On Thu, Mar 06, 2008 at 02:54:58PM -0600, John Lato wrote: > I used to use Perl a great deal for score processing and generation, but > now I tend toward other options. Not that any of these would be > necessarily better for you, but it's always good to know your options. I couldn't agree more. (In a Former Life, I used Perl lots; were I to have to live that Life again, I think I'd switch to Ruby) > 1. Instead of using frequencies in your score, you can use PCH values. Hmmm . . . One of my goals in learning C-sound is to learn how to contrast, and perhaps even to _hear_, the differences between different tunings. I am a violinist/violist, and we often strive, esp in chamber music, for a more perfect intonation than given by tempered tunings, i.e. the division of the octave into (multiplicatively) equal intervals. So making examples of this in csound is definitely one of my priorities, and PCH seems to me to go in another direction. > 2. If you're planning on creating very large and/or complicated scores, > you might prefer a front-end like Blue or Cecilia. Dunno Blue. I've tried Cecilia but couldn't make it work, somehow. > There are also several score-generating systems and languages, I shall try to find time to take a look; thanks for the references. > For score generation, at least, I believe the systems in use are at least > as numerous as the number of csound users. Like religions, eh? > prominent csounder creates his scores in Excel. I think most csounders > would agree that the immense variety of useful approaches to score > production is a good thing. Absolutely. Freedom is one of my "religious values". I thank also Mr Joaquin, who recommends using macros. Macros is one of the things I had on my To Learn list, and I am grateful to him for his illuminating example. Best wishes to all, and thanks to the feedbackers! Alan -- Alan McConnell : http://patriot.net/users/alan There are many good Impeachment sites; one of the best is: www.waifllc.org