...

...

Matteo Sisti Sette a ?crit :

...

Frank wrote:

...

It's not so much the tool, as it is the skills that makes music sound good.

That is true for really good tools. Needless to say that Pd is one of them.

sorry, I might going to be rude,

but I've never heard some music completely made with PureData that really sound good.

they are alway little experiments, or false reproductions of things we know and without the sound.

like last time someone posted something that sounded like 'psychic warriors of gaia', but honnestly i'd prefer the original.

The skill to make music with pd is about rewriting everything, at the end it's not really the skill of a musician,

for example in concrete music, who is the musician, Pierre Schaeffer, or Pierre Henry?

Pierre Schaeffer has demonstrated that he is a very skilled music scientist, but he didn't even made a shit that we could hear like a composition.

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.

I might also be rude, here, but:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_by_example

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_the_undistributed_middle (even if your premises were true)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance#Argument_from_personal_...

Etc.

Also, there are plenty of counterexamples to your last premise, if you believe you can do the same things soundwise in Pd that you can in Max/MSP (e.g. plenty of people dance to Radiohead).

I think maybe your feelings are more about the musical taste of musicians who use Pd than the technical possibilities of Pd. There are different social contours associated with all the various sound-producing softwares which say very little at all about the softwares themselves.

(sorry to continue this thread) Matt