[microsound] recreating electronic music

[isjtar]

i agree, I dislike pd with a passion, but such a project has all the reasons to be written in free software.
why not do it in SuperCollider?
 
On 11 Apr 2011, at 03:37, Justin Glenn Smith wrote:

> I think it is salient here that pd was written by the very same Miller S. Puckett that the MSP part of Max/MSP is named after. And it was made in a large part for this very reason of being able to preserve tools and techniques of creating electronic music for posterity. Implementing your work in a closed and proprietary platform is embedding a self destruct mechanism into your work. It isn't guaranteed to go off, but historically it pretty much always has.
> 
> If you don't care about history or preservation of artistic work then why are you even trying to recreate things from the past?
> 
> Michal Seta wrote:
>> On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 6:12 PM, Samuel van ransbeeck <thinksamuel at yahoo.com
>>> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hello Michal
>>> 
>>> interesting point you raise there. I have thought of using PD personally
>>> but always I think: what about support? I know PD has a large user-base but
>>> still I think that Max is superior;
>>> 
>> *
>> *
>> *Superior* is a very strong word...  let's see...
>> 
>> 
>>> Why? 1) A large user base as well
>>> 
>> 
>> Ok, so Pd is equal in superiority,
>> 
>> 
>>> 2) You buy a pretty expensive product, so you are entitled a good
>>> functioning program.
>>> 
>> 
>> Have you ever read the MaxMSP license agreement?  By using the software you
>> agree to use it "as is".  No one can guarantee good functioning of a
>> software (and in my experience, MaxMSP has its flaws and bugs, enough to
>> look up the updates change logs).
>> 
>> 
>>> Cycling HAS to respond your emails, while PD has not a full time support
>>> staff.
>>> 
>> 
>> Yes, cycling74 will respond to emails but only for a limited time and *only* if
>> you are a license owner (i.e. will they support me trying to get something
>> running with a runtime version of Max?  Will you answer my emails and help
>> me run your patches in runtime?).
>> 
>> Now, I think that is it only natural that we (artists) take other people's
>> (artistic) work and we get inspired, we decompose, recompose, mashup etc.  I
>> could, for instance, download the Pd repertory project, install Pd, look at
>> the patches, decompose, get inspired and come up with some composition +
>> patch that is somehow derived from a piece I liked.  If I wanted to that
>> with something that was provided as MaxMSP patches, I would also need to buy
>> either a new computer or a new operating system (because I run linux) and
>> buy MaxMSP license.  What if, later, I change my mind and do not want to be
>> inspired anymore...  do I get a refund?
>> 
>> This is all assuming (perhaps wrongly) that your intention is to "port"
>> electronic music *and* make it available for study,  deconstruction and the
>> like.  Because maybe you will simply make   runtime binaries of that stuff
>> and not share the patches at all, which is fine, and in that case all my
>> points are invalidated.
>> 
>> 
>>> If you are thinking of open-source software, I would suggest looking to
>>> Faust (Faustworks). You program your audio stuff in C++ and then you can
>>> export it as an external or VST and additionally, it makes a mathematical
>>> abstraction of your program.
>>> 
>> 
>> Yes.  You can.  I only mentioned Pd because it is "syntactically" similar to
>> MaxMSP.  It could be any programming language.
>> 
>> 
>>> In general, every language becomes obsolete one time. We have to work with
>>> the current language and in 10, 20 years, there will be a new 'recreation'
>>> of the music.
>>> 
>> 
>> Yes, that's my point, actually.  The music that was done with CSound 15
>> (maybe more?) years ago, can still be parsed and rendered today.  There are
>> still people today using such obsolete languages as Lisp and Forth
>> (sometimes even for music!).  In any case, you are free to use whatever
>> software you wish, I was just curious about the choice of software.  I think
>> that using an expensive software because the company's full-time staff is
>> obliged to answer support emails is a rather weak reason to choose one
>> software over another*.  *Perhaps there are other reasons?
>> 
>> Best,
>> ./MiS
>> *
>> *
>> *
>> *
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> microsound mailing list
>> microsound at microsound.org
>> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound
> 
> _______________________________________________
> microsound mailing list
> microsound at microsound.org
> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound