thats a pretty phat answer!
wow. heh.
forget anything that is useful that might make the project more friendly, usable and easier to get into.
oh wait, sorry,I guess we all are supposed to be elitist.
heh.
brilliant.
anyone have an actual answer or what?
-dok
On Nov 1, 2003, at 6:34 AM, miso soup wrote:
forget max
On Saturday, November 1, 2003, at 05:53 AM, doktorp wrote:
Any exernal, or plan to implement the famous ubumenu from max?
any alternatives?
thanks!
-dok
PD-list mailing list PD-list@iem.at http://iem.at/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pd-list
I agree with "Miso Soup": PD is free, Max is not. So for me Max is elitist and not so friendly. I started to use Max a long time ago, before PD, because I had access to elitist facilities (a university lab and a fancy production studio). At some point I had to get my own expensive computer (Macintosh), without enough money to buy Max, so I borrowed a Max floppy disk with no installation key for a few years. Then Linux and PD started to be good enough and it was time to get a new computer; Max on the Macintosh is actually what made me switch to free software on the desktop, PD don't have the fanciest gui, but it's lightweight, fast and very free. I guess we all have our views about elitism...
On Sun, Nov 02, 2003 at 02:23:52AM -0500, doktorp wrote:
thats a pretty phat answer!
wow. heh.
forget anything that is useful that might make the project more friendly, usable and easier to get into.
oh wait, sorry,I guess we all are supposed to be elitist.
heh.
brilliant.
anyone have an actual answer or what?
-dok
On Nov 1, 2003, at 6:34 AM, miso soup wrote:
forget max
On Saturday, November 1, 2003, at 05:53 AM, doktorp wrote:
Any exernal, or plan to implement the famous ubumenu from max?
any alternatives?
thanks!
-dok
-- Marc
Hi all, i'm sorry but i don't agree with that at all. As a musician i have to have a proper instrument, be it a piano, a guitar or a computer with the appropriate software. It may cost money (instruments usually do) or it may not, also the music may depend on the quality of an instrument or it may not. I both like lo-fi _and_ hi-fi-music when it's properly done. Never ever would come to my mind that buying an expensive instrument is elitist if it is necessary for doing a special kind of music. For my part, i mostly work with Max because i can do things with it that i can hardly do with PD (or, i had to invest so much time into programming the tools that i don't have time for the music), and i really don't understand how someone could call a professional-grade 500$ software elitist, with their makers providing great support. On the other hand, my sympathies are also with PD because of the well-known facts like open-sourceness etc. In fact, what i don't want is PD to be the poor man's Max, because it simply isn't - both systems are living side by side with their respective advantages. I'm quite sure that most of the people don't have a political but rather pragmatic approach to PD and would immediately start using a fast and feature-rich gui for PD once it's there. And that will contain a ubumenu-like dropdown object.
best greetings, Thomas
----- Original Message ----- From: "Marc Lavallée" odradek@videotron.ca To: PD-list@iem.at Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2003 10:53 AM Subject: Re: [PD] ubumenu
I agree with "Miso Soup": PD is free, Max is not. So for me Max is elitist and not so friendly. I started to use Max a long time ago, before PD, because I had access to elitist facilities (a university lab and a fancy production studio). At some point I had to get my own expensive computer (Macintosh), without enough money to buy Max, so I borrowed a Max floppy disk with no installation key for a few years. Then Linux and PD started to be good enough and it was time to get a new computer; Max on the Macintosh is actually what made me switch to free software on the desktop, PD don't have the fanciest gui, but it's lightweight, fast and very free. I guess we all have our views about elitism...
On Sun, Nov 02, 2003 at 02:23:52AM -0500, doktorp wrote:
thats a pretty phat answer!
wow. heh.
forget anything that is useful that might make the project more friendly, usable and easier to get into.
oh wait, sorry,I guess we all are supposed to be elitist.
heh.
brilliant.
anyone have an actual answer or what?
-dok
On Nov 1, 2003, at 6:34 AM, miso soup wrote:
forget max
On Saturday, November 1, 2003, at 05:53 AM, doktorp wrote:
Any exernal, or plan to implement the famous ubumenu from max?
any alternatives?
thanks!
-dok
-- Marc
PD-list mailing list PD-list@iem.at http://iem.at/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pd-list
On Sun, Nov 02, 2003 at 11:39:38AM +0100, Thomas Grill wrote:
i'm sorry but i don't agree with that at all.
Not at all? You do agree to a certain degree... Let me explain more.
As a musician i have to have a proper instrument, be it a piano, a guitar or a computer with the appropriate software. It may cost money (instruments usually do) or it may not,
A computer is an instrument, and a software is like a music sheet. I buy computers because I can't make them, but I can program them.
I both like lo-fi _and_ hi-fi-music when it's properly done.
The hi-fi concept relates to the quality of reproduction, not production.
Never ever would come to my mind that buying an expensive instrument is elitist if it is necessary for doing a special kind of music.
Some people can't buy what you consider necessary to create a certain kind of music, so they create other kind of music because they have access to free tools that allows them to create their own music.
and i really don't understand how someone could call a professional-grade 500$ software elitist, with their makers providing great support.
Some people can't spend $500 for a software, and this amount of money is now enough to buy a good enough computer that runs PD for professional work. I also like the fact that it's possible to get three computers running PD for the price of a single Max equipped workstation.
On the other hand, my sympathies are also with PD because of the well-known facts like open-sourceness etc.
Don't stop, all that "etc" business is very interesting.
In fact, what i don't want is PD to be the poor man's Max, because it simply isn't
Rich people can make music with garbage cans, but my point is that usually poor people can't play a Stradivarius.
both systems are living side by side with their respective advantages.
I can't afford running Max and PD. Lucky you.
I'm quite sure that most of the people don't have a political but rather pragmatic approach to PD and would immediately start using a fast and feature-rich gui for PD once it's there.
Pragmatism and politic also can live side by side; I switched to free software for both reasons. I don't care much about a feature-rich gui for PD, but I'm also convinced it will exist one day. What I find really disturbing is the equation: "fancy gui = non elitist". It's like equating computer literacy to elitism. Scary...
And that will contain a ubumenu-like dropdown object.
Go Ubu!
Thanks for your constructive reply.
Marc
Hi Marc,
A computer is an instrument, and a software is like a music sheet. I buy computers because I can't make them, but I can program them.
You could also cut wood and carve a violin - but maybe it takes you too long to learn and do it - and you may get stuck making violins instead of playing them. I don't see software as just a music sheet - it's my experience that using a certain software influences the musical style more than that could be regarded as an interpretation - and also that programming music software takes away too much valuable time from making music - i see the combination of computer+software as the instrument, maybe with even more emphasis on the software.
I both like lo-fi _and_ hi-fi-music when it's properly done.
The hi-fi concept relates to the quality of reproduction, not production.
I don't think so - but maybe i used the wrong notion. There's definitely a difference in the choice of instruments for playing a Ligeti or Feldman piece and playing folk music. I'm sure that "Triadic memories" wouldn't sound adequate on a bar piano, while the latter would be ok for playing some Waltz tunes.
Never ever would come to my mind that buying an expensive instrument is elitist if it is necessary for doing a special kind of music.
Some people can't buy what you consider necessary to create a certain kind of music, so they create other kind of music because they have access to free tools that allows them to create their own music.
That's true but i have a problem with calling the "certain kind of music" elitist just because it may be difficult or expensive to realize. Probably the realization results in cds or even mp3s that may be available for practically anyone (well ok, in the industrial world). As stated before, for my usage, PD isn't fit for replacing Max for all applications - but you will have hard times trying to make me say fundamentally bad things about PD.
and i really don't understand how someone could call a professional-grade 500$ software elitist, with their makers providing great support.
Some people can't spend $500 for a software, and this amount of money is now enough to buy a good enough computer that runs PD for professional work. I also like the fact that it's possible to get three computers running PD for the price of a single Max equipped workstation.
Yes that's great.
What I find really disturbing is the equation: "fancy gui = non elitist". It's like equating computer literacy to elitism. Scary...
Who did that?
best greetings, Thomas
Well i just wanted to say to doktorp to explain his need without comparing with max.
Max is a Lord and Pd is a Dandy right?
For me it's 2 different project and i don't see any need to compare them(also it's boring). i'm really fade up in general with shareware or costware or crack and i'm trying more and more to move all my needs to free software and opensource. Now some freesoftware are accused of reverse engineering by some companies(Gimp with Adobe or Linux with SCO..) and there's a big danger upon the open-source devellopers with software patent new laws.Even the GNU license is in danger.This create a radicalism also.We must now choose between freedom and business. This is the big part and this is why we should not compare something free with something not at this time. Who is friendly and who is elitist? Max is elitist for sure like IRCAM also and PD is friendly for sure like us ;-)
On Sunday, November 2, 2003, at 02:16 PM, Thomas Grill wrote:
Hi Marc,
A computer is an instrument, and a software is like a music sheet. I buy computers because I can't make them, but I can program them.
You could also cut wood and carve a violin - but maybe it takes you too long to learn and do it - and you may get stuck making violins instead of playing them. I don't see software as just a music sheet - it's my experience that using a certain software influences the musical style more than that could be regarded as an interpretation - and also that programming music software takes away too much valuable time from making music - i see the combination of computer+software as the instrument, maybe with even more emphasis on the software.
I both like lo-fi _and_ hi-fi-music when it's properly done.
The hi-fi concept relates to the quality of reproduction, not production.
I don't think so - but maybe i used the wrong notion. There's definitely a difference in the choice of instruments for playing a Ligeti or Feldman piece and playing folk music. I'm sure that "Triadic memories" wouldn't sound adequate on a bar piano, while the latter would be ok for playing some Waltz tunes.
Never ever would come to my mind that buying an expensive instrument is elitist if it is necessary for doing a special kind of music.
Some people can't buy what you consider necessary to create a certain kind of music, so they create other kind of music because they have access to free tools that allows them to create their own music.
That's true but i have a problem with calling the "certain kind of music" elitist just because it may be difficult or expensive to realize. Probably the realization results in cds or even mp3s that may be available for practically anyone (well ok, in the industrial world). As stated before, for my usage, PD isn't fit for replacing Max for all applications - but you will have hard times trying to make me say fundamentally bad things about PD.
and i really don't understand how someone could call a professional-grade 500$ software elitist, with their makers providing great support.
Some people can't spend $500 for a software, and this amount of money is now enough to buy a good enough computer that runs PD for professional work. I also like the fact that it's possible to get three computers running PD for the price of a single Max equipped workstation.
Yes that's great.
What I find really disturbing is the equation: "fancy gui = non elitist". It's like equating computer literacy to elitism. Scary...
Who did that?
best greetings, Thomas
PD-list mailing list PD-list@iem.at http://iem.at/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pd-list
On Sun, Nov 02, 2003 at 03:14:41PM +0100, miso soup wrote:
For me it's 2 different project and i don't see any need to compare them(also it's boring).
They're very similar. The MSP component of MAX is PD. PD is licensed with a BSD license, which means you can create your own product without releasing the source code. That's what Apple did with OSX and Cycling74 with Max/MSP. Now, do we prefer to play with a ready-made software that will always hide how it's made, or work with a free software that shows us everything? The choice is simple enough...
and there's a big danger upon the open-source devellopers with software patent new laws.Even the GNU license is in danger. This create a radicalism also. We must now choose between freedom and business.
It has always been possible to do business with free software.
-- Marc
Now, do we prefer to play with a ready-made software that will always hide how it's made, or work with a free software that shows us everything? The choice is simple enough...
Have you ever had a look at the PD internals? You will easily find that everything is open but nothing is documented and as long you haven't spent months on trying to understand what's going on, you won't notice much of a difference between PD and Max in this respect. If one is willing to dig into it, one can have great benefits, but my experience tells me that it's not what most people using real-time-systems are interested about. What concerns programming externals, documentation is available for both systems. If you compared just the quality of overall documentation the choice would be simple enough.
greetings, Thomas
On Sun, Nov 02, 2003 at 04:37:21PM +0100, Thomas Grill wrote:
Have you ever had a look at the PD internals?
Yes I did, and I submitted a change a few years ago.
You will easily find that everything is open but nothing is documented and as long you haven't spent months on trying to understand what's going on, you won't notice much of a difference between PD and Max in this respect.
The source code being easy to read is not a key factor for choosing free software.
If one is willing to dig into it, one can have great benefits, but my experience tells me that it's not what most people using real-time-systems are interested about.
There cannot be only users, and some people like you are also programmers, and some of them are not even interested by users.
What concerns programming externals, documentation is available for both systems. If you compared just the quality of overall documentation the choice would be simple enough.
Very simple because it's possible to document PD, and also flext. ;-)
-- Marc
hi. well, to join that discussion,
let me say,
poor is not really a good argument talking about an instrument. the better music you make, the better instruments you will use. if you are poor in the beginning (students) you will want to access a stradivary as soon as you can effort it... (and the Stradivary is actually waiting for good musicians)
so the only reason to use Pd instead of MAX would be, that it offers more features to create your music and art in any way. who can tell it does?. I think each single evolution to make it more playable is a step into the right direction. If it has to many presets, then it would handicap your creativity, but Pd is miles away from that, MAX I think is also. Making life easier is not an original sin...
Useability is really an important point! open source or not, in the end a musician wants to use the software and not to create it. And if someone spends years on developing software, why shouldnt he/she be paid for that???
I would pay money for my Stradivary... But more I want a Stradivary to be existing!!!
Marius.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Marc Lavallée" odradek@videotron.ca To: pd-list@iem.at Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2003 4:50 PM Subject: Re: [PD] ubumenu
On Sun, Nov 02, 2003 at 04:37:21PM +0100, Thomas Grill wrote:
Have you ever had a look at the PD internals?
Yes I did, and I submitted a change a few years ago.
You will easily find that everything is open but nothing is documented and as long you haven't spent months on trying to understand what's going on, you won't notice much of a difference between PD and Max in this respect.
The source code being easy to read is not a key factor for choosing free software.
If one is willing to dig into it, one can have great benefits, but my experience tells me that it's not what most people using real-time-systems are interested about.
There cannot be only users, and some people like you are also programmers, and some of them are not even interested by users.
What concerns programming externals, documentation is available for both systems. If you compared just the quality of overall documentation the choice would be simple enough.
Very simple because it's possible to document PD, and also flext. ;-)
-- Marc
PD-list mailing list PD-list@iem.at http://iem.at/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pd-list
hi marius,
do you mean Strad offers more features than a poor man's vn?
Krzyszt-let-the-very-same-music-be-played-and-practised-on-both-of
marius schebella wrote: ...
poor is not really a good argument talking about an instrument. the better music you make, the better instruments you will use. if you are poor in the beginning (students) you will want to access a stradivary as soon as you can effort it... (and the Stradivary is actually waiting for good musicians)
so the only reason to use Pd instead of MAX would be, that it offers more features to create your music and art in any way. who can tell it does?. I
definitely. Marius.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Krzysztof Czaja" czaja@chopin.edu.pl To: "marius schebella" marius.schebella@chello.at Cc: "Marc Lavallée" odradek@videotron.ca; pd-list@iem.at Sent: Monday, November 03, 2003 11:38 AM Subject: Re: [PD] ubumenu
hi marius,
do you mean Strad offers more features than a poor man's vn?
Krzyszt-let-the-very-same-music-be-played-and-practised-on-both-of
marius schebella wrote: ...
poor is not really a good argument talking about an instrument. the
better
music you make, the better instruments you will use. if you are poor in
the
beginning (students) you will want to access a stradivary as soon as you
can
effort it... (and the Stradivary is actually waiting for good musicians)
so the only reason to use Pd instead of MAX would be, that it offers
more
features to create your music and art in any way. who can tell it does?.
I
definitely what?
you mean you know how to notate Strad-related features in your score?
is not doomed, in the long run, a piece of music that actually cannot be performed on instruments of other brands than listed in the score?
Krzysztof
marius schebella wrote:
definitely.
...
do you mean Strad offers more features than a poor man's vn?
Krzyszt-let-the-very-same-music-be-played-and-practised-on-both-of
I just said a Stradivary offers definitely more features than a poor man`s violin. and if I play or listen good enough to recognize the difference, then I would prefer the Stradivary. The mystical things that make the music do not have to be written down in the score (I wonder if this is possible at all).
Marius.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Krzysztof Czaja" czaja@chopin.edu.pl To: "marius schebella" marius.schebella@chello.at Cc: pd-list@iem.at Sent: Monday, November 03, 2003 12:45 PM Subject: Re: [PD] ubumenu
definitely what?
you mean you know how to notate Strad-related features in your score?
is not doomed, in the long run, a piece of music that actually cannot be performed on instruments of other brands than listed in the score?
Krzysztof
marius schebella wrote:
definitely.
...
do you mean Strad offers more features than a poor man's vn?
Krzyszt-let-the-very-same-music-be-played-and-practised-on-both-of
PD-list mailing list PD-list@iem.at http://iem.at/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pd-list
I find it difficult to compare any two instruments that I have not played personally, as often I have found very low end instruments that have challanged the quility of their 'superiors'. As a guitar player I play a very nice, top of the range guitar, but this does not stop me from continuing to play away on my beat up Hohner that should sound like muck considering it's a poor mans instrument but actually plays and sound great. In systems like Pd and Max we have 2 great softwares, and I think people should not question if one is better than the other and just be happy that they both work really great. And so what if one is more expensive than the other, those who want MAX will get it and those who don't won't. It's all very simple. I'm a student and I use Pd and Max, I wanted to have Max as well so I saved and bought it, I'm not upset that I had to do this because I was not forced to buy it beacuse of the availability of PD. In the end I don't think it's possible to listen to a piece of music and determine from listening whether it was realised in MAX/MSP or PD, so what difference does it make which of the two systems was used? Long live Pd and Max!
--- marius schebella marius.schebella@chello.at wrote: > I just said a Stradivary offers definitely more
features than a poor man`s violin. and if I play or listen good enough to recognize the difference, then I would prefer the Stradivary. The mystical things that make the music do not have to be written down in the score (I wonder if this is possible at all).
Marius.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Krzysztof Czaja" czaja@chopin.edu.pl To: "marius schebella" marius.schebella@chello.at Cc: pd-list@iem.at Sent: Monday, November 03, 2003 12:45 PM Subject: Re: [PD] ubumenu
definitely what?
you mean you know how to notate Strad-related
features in your
score?
is not doomed, in the long run, a piece of music
that actually
cannot be performed on instruments of other brands
than listed in
the score?
Krzysztof
marius schebella wrote:
definitely.
...
do you mean Strad offers more features than a
poor man's vn?
Krzyszt-let-the-very-same-music-be-played-and-practised-on-both-of
PD-list mailing list PD-list@iem.at http://iem.at/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pd-list
PD-list mailing list PD-list@iem.at http://iem.at/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pd-list
Want to chat instantly with your online friends? Get the FREE Yahoo! Messenger http://mail.messenger.yahoo.co.uk
I really don't see how a strad could have more features... But I know nothing about violins...
I used to play an old beat-up Aria for which I paid $100. Until I bought a hand-made Contrares, very rare. That was the most beautifully sounding classical guitar I've ever played (although a little tough on the left hand). It open up a whole new sonic palette. It had the same features as the Aria, though (the frets, the body, 6 strings and I couldn't get it to feedback unplugged, no matter how hard I tried...)
Going back to the pd vs. max/msp debate... I've seen this come up on various lists. So far max/msp seems to be preferred mainly because of it's slick look, ease of use and the fact that one can make standalone apps with it. I don't really see those features as advantageous in terms of actually making music. It's interesting, though, the amount of questions about pd in terms of Max/msp.
I do think that the correct answer is what was given: 'forget max'. pd is a different system. It uses the same idiom as max but has a slightly different set of features. It's ugly, but it's efficient (last time I checked, pd was able to handle slightly more complex patches under debian ppc than max/msp under mac os9 on the same machine and was _way more stable_ despite of the low version number and beta status).
However, I do not consider pd as poor man's max. It's simply an alternative and it happens to be cheaper. And since I see the potential of pd and find it adequate for my needs, I don't see a need to use max, despite of its numerous merits.
./MiS
On Mon, 2003-11-03 at 07:10, marius schebella wrote:
I just said a Stradivary offers definitely more features than a poor man`s violin. and if I play or listen good enough to recognize the difference, then I would prefer the Stradivary. The mystical things that make the music do not have to be written down in the score (I wonder if this is possible at all).
Marius.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Krzysztof Czaja" czaja@chopin.edu.pl To: "marius schebella" marius.schebella@chello.at Cc: pd-list@iem.at Sent: Monday, November 03, 2003 12:45 PM Subject: Re: [PD] ubumenu
definitely what?
you mean you know how to notate Strad-related features in your score?
is not doomed, in the long run, a piece of music that actually cannot be performed on instruments of other brands than listed in the score?
the fact that one can make standalone apps with
it(MAX).
Technically they are not true standalones? Its like saying that one can use the FlshMX to create standalone flash movies. In the same way then one can eaily produce a similar 'standalone' with Pd, just make an installer that installs PD along with the patch you want, include a shortcut to the file which which can place itself on the desktop or whatever, and open Pd upon double clicking it. Then you will have a true Max "standalone"!
Want to chat instantly with your online friends? Get the FREE Yahoo! Messenger http://mail.messenger.yahoo.co.uk
Im still not convinced.
imagine this, had I writ:
"Is anyone aware of a gui external that implements a menu or menu like structure, similar to what most operating systems have? If not, are there any plans to implement it"
Ill take note not to mention max/msp since it seems to be such a heated topic. But realize it is where a lot of users are/will be coming from.
yes, the feature-set is different, but that doesn't mean that things that make sense in a similar context should be left out, just to differentiate the products.
that would be like Apple not including a search function just because its in windows. Ok, metaphors are bad, ill admit that one, but I think you can read into what Im getting to.
The discussion definitely has been an interesting one. Amusingly enough, I don't use PD or Max to make music. I am personally more interested in realtime visualization.
I think all in all, everyone on this list wants to see PD evolve as best it can. This means lots of things need to be weighed and examined in light of the direction the community (especially the developers) want to take it.
Anyway, thanks for the replies.
and BTW,
did the mailing list go down for a day or two? A few of my emails seem to have been lost in the ether...
-dok
On Nov 3, 2003, at 9:56 AM, Michal Seta wrote:
I do think that the correct answer is what was given: 'forget max'. pd is a different system. It uses the same idiom as max but has a slightly different set of features. It's ugly, but it's efficient (last time I checked, pd was able to handle slightly more complex patches under debian ppc than max/msp under mac os9 on the same machine and was _way more stable_ despite of the low version number and beta status).
Hallo, doktorp hat gesagt: // doktorp wrote:
Ill take note not to mention max/msp since it seems to be such a heated topic. But realize it is where a lot of users are/will be coming from.
Actually the heat came up when you wrote this: "oh wait, sorry,I guess we all are supposed to be elitist" There's no problem with mentioning Max here. A lot of Pd users used Max before and are trying to get comfortable with Pd from a Max perspective. They get helped generally.
Personally I didn't miss that ubumenu-thingie yet, but I had never used Max when I learned Pd so I'm quite confortable with remembering object names or looking into /usr/lib/pd/extra/ (another argument against external libraries, btw.)
A question, though: Does this ubumenu also include abstactions?
ciao
Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org__
A question, though: Does this ubumenu also include abstactions?
I don't think it would be too difficult to implement if I remember correctly? I did all this for my MA over a year ago and have not looked at it since so it's a bit cloudy. If anyone want the code and feels like updating it to the latest version i will glady pass it on. Btw, when I said that perhaps it would not be a great idea as it might make Pd more user friendly I was joking, did anyone actually get that? It was an interesting discussion that followed however!
Want to chat instantly with your online friends? Get the FREE Yahoo! Messenger http://mail.messenger.yahoo.co.uk
Aha, now my missing emails come in from the void to confuse and obfuscate the conversation.
Like I said, the elitist dig was just to stir up the dirt. Im familiar enough with mailing lists and whatnot to know how to get a response. Ok sorry, it was a bit devious. *rubs hands together*. 'Forget max' spurred me to incite some fires. and that comment was directed at miso, not everyone.
As far as ubumenu functionality is concerned, you can do a few things, namely: insert a list to the ubumenu. Upon selection it outputs the index, the string of the item chosen, and a dumpout, in 3 outputs. You can enable/disable items in the list (they become faded + non-selectable etc). It has various niceties like other modes of operation, like acting as a button/toggle, you can set the item/index with a message, force it to dump its current selection, etc etc.
But the real nice thing about it (esp when max was in OS 9) is that it was non-interrupting. it drew a window that seemed like a menu. this would not cause stutters in jitter/msp playback. But that was a multitasking deficiency of OS 8/9.
Anyway not to drag this on.... =).
A nice common relatively full gui featureset im sure, would benefit everyone.
And I didnt mean to say PD is 'half done' in a manner to disrespect it. Im a glass is half full kind of guy. it means to me "we havent even seen half of what it can do (and ive seen about, what, 1/37th?)" Ok enough rambling.
Thanks everyone for the input.
On Nov 3, 2003, at 2:16 PM, Frank Barknecht wrote:
Hallo, doktorp hat gesagt: // doktorp wrote:
Ill take note not to mention max/msp since it seems to be such a heated topic. But realize it is where a lot of users are/will be coming from.
Actually the heat came up when you wrote this: "oh wait, sorry,I guess we all are supposed to be elitist" There's no problem with mentioning Max here. A lot of Pd users used Max before and are trying to get comfortable with Pd from a Max perspective. They get helped generally.
Personally I didn't miss that ubumenu-thingie yet, but I had never used Max when I learned Pd so I'm quite confortable with remembering object names or looking into /usr/lib/pd/extra/ (another argument against external libraries, btw.)
A question, though: Does this ubumenu also include abstactions?
ciao
Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org__
PD-list mailing list PD-list@iem.at http://iem.at/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pd-list
i think that this wouldn't be hard to make with toxy
doktorp wrote:
As far as ubumenu functionality is concerned, you can do a few things, namely: insert a list to the ubumenu. Upon selection it outputs the index, the string of the item chosen, and a dumpout, in 3 outputs. You can enable/disable items in the list (they become faded + non-selectable etc). It has various niceties like other modes of operation, like acting as a button/toggle, you can set the item/index with a message, force it to dump its current selection, etc etc.
Frank Barknecht wrote:
or looking into /usr/lib/pd/extra/ (another argument against external libraries, btw.)
As an old Maxer I still don't know how to look into /usr/lib/pd/extra/ (I mean without commandline) because I can't find them on my Powerbook though they must be there. Definitely something to put into a FAQ for OS X
Stefan
___/ ///
---------------------------- 9, rue Moreau -_____-----------|---------- 93200 Saint Denis -(_|_ ----|-----|-----()--- France - _|_)----|-----()---------- CCMIX 01-49 77 51 72 ---------()----------------- Mobil 06-89 22 03 52
Hallo, Stefan Tiedje hat gesagt: // Stefan Tiedje wrote:
Frank Barknecht wrote:
or looking into /usr/lib/pd/extra/ (another argument against external libraries, btw.)
As an old Maxer I still don't know how to look into /usr/lib/pd/extra/ (I mean without commandline) because I can't find them on my Powerbook though they must be there. Definitely something to put into a FAQ for OS X
A commandline-less alternative would be to use someting like: [bang(->[openpanel /usr/...] but unfourtunatly openpanel doesn't allow setting the initial directory this way (or another). I'd think that this would be a cool function, btw.
ciao
Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org__
On Sun, Nov 02, 2003 at 02:16:36PM +0100, Thomas Grill wrote:
You could also cut wood and carve a violin - but maybe it takes you too long to learn and do it - and you may get stuck making violins instead of playing them.
The same applies to computer and softwares. Today, violon music is the result of something called "tradition", which means that generations of violon makers, players and composers made the violon what it is right now. I believe computer music needs to focus toward tradition, and free software should be a major component of that tradition to come.
I don't see software as just a music sheet
I understand. But I believe software is primarly information.
and also that programming music software takes away too much valuable time from making music - i see the combination of computer+software as the instrument, maybe with even more emphasis on the software.
Sure, but I prefer that part of my instrument should be made free, because it's the most dynamic one, very close to my creation processes. You might create something good enough, but with proprietary software it would not be possible to archive your work and explain how to reproduce it again. So I don't mind spending some time learning difficult tools.
There's definitely a difference in the choice of instruments for playing a Ligeti or Feldman piece and playing folk music.
I played Ligeti on a DX-7 in 1987 with a DOS MIDI software, and it was very interesting.
That's true but i have a problem with calling the "certain kind of music" elitist just because it may be difficult or expensive to realize.
"Réponds" from Boulez was elitist, and it was necessary to use a 4X computer. Nobody was able to do the same at the time, but it's now possible with off-the shelf equipments and free software.
As stated before, for my usage, PD isn't fit for replacing Max for all applications - but you will have hard times trying to make me say fundamentally bad things about PD.
I'd be very interested to know what's missing in PD, since I stopped using Max about 5 years ago. Maybe a comment by Miller Puckette would clarify why PD exists at all, since he designed Max in the first place.
-- Marc
I'd be very interested to know what's missing in PD, since I stopped using Max about 5 years ago.
That has already been discussed many times and i guess everyone has his own opinion on that. Probably some people are even satisfied with the status quo. These are the points that i consider missing in the first place and these are also the fields that i've been working on for the last several months
- a GUI system that is feature-rich and responsive enough for ergonomic
performance interfaces.
- a presetting and automation system
- dynamic patch management including poly~-like functionality, controllable
by a script language (a la Supercollider)
greetings, Thomas
This is pretty much the point I was making.
why settle with
'PD is open source, PD is better since we know what is going on on a deeper level, and no one needs/wants a rich gui featureset'
thats settling for, as far as I am concerned, half finished software.
if you dont like ubumenu, fine! we have a chance to make something better, to have alternatives, and to dictate where the project goes.
or, we can stop right now.
and btw, the elitist comment was to just incite some responses.
glad it worked and got a discussion going.
^.-
-dok
On Nov 2, 2003, at 10:25 AM, Thomas Grill wrote:
That has already been discussed many times and i guess everyone has his own opinion on that. Probably some people are even satisfied with the status quo. These are the points that i consider missing in the first place and these are also the fields that i've been working on for the last several months
- a GUI system that is feature-rich and responsive enough for ergonomic
performance interfaces.
- a presetting and automation system
- dynamic patch management including poly~-like functionality,
controllable by a script language (a la Supercollider)
Hallo,
doktorp hat gesagt: // doktorp wrote:
thats settling for, as far as I am concerned, half finished software.
I could name several areas where Pd is half-finished, too, but that doesn't mean that those areas will never be fixed. Actually every software that has developers is never finished. But you can always just do so many things at the same time. It's impressing, that even as half-finished software that is written in large parts by one single person, Pd is as powerful as it is now.
If there is a feature missing, than this doesn't necessarily mean, that it is unimportant. It just means, that it wasn't so important to someone to add it.
ciao
Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org__
One of the main purposes I used the Max pop-up menus for was to load audio and video files on the fly, and I'm happy to report that there is a nice external called playlist from Yves that will do something similar. This graphical object will display the contents of a directory and allow you to select a file and put the path into a message which you can feed to the right object in pd or GEM. It's of course not quite as flexible as the max version, but I have found it useful.
Maybe Yves or someone can modify it to take arbitrary lists and save that data with patch info or to a separate file? That might make it match the max menu features a little better.
Find playlist for OSX and Linux here: http://ydegoyon.free.fr/software.html
cgc
Quoting doktorp doktorp@mac.com:
On Saturday, November 1, 2003, at 05:53 AM, doktorp wrote:
Any exernal, or plan to implement the famous ubumenu from max?
any alternatives?
thanks!
-dok
Thanks
yes Ive seen that external and its quite nice for what it is designed for,
but the nice thing about a 'menu' is that its gui space isnt constrained by how many objects it lists.
but yeah that would be nice if it could take and output and arbitrary list.
-dok
On Nov 2, 2003, at 3:04 PM, cgc@humboldtblvd.com wrote:
One of the main purposes I used the Max pop-up menus for was to load audio and video files on the fly, and I'm happy to report that there is a nice external called playlist from Yves that will do something similar. This graphical object will display the contents of a directory and allow you to select a file and put the path into a message which you can feed to the right object in pd or GEM. It's of course not quite as flexible as the max version, but I have found it useful.
Maybe Yves or someone can modify it to take arbitrary lists and save that data with patch info or to a separate file? That might make it match the max menu features a little better.
Find playlist for OSX and Linux here: http://ydegoyon.free.fr/software.html
cgc
Quoting doktorp doktorp@mac.com:
On Saturday, November 1, 2003, at 05:53 AM, doktorp wrote:
Any exernal, or plan to implement the famous ubumenu from max?
any alternatives?
thanks!
-dok
-
cgc＠humboldtblvd.com -
doktorp -
Frank Barknecht -
Josh Steiner -
Krzysztof Czaja -
Marc Lavallée -
marius schebella -
Michal Seta -
miso soup -
Rory Walsh -
Stefan Tiedje -
Thomas Grill