Bela Bartok's Mikrokosmos is an excellent example of building up from the very basic. The key part of it is that he manages to make each little exercise an interesting composition, so it doesn't feel so much like exercises. This is definitely what we should aim for with tutorials.
.hc
On May 4, 2005, at 11:42 AM, B. Bogart wrote:
Hey there,
I think an introduction needs to be there that is at the bottom level. I've not looked at much of Miller's book but I get the impression it compliments and fills in the doc/ "tutorial" examples.
I think the first few steps in PD should assume only the use of a computer, creating shortcuts, and so on. A real introduction would involve an installation guide as well. You would be damn suprised how problematic it is for a new user to add a new -lib flag on windows. (Marc Lavallee and I actually had a hard time getting it to work ourselves, having been so long sice we touched it.)
I think documentation should start at the very bottom and build knowledge and skill slowly. It should be structured so that a user with more knowledge can jump in at a particular part and still have a good experience.
B>
Anton Woldhek wrote:
Ok, so lets drop the port idea then. So what can we offer newbies that find the currenct documentation too difficult (millers book)? Is a text that deals with pd pecularities necessary. What level of dsp knowledge should it assume?
PD-dev mailing list PD-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
________________________________________________________________________ ____
"The arc of history bends towards justice." Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.