Hi István,

> Well, from what I can gather slippery chicken uses a 2.6 version of

That's right.

> Common Music. Great piece of software, by the way :)

Thanks.  It's a monster.  Hope it's going to be useful to some people here.

> What I would be interested in knowing is why you chose this older
> version instead of Common Music 3. Was it because you started working

Because afaik CM3 is now no longer in Common Lisp but in Scheme.

> on slippery chicken before 3.0 came out, or was it because you

That's true too.

> preferred to work in Common Lisp instead of Scheme. Or did 3.0 bring
> in some changes that didn't play well with the design of slippery
> chicken?

It really just was a language thing.  Having worked on SC in CLOS
since 2000 it wouldn't be a simple thing to port it.  I haven't looked
into CLOS->Scheme in any detail but when I did a while ago it didn't
seem trivial.  Rick did it though (and Bill too from Common Lisp at
least, I assume) so I'd be interested in the process. Certainly the
embedding potential of Scheme is very attractive.

> I am asking because I am planning on working on a music and sound
> editor/composition environment for my graduation thesis next year, and
> am thinking of using Common Music as a component.

Well the thing to bear in mind is that I don't see CM and SC as being
the same beast at all.  AFAIK CM is now really aimed at real-time algo
comp whereas SC is very much not real-time and is focussed on
generating complete pieces in quite a specific way.  I'm very curious
to find out if that particular way is too restrictive for other
composers or not.

Cheers, Michael

>
> Good day,
> István Lakatos
>
> On 25 May 2012 12:48, Torsten Anders <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Dear Michael,
>>
>> Great news! (And great to see that you go quite some AHRC grant for that 
>> recently.)
>>
>> Just a question: you say that this software is written in Common Lisp, and 
>> in the credits you say that Common Music is packaged with it. Does that mean 
>> you are using some older version of Common Music?
>>
>> Best wishes,
>> Torsten
>>
>> --
>> Dr Torsten Anders
>> Course Leader, Music Technology
>> University of Bedfordshire
>> Park Square, Room A315
>> http://www.torsten-anders.de
>>
>>
>> PS: Also, you are saying clearly that you do not plan an graphical user 
>> interface for this software. Nevertheless, likely it would be relatively 
>> easy to turn your whole software into a library for PWGL or OpenMusic. If 
>> you still have some resources left from your AHRC grant then doing so could 
>> greatly strengthen your impact (good for your REF and may even be helpful 
>> for the next grant application). It is easy, because every Lisp function 
>> such as make-slippery-chicken can be immediately used as a GUI object (box) 
>> in a PWGL or OpenMusic patch. If you want, you can further customise the 
>> graphical interface of central functions (e.g., have a menu to define a 
>> certain function argument). Such customisation can be available (to a 
>> certain extent) for both PWGL and OpenMusic at the same time when using OMPW 
>> (https://github.com/kisp/ompw).
>>
>> The advantage for yourself could be that you get graphical editors such as a 
>> BPF editor (basically an envelope editor, could be useful, e.g., for your 
>> pitch curves), and -- perhaps more importantly -- music notation editors 
>> (e.g., check out the ENP editor of PWGL). Score snippets can be arranged in 
>> time using OpenMusic's maquette etc.  You may also want to use existing PWGL 
>> or OpenMusic libraries together with your own work.
>>
>> For a more advanced used of such features you would need to have a 
>> conversation of your music representation (your slippery chicken object) 
>> into the OpenMusic / PWGL music representation. You already did something 
>> similar when defining your Lilypond interface (likely you are using Fomus, 
>> which makes this interface much more simple to define), so you know that 
>> such score format conversation is not defined on a single day, but is not 
>> too complex either.
>>
>> Anyway, you are probably still not interested :)
>>
>> On 24 May 2012, at 19:04, Michael Edwards wrote:
>>> It is with great pleasure that I announce the open-source release of my
>>> algorithmic composition software "slippery chicken":
>>> http://www.michael-edwards.org/sc/
>>>
>>> Please feel free to re-post to any potentially interested colleagues, 
>>> students
>>> or mailing lists.
>>>
>>> Workshops introducing the software will be held in Edinburgh, UK, and
>>> Karlsruhe, Germany, in July 2012:
>>> http://www.michael-edwards.org/sc/workshops.html
>>>
>>> "slippery chicken" is an open-source algorithmic composition system written 
>>> in
>>> Common Lisp which enables a top-down approach to music composition. The
>>> software was originally tailor-made to encapsulate the author's personal
>>> composition techniques, however many general-purpose algorithmic composition
>>> tools have been programmed that should be useful to a range of composers. 
>>> The
>>> main goal of the project is to facilitate a melding of electronic and
>>> instrumental sound worlds, not just at the sonic but also at the structural
>>> level. Pure instrumental or electronic composition is of course possible 
>>> with
>>> the system too. Techniques for the innovative combination of rhythm and 
>>> pitch
>>> data--arguably one of the most difficult aspects of making convincing 
>>> musical
>>> algorithms--are offered.
>>>
>>> Anyone interested in discussing the software is encouraged to join the 
>>> Google
>>> Group http://groups.google.com/group/slippery-chicken
>>>
>>> Best wishes,
>>>
>>>        Michael Edwards
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ___________________________________________
>>>
>>> michael edwards
>>>
>>> office : (+44) (0)131 650 2431
>>> mobile : (+44) (0)7952 153750
>>>
>>> [email protected]
>>>
>>> MSc in Digital Composition and Performance
>>>     http://michael-edwards.org/dcp
>>> University of Edinburgh
>>>     http://michael-edwards.org/uofe
>>> Personal homepage
>>>     http://www.michael-edwards.org
>>> ___________________________________________
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Cmdist mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://ccrma-mail.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/cmdist
>
> _______________________________________________
> Cmdist mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://ccrma-mail.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/cmdist
>

_______________________________________________
Cmdist mailing list
[email protected]
http://ccrma-mail.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/cmdist

Reply via email to