Re: [Fluxus] usefulness for audio?
hey, cool! i'll try that. never been able to get fluxus running properly ever since i'm on x86_64 -- and i'm missing it. cheers, ub On 26.10.2014 05:09, Karl Blomström wrote: Hello! I put together some notes for myself on how to compile and install fluxus 0.17 on Ubuntu 13.10 and I also used it on Ubuntu 14.4 a month ago without any trouble. It might help you out: http://qiita.com/blmstrm/items/72b6276df1a1b80cb2ec Regards, Blmstrm Den 26 okt 2014 04:18 skrev Jiří Rouš jirkar...@gmail.com: Hi, last months I'm trying to get into clojure with overtone and quil libs. It is still very complicated for me, if I could say OOP breed, to understand functional paradigm, but slowly it is revealing somehow. Years ago Chuck was an easiest language to understand (choosing from csound, sclang and chuck), but I never used it for something serious and my experience with it is too short to make any evaluation. Supercollider language is from my point of view quite tricky in the beginning, mainly regarding the syntax. Clojure is really interesting. Combination of general purpose language with elegant syntax and domain specific libraries all conjoined through emacs. It is, after while, pleasuring user experience from coding... after one stick with emacs... Few days ago a friend told me about book which is about euterpea, sound library for haskell and its use. I never used it but haskell seems to be powerful and elegant tool too. I never managed to run fluxus on my computers (hope it is mainly lack of experience with compiling and what ever skills was needed...). best regards jr On Sat, Oct 25, 2014 at 5:47 PM, plutek infinity plu...@infinity.net wrote: On 2014-10-25 11:31, Peter Todd wrote: ... Have fun! ... yep; you too! :) .pltk.
Re: [Fluxus] usefulness for audio?
I suggest you look at Overtone, which is a Clojure library for SuperCollider: http://overtone.github.io/ This isn't meant as any slight against fluxa; I really haven't used it at all, but as you say, I suspect it may not come out of the box with much in the way of fancy audio analysis etc. Overtone should be able to give you the strength of SuperCollider with a lisp syntax and integration with emacs. Cheers, Peter On 25 October 2014 03:10, plutek infinity plu...@infinity.net wrote: greetings! for a number of years, i've been using puredata to code a live performance rig which takes input from a clarinet, and analyzes and transforms it various ways to yield a kind of extended instrument for improvisational performance. lately, i've become disenchanted with puredata, and want to use something more text-based as well as more easily modifiable and expressive on-the-fly... i've looked at ChucK, SuperCollider, and fluxus+fluxa. in terms of the general aesthetic of the environment, and the feel of working in each, i'd have to rate them this way: 1. fluxus+fluxa 2. ChucK 3. SuperCollider i'm using a lot of MIDI input for control, and need a deep capability for audio analysis and transformation -- this is fundamentally about sound, with future possibilities for graphics as a distant possible dream. also, i need to start with a significantly developed machine ready to go, but with a live-coding approach available during performance, for modifications. so, i'm interested in thoughts any of you might have about the possibility of fluxus+fluxa really being a viable environment for what i'm doing; my sense is that it's a real stretch to think that it's truly appropriate -- which is truly a shame, because it is just simply such a beautiful and intuitive thing! :( on the other hand, i'm extremely comfortable already with the text-file-editing paradigm implied in ChucK -- i already do way too many things in emacs, and that environment is just second nature to me. the C-based syntax, and lack of attention to visual aesthetic is just simply not as appealing as the lisp-based beauty of fluxus. SuperCollider is a complete wildcard, which i really know nothing about, and just seems like a Big Black Box, although what i've read and watched seems to indicate it would work. so, if you would, please give me some collective wisdom about appropriateness, functionality, reliability, etc., etc thanks so much in advance... cheers! .pltk.
Re: [Fluxus] usefulness for audio?
On 25/10/14 03:10, plutek infinity wrote: so, i'm interested in thoughts any of you might have about the possibility of fluxus+fluxa really being a viable environment for what i'm doing; my sense is that it's a real stretch to think that it's truly appropriate -- which is truly a shame, because it is just simply such a beautiful and intuitive thing! :( Fluxa was really only intended as an experiment in a possible way of doing audio, rather than a do-everything production type of thing. I'm still using it for slub gigs quite a lot, but trying to keep it small than add too many features. I would agree with Peter that overtone is probably a good balance for a more complete environment with a lisp interface (also with a really active community), but it would be good to see more diversity in this area. Interesting post btw! cheerio, dave
Re: [Fluxus] usefulness for audio?
On 2014-10-25 06:05, David Griffiths wrote: On 25/10/14 03:10, plutek infinity wrote: so, i'm interested in thoughts any of you might have about the possibility of fluxus+fluxa really being a viable environment for what i'm doing; my sense is that it's a real stretch to think that it's truly appropriate -- which is truly a shame, because it is just simply such a beautiful and intuitive thing! :( Fluxa was really only intended as an experiment in a possible way of doing audio, rather than a do-everything production type of thing. I'm still using it for slub gigs quite a lot, but trying to keep it small than add too many features. I would agree with Peter that overtone is probably a good balance for a more complete environment with a lisp interface (also with a really active community), but it would be good to see more diversity in this area. thanks a lot, guys... Overtone does look very interesting, and i hadn't heard about it! neither of you mentioned ChucK... any thoughts? (beginning Overtone installation...) :) cheers! .pltk.
Re: [Fluxus] usefulness for audio?
On 2014-10-25 11:31, Peter Todd wrote: ... Have fun! ... yep; you too! :) .pltk.
Re: [Fluxus] usefulness for audio?
Hi, last months I'm trying to get into clojure with overtone and quil libs. It is still very complicated for me, if I could say OOP breed, to understand functional paradigm, but slowly it is revealing somehow. Years ago Chuck was an easiest language to understand (choosing from csound, sclang and chuck), but I never used it for something serious and my experience with it is too short to make any evaluation. Supercollider language is from my point of view quite tricky in the beginning, mainly regarding the syntax. Clojure is really interesting. Combination of general purpose language with elegant syntax and domain specific libraries all conjoined through emacs. It is, after while, pleasuring user experience from coding... after one stick with emacs... Few days ago a friend told me about book which is about euterpea, sound library for haskell and its use. I never used it but haskell seems to be powerful and elegant tool too. I never managed to run fluxus on my computers (hope it is mainly lack of experience with compiling and what ever skills was needed...). best regards jr On Sat, Oct 25, 2014 at 5:47 PM, plutek infinity plu...@infinity.net wrote: On 2014-10-25 11:31, Peter Todd wrote: ... Have fun! ... yep; you too! :) .pltk.
Re: [Fluxus] usefulness for audio?
Hello! I put together some notes for myself on how to compile and install fluxus 0.17 on Ubuntu 13.10 and I also used it on Ubuntu 14.4 a month ago without any trouble. It might help you out: http://qiita.com/blmstrm/items/72b6276df1a1b80cb2ec Regards, Blmstrm Den 26 okt 2014 04:18 skrev Jiří Rouš jirkar...@gmail.com: Hi, last months I'm trying to get into clojure with overtone and quil libs. It is still very complicated for me, if I could say OOP breed, to understand functional paradigm, but slowly it is revealing somehow. Years ago Chuck was an easiest language to understand (choosing from csound, sclang and chuck), but I never used it for something serious and my experience with it is too short to make any evaluation. Supercollider language is from my point of view quite tricky in the beginning, mainly regarding the syntax. Clojure is really interesting. Combination of general purpose language with elegant syntax and domain specific libraries all conjoined through emacs. It is, after while, pleasuring user experience from coding... after one stick with emacs... Few days ago a friend told me about book which is about euterpea, sound library for haskell and its use. I never used it but haskell seems to be powerful and elegant tool too. I never managed to run fluxus on my computers (hope it is mainly lack of experience with compiling and what ever skills was needed...). best regards jr On Sat, Oct 25, 2014 at 5:47 PM, plutek infinity plu...@infinity.net wrote: On 2014-10-25 11:31, Peter Todd wrote: ... Have fun! ... yep; you too! :) .pltk.
[Fluxus] usefulness for audio?
greetings! for a number of years, i've been using puredata to code a live performance rig which takes input from a clarinet, and analyzes and transforms it various ways to yield a kind of extended instrument for improvisational performance. lately, i've become disenchanted with puredata, and want to use something more text-based as well as more easily modifiable and expressive on-the-fly... i've looked at ChucK, SuperCollider, and fluxus+fluxa. in terms of the general aesthetic of the environment, and the feel of working in each, i'd have to rate them this way: 1. fluxus+fluxa 2. ChucK 3. SuperCollider i'm using a lot of MIDI input for control, and need a deep capability for audio analysis and transformation -- this is fundamentally about sound, with future possibilities for graphics as a distant possible dream. also, i need to start with a significantly developed machine ready to go, but with a live-coding approach available during performance, for modifications. so, i'm interested in thoughts any of you might have about the possibility of fluxus+fluxa really being a viable environment for what i'm doing; my sense is that it's a real stretch to think that it's truly appropriate -- which is truly a shame, because it is just simply such a beautiful and intuitive thing! :( on the other hand, i'm extremely comfortable already with the text-file-editing paradigm implied in ChucK -- i already do way too many things in emacs, and that environment is just second nature to me. the C-based syntax, and lack of attention to visual aesthetic is just simply not as appealing as the lisp-based beauty of fluxus. SuperCollider is a complete wildcard, which i really know nothing about, and just seems like a Big Black Box, although what i've read and watched seems to indicate it would work. so, if you would, please give me some collective wisdom about appropriateness, functionality, reliability, etc., etc thanks so much in advance... cheers! .pltk.
