This (rather pointless) discussion is really clogging the list since ages now, whithout IMHO giving any real suggestion on improvements for Pd... It started IIRC with someone coming to mailing list about software A and sayng "hey software B is much better ("smoother", uh?) than A which sucks".. I wish we could have much more interesting/productive discussions on the list, like the new gui, designs, development in general, how to make patches, learning Pd better, helping each other learn.. I'm not saying critique is not good on the mailing list, but it should be constructive at least... In the end, if people are really dissatisfied with Pd I think they should (esp. mailing-list-wise):
- propose/discuss, clear, understandable feature requests, bug reports,
ideas, like: "I would like pink glowing shiny buttons in Pd"
- Get involved into the development (if they have the skills) and
improve what they don't like
- Switch to some other greater, uhm.. smother :), software
End of Friday rant ;)
Best to all, Lorenzo.
Oh, wasn't the metaphor clear, really?
nope
well, no problem, here you go then... once more...
there you go
We don't care to know if someone says; "Hey, I got a clarinet", we wanna know what he is doing with it, in a sense that it'd make more sense if the person would come and say; "Hey, check out, look what I do>with my clarinet". The point here is to emphasize the instrument as a tool, a media, something that you use to make an idea come true... so the point, in the end, is to present this idea. the media should not>be the interesting thing, but the result!
without a good media, we can't get good results, reverbs sounding like bathrooms were cool when Joe Meek used it fifty years ago, but now the situation is a bit different.
So maybe you need and want a shitty clarinet to achieve the objective you have, maybe you need a quite expensive one. Nevertheless, the point is what you do with it.
The clarinetist of one chamber orchestra I've wrote for had to use a 'C' clarinette that sounded like shit to play all the notes, instead of her cool but expensive B flat, the result is that I don't liked the sound she had.
(If you want to compare I can send you the files)
As I said, that are things you can only do in Pd... which is basically when you need to program something. If you dont see that, maybe you dont need it!
I use Pd for other purpose than trying to convince people I could make music with it, even if I've made several pieces with that it's possible to download.
And since we need to program it, we are the ones doing the thing, Pd is not doing much for us. And yeah, you build stuff with it. So maybe you should not waste your time building things that are already there,>why reinvent the wheel? If you can do something in Pd, it doesn't mean it has to be done in Pd, or that is easier to do it with it.
I use the stuff I've built with pd for show numbers, like modern circus, and I don't tell all the world each time I use a pd patch.
So, anyway, if you build something in Pd that does not work, it is your fault, not Pd's... if you built a clarinet in it that does not do what you want and need, maybe you should ask a guy who's good at>clarinet building...
It's not a problem of 'working' but a problem of 'sounding'.
hope it was clearer now, can't make it clearer than that I guess, by the way...
I do appreciate.
take care
thank you for your effort in my understanding, but I still remain on the idea that pd is just a tool for learning dsp, but indeed it can be used for other purposes, maybe that is where the discussion has evolved, but
when one knows how dsp works, I guess that person would use real developper tools to make his stuff, like a compiler.
cheers
2010/4/15< colet.patrice@free.fr>
I would care about how the clarinette is sounding, if I or a skilled clarinetist can't make a melody with it, i would play with noises...
Selon Alexandre Porres< porres@gmail.com>:
pd is just a tool for learning dsp, there is no such project that show how pd is cool to make people moving on the dance floor.
Is that what you are really expecting pd to be or sound like? Well, indeed, I disagree Pd would be a proper tool for that. And you are really wrong to assume pd is only a tool to study DSP, although it is in fact really good for that as well.
Now, you are missing completely the points of using Pd, and if you can't imagine why you would need pd to do things that you can only do in pd, maybe pd is not for you... no, it ain't a money maker for the dance floor dj...
I see musicians and artist that see why they need to do something in pd and ask for help. It is common to have an artist creating a piece that uses Pd without knowing how to program it, but working in conjunction with a programmer.
And of course, Pd can be only a minor (but essential) thing on the project... you don't need to reinvent the wheel in Pd, or just use Pd if you are using it... there is no rule for that... in a sense that I don't see there is such a thing called "pd music".
who is the musician, Pierre Schaeffer, or Pierre Henry?
I dont see the point here... Of thousands of people who work with computer music/technology, do we only have mostly Pierre Schaeffers out there? Is Pierre Henry the Only guy who gets to be a musician? If someone is using pd then he can't be Pierre Henry or many other thousands of people I know besides him that are actually great musicians?
And yeah, nobody cares if someone comes out and says; "Hey, look what an amazing I have here, I got a Clarinet!!! And I built it... or someone who's really good built it for me!!!". All we want to know is, what do you do with it, right? And we don't really care about the Clarinet. And if you don't like it, don't blame it on the clarinet...
cheers
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list