Italian tempo markings are all working practice that varies between sources and traditions. Where a page presents one of these, it says so on the page rather than dressing convention up as calculation.

What this site will not publish

• Fabricated testimonials, review counts, or user numbers.
• Accuracy percentages that have not been measured.
• Invented credentials or manufactured authority.
• Claims of precision the underlying maths does not support.
• Pages created to occupy a keyword rather than to answer a question.

That last point is deliberate. There is real search demand for things like "128 bpm delay calculator" and dozens of similar variants. Those queries are answered by the calculators, which accept any tempo. Building a separate thin page for each one would add URLs without adding anything for a reader.

Review and updates

Every page carries a visible last-reviewed date. Pages are revisited when the tool they describe changes, when a reader reports a problem, or on a periodic sweep — whichever comes first.

Corrections

If a calculation is wrong, it gets fixed, a test is added so it cannot recur, and the review date changes. Corrections are made openly rather than quietly.

The most useful thing you can send is a wrong result: tell me which tool, the tempo you entered, the value it gave, and the value you expected. That is usually enough to reproduce it immediately.

Independence

The tools are free and require no account. No tool result is influenced by any commercial relationship. If that ever changes — if a page carries advertising or an affiliate link — it will be disclosed on the page itself, not buried here.