On Tue, 29 May 2007 10:39:40 +0200 "Eirik Arthur Blekesaune" blekesaune@gmail.com wrote:
Can anybody help me point out who uses PD to teach electronic music? .. (Algoritmic) Composistion Synthesis DSP-theory real-time performance
Electronic music and DSP are intersecting, I think Pd is unique in its potential to teach the greatest amount in a single environment. Before Pd you could only cover such a wide range of principles with a pile of different tools.
How to break up units into music processing, composition, synthesis, sequencing? Here's my unit outlines...
http://www.obiwannabe.co.uk/html/workshops/units-list.html
What are the pros and cons for using it to teach DSP-theory?
Pros: DSP has a very wide applications field, with Pd it's easy to demonstrate/model lots of things, not just sound, but possibly radar, process control, machine listening, without expensive DSP development boards. If I had more time and resources I would include some physical/electronics and interfacing stuff, because that is useful for real time performance and instrument designers imo.
With GUI canvas concept it is possible to build active teaching tools with Pd itself. Active lecture slides that are patches and contain links to other patches makes Pd a very powerful demonstration device for CBT.
It's free open source software, perfect for teaching, now students only need knowledge and motivation, not expensive licenses to get education.
Cons, hmm, as Tom said, the fine grain sample/block level could be better somehow. There's a river to cross when moving between teaching about delays and filters. And for Pd to be a mature as a development tool as well as for teaching it needs to output code that can be compiled into new externals or used in separate applications. I believe these two things are related. It's like Pd is missing a lowest level where you can basically write simplified code into objects and compile them.
Best, Eirik Blekesaune