The only point that's not irrelevant is that you can load up soundfiles
without needing a new physical object for each one.
It's not musically interesting that it takes up less room.
That the patch can become something else is a distraction from the particularly
narrow point I'm making, which is that it fits the definition of
technological parody offered up on this list. (If you have to change the patch
to make it do something musically interesting, then we're no longer talking
about that tutorial; we're talking about a new patch.)
But we both see the larger point of that patch as an expression of some of the
strengths of Pd. And we both realize that with very few tweaks it can be made
to make interesting sounds that surpass what could (easily) be done on a
turntable. It's clearly a successful tutorial patch, and in that context I
see absolutely no reason to change it.
Calling the patch a technological parody doesn't mean anything good or
bad-- it's simply a fact. So again, I fail to see how one can merely use
that term to criticize something, or how another can read the term and
understand the upshot of that criticism. I think it's lazy and lacks
substance-- especially troubling seeing how it first appeared as a response to
the work of a newcomer to the list (I think).
-Jonathan
_______________________________________________
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
