Sorry for bringing this old thread up, I find Alex's opinion very interesting. Actually I kinda feel that using Pd, I'm stuck in the process of "making the instrument instead of the music" kinda situation.Even though at first, I can custom made an instrument specific to what I want, I ended up exhausted at building the instrument first, and find myself resting for several moments before finally finishing a composition.
I recently tried Reaktor, and one thing that's best is the interface, that features definitely makes me interested in learning deeper into this tool. I also tried Max/MSP, and yes I love the interface, kinda more engaging to patch things. I also recently acquired Launchpad, (with all the monome emulations build using Max/MSP, I become slowly adapt to it). But either way, I kinda stuck with Pd because this is the first audiovisual environment programming that I know and dig. So, I think, probably it will all go down to which tool we are comfort with (ugh, sounds so diplomatic, hate it). But anyway, I feel that Max/MSP produce a smoother audio than Pd, is it me or does anyone feel this too? Regards, Didit lunchboxavlab.wordpress.com On Sun, Nov 15, 2009 at 11:45 PM, Alexandre Porres <[email protected]> wrote: > hi, > Here are MY thoughts: > > > As a composer attending composition courses in brazilian universities I was > presented with the idea that MAX was "professional" and "stable. and pd > "experimental" and "unstable". Another given point is that MAX had some > wonderful capabilities that Pd might never, giving the sense that you can > only do some sorts of thing in MAX. But that is some load of BS in my > opinion (I know you didn't see that coming... shocking, huh?). > > when it came for me to decide which to study and where to implement my > research. It felt logical to go for a free environment, meaning that I'd be > able to show results and present knowledge in a free way, and one wouldn't > need to buy a software to able to check my study. But this seems more of an > issue here in Brazil, as in some places people don't bother with the cash > issue, and got MAX everywhere. > > But in Brazil, most MAX users go for the pirate version, and if you hope > for stability, what is the point in that? > > The CA$H issue is greatly pertinent in this discussion, but it gets deeper > than that. The way I see it, and you have put it in your email, is that Pd > and MAX are in fact more powerful, and you need quite a knowledge to be able > to design stuff. Reaktor and Bidule are easier for that matter. > > So my point is, it is too important that you really know what you are > doing. You need to study DSP for christ's sake, know exactly how FFT works, > or even Wavelets! You also need to really work hard and practice it as an > instrument to be able to develop patching techniques in Pd or MAX. > > They are great "Do it yourself" environments, and now I ask, what is the > point of spending a lot here? It seems reasonable for me to pay for other > people to do the work for you. If this was cooking, I would pay for a chef > to cook for me, and not spend a lot to make the meal myself... > > At least here in Brazil, I haven't seen people doing great and highly > sophisticated MAX patches that would justify it being a more powerful tool. > And i dont really use it to know myself whatever there is to it besides the > friendlier interface and customer support. And i haven't had trouble not > being able to use Pd in my Computer Music projects. I also have the idea > that Pd is simpler and more straight to the point, and that MAX is heavier > to run and has all sorts of gadgets that are there more to justify the > investment, but that end up making it more confusing for me. > > It gets to a point where is rather paradoxal to me, you have a do it > yourself environment trying to be an end-user end oriented tool. > > Now, Reaktor and Bidule are not that powerful and more straightforward into > some direction. This makes them more specific tools and easier to use, and I > see now the point of paying for those. they are more headed torwards > end-users, and they are kind of cooking for them. > > Another issue comes to aesthetics. Being a free software community, stuff > made in Pd or by Pd people tends to be more anarchic and somewhat > standard-free. MAX, on the other hand, seems to be highly inserted into this > really specialized niche of the traditional Computer Music environment. > After all, it is something that comes from IRCAM, so it is natural that the > aesthetic of MAX users usually tend to look as something related to IRCAM's > school, and that kind of standard. > > But then, being a composer dealing with computer music is hard because you > need to be both a composer and a computer science guy. The way around is > making partnerships, and people in IRCAM actually do partnerships. So, if > you are a composer, you need to compose and that is it... you give the > computer stuff to a computer guy and let him bother with it in the way he > wants. Philippe Manoury is a composer that was there when MAX came out, and > his pieces are classic MAX computer music pieces from the 80's. Now the same > pieces are being done in Pd. You ask, did Philippe change from MAX to Pd? > No, not at all. He was working with Miller Puckette in the 80's in IRCAM, > and keeps working with Miller to this date in San diego. He is just the > composer, and Miller is the computer guy... Miller wrote MAX in the 80's, > but now uses Pd which he also wrote himself. > > Well, thanks for your attention on my thoughts, see you next time. > > Cheers > Alex > > > _______________________________________________ > [email protected] mailing list > UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> > http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list > > -- mataharipertama.wordpress.com kotakmakan.multiply.com
_______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
