[microsound] recreating electronic music

Mon Apr 11 12:37:14 EDT 2011

Can I inquire as to what would give you such strong feelings on PD?

I wouldn't suggest it for everything, but it can really do amazing
things and as a dataflow language it is far superior to Max/MSP due to
the fact that it allows for a much more logical programming style
where Max/MSP has many objects that behave in bizarre ways, leading to
people creating really messy / nonsensical patches.

~David

On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 8:15 AM, isjtar <list at isjtar.org> wrote:
> 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> microsound mailing list
> microsound at microsound.org
> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound
>