Csound Csound-dev Csound-tekno Search About

[Csnd] looking for recommendation for synthesizer project

Date2019-03-01 21:16
FromMichael Mossey
Subject[Csnd] looking for recommendation for synthesizer project
I compose mostly for acoustic instruments, but I've dabbled in Csound and software synthesizers also. I'm a professional programmer so I like Csound.

I now face a choice between getting more into CSound on the one hand, or exploring a general purpose software synthesizer. I own "Falcon" and like its potential.

Could I get some advice?

My goal is to

- write some original electronic compositions

- they will be fairly traditional 12-ET stuff, perhaps even tonal

- I'm not interested in far-out electronic sounds -- I'm much more interested in learning to "orchestrate" combinations of sounds in pleasing ways. Mainly this is about having fun and learning new things.

- Among existing synths, I quite like analog synths with extended high harmonics -- I don't mean loud highs -- I mean very clean and extended highs, which often analog synths do better than digital. Of course, Csound is not an analog synth but I can run it at a high sample rate and use subtractive synthesis techniques to get similar sounds.

As a programmer, I like how quickly it's possible to slap together a sophisticated Csound instrument and use it any way I want. By comparison, Falcon is hard to configure, as it requires dozens if not hundreds of clicks, and configurations are clumsy to reuse.

But I wonder if Falcon would sound better on the whole. In a way they've selected the overall sound for me -- they provide a curated collection of filters, effects, etc. By comparison I feel that Csound requires a degree in signal processing to fully understand.

I tend toward Csound because of its ease in programming and reconfiguring existing programs, but I'd like advice about whether there's a significant consideration that it may perhaps be easier to get a really stellar/beautiful sound out of Falcon.

Mike


Csound mailing list Csound@listserv.heanet.ie https://listserv.heanet.ie/cgi-bin/wa?A0=CSOUND Send bugs reports to https://github.com/csound/csound/issues Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
Date2019-03-01 21:41
From"Jeanette C."
SubjectRe: [Csnd] looking for recommendation for synthesizer project
Mar 1 2019, Michael Mossey has written:
...
> I now face a choice between getting more into CSound on the one hand, or
> exploring a general purpose software synthesizer. I own "Falcon" and like
> its potential.
...
If you are considering putting in a bit of development work as well, I'd
definitely say Csound. Csound has been getting a few very nice
"mainstream" opcodes over the past years and I like this extension. Even
if not, the same thing holds true for your compositional purposes.

Other than that, most synths - if not Csound-like environments - have
GUIs, though many these days include methods for progressive control
from hardware devices. I always enjoyed the feature-list and sounds of
Omnisphere.

Best wishes,

Jeanette


-- 
  * Website: http://juliencoder.de - for summer is a state of sound
  * SoundCloud: https://soundcloud.com/jeanette_c
  * Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCMS4rfGrTwz8W7jhC1Jnv7g
  * GitHub: https://github.com/jeanette-c
  * Twitter: https://twitter.com/jeanette_c_s

Can't you see I'm a fool in so many ways <3
(Britney Spears)

Csound mailing list
Csound@listserv.heanet.ie
https://listserv.heanet.ie/cgi-bin/wa?A0=CSOUND
Send bugs reports to
        https://github.com/csound/csound/issues
Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
Date2019-03-01 22:04
FromMichael Gogins
SubjectRe: [Csnd] looking for recommendation for synthesizer project
Thanks for your question, which deserves a full answer.

I have used Csound extensively for at least 25 years. I have contributed code to Csound. I have used other software synthesizers, Buchla modular analog synthesizers, and Korg hardware synthesizers. I tend to work in 12 tone equal temperament, I use harmony, and I focus on direct synthesis (rarely use sampled sounds). I can affirm the following with very high confidence:

There is a basic core of DSP functions/algorithms/modules used by all synthesizers, whether digital or analog. Csound implements all of these core functions as well as any other digital hardware or software synthesizer.

Each synthesizer in addition provides its own specialized toolbox of additional modules. Csound has, on the whole, the most extensive toolbox of additional modules, though there are some that other synthesizers such as SuperCollider have but Csound does not. There are also proprietary algorithms in software such as Autotune that exceed the capabilities of Csound.

The signal path in Csound is based on 64 bit double-precision floating point numbers. I am not aware of any synthesizer with a quieter signal path. I too like and use clean, extended highs and I can assure you that Csound does this very well. I normally render everything I do at 96 KHz to 32 bit floating point soundfiles. It is easy to use even higher sampling rates with 64 bit floating point soundfiles. When you hear this over reference quality speakers the quality is awesome.

Modular analog synthesizers such as Eurorack or Buchla do have a distinct sound that arises from nonlinear distortion in the analog signal path. This can be very well emulated by digital synthesizers such as Csound, but only with additional work -- sometimes, a lot of additional work.

Csound provides a flexible low-level score representation and automatically allocates additional instances of polyphonic instruments as required. Depending on your style of composition, this might be a major advantage; it is for me, as I use complex textures of overlapping notes that MIDI does not handle properly.

In short, I think it VERY unlikely that any other synthesizer would actually sound better, in the end, than Csound. But you may well get a good sound out of another synthesizer with less work. To use Csound to its full potential does require, as you suspect, a level of skill and knowledge. Often, manufacturers have employed outstanding sound designers and engineers to create their canned instruments. To equal this with Csound is entirely feasible but, again, only with some real work and understanding,

On the plus side of this, because Csound is an old program initially released in 1986, and has maintained pretty complete backward compatibility, there is an online collection of freely available examples, pieces, and instrument designs that is a huge, huge resource and that I use all the time. I think this is one of the best reasons to use Csound.

Only you can determine how much learning and work you are willing to spend to get great sounds. I suggest you trawl through some of the many Csound example instruments online. Bear in mind that if you borrow these examples, it is often possible to improve them for your own purposes.

Hope this helps,
Mike


On Sat, Mar 2, 2019, 10:17 Michael Mossey <michaelmossey@gmail.com> wrote:
I compose mostly for acoustic instruments, but I've dabbled in Csound and software synthesizers also. I'm a professional programmer so I like Csound.

I now face a choice between getting more into CSound on the one hand, or exploring a general purpose software synthesizer. I own "Falcon" and like its potential.

Could I get some advice?

My goal is to

- write some original electronic compositions

- they will be fairly traditional 12-ET stuff, perhaps even tonal

- I'm not interested in far-out electronic sounds -- I'm much more interested in learning to "orchestrate" combinations of sounds in pleasing ways. Mainly this is about having fun and learning new things.

- Among existing synths, I quite like analog synths with extended high harmonics -- I don't mean loud highs -- I mean very clean and extended highs, which often analog synths do better than digital. Of course, Csound is not an analog synth but I can run it at a high sample rate and use subtractive synthesis techniques to get similar sounds.

As a programmer, I like how quickly it's possible to slap together a sophisticated Csound instrument and use it any way I want. By comparison, Falcon is hard to configure, as it requires dozens if not hundreds of clicks, and configurations are clumsy to reuse.

But I wonder if Falcon would sound better on the whole. In a way they've selected the overall sound for me -- they provide a curated collection of filters, effects, etc. By comparison I feel that Csound requires a degree in signal processing to fully understand.

I tend toward Csound because of its ease in programming and reconfiguring existing programs, but I'd like advice about whether there's a significant consideration that it may perhaps be easier to get a really stellar/beautiful sound out of Falcon.

Mike


Csound mailing list Csound@listserv.heanet.ie https://listserv.heanet.ie/cgi-bin/wa?A0=CSOUND Send bugs reports to https://github.com/csound/csound/issues Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
Csound mailing list Csound@listserv.heanet.ie https://listserv.heanet.ie/cgi-bin/wa?A0=CSOUND Send bugs reports to https://github.com/csound/csound/issues Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
Date2019-03-02 11:23
Frombrian@AMSYNTH.COM
SubjectRe: [Csnd] looking for recommendation for synthesizer project

If I may add to Michael's comments..  most software synths use a GUI, and these can sometimes take up precious resources, making an otherwise great instrument almost useless unless you use limited polyphony, quick envelope release times, little or no effects, etc.  Some softsynths require use within a DAW, which, while useful in many cases, may also end up making things a bit more prone to CPU excesses, crashes, hang-ups, etc.

In my humble opinion, Csound gives you practically every level of control you can dream of: signal depth and resolution, aliasing control/elimination, etc.  Need additional oscillators/filters/envelopes/etc?  Just add them!   With a few lines of code, you start doing things that you can't with pre-designed synths (hard/software).

The only thing is, you need to experiment and work at it.  I've been dabbling in Csound for a while now. It takes time and practice (that's what the Csound community is for! ;) ).  And it's worth it, when you start building what you need for your music.

 

Brian

 

On Sat, 2 Mar 2019 09:04:00 +1100, Michael Gogins wrote:

Thanks for your question, which deserves a full answer.
I have used Csound extensively for at least 25 years. I have contributed code to Csound. I have used other software synthesizers, Buchla modular analog synthesizers, and Korg hardware synthesizers. I tend to work in 12 tone equal temperament, I use harmony, and I focus on direct synthesis (rarely use sampled sounds). I can affirm the following with very high confidence:
There is a basic core of DSP functions/algorithms/modules used by all synthesizers, whether digital or analog. Csound implements all of these core functions as well as any other digital hardware or software synthesizer.
Each synthesizer in addition provides its own specialized toolbox of additional modules. Csound has, on the whole, the most extensive toolbox of additional modules, though there are some that other synthesizers such as SuperCollider have but Csound does not. There are also proprietary algorithms in software such as Autotune that exceed the capabilities of Csound.
The signal path in Csound is based on 64 bit double-precision floating point numbers. I am not aware of any synthesizer with a quieter signal path. I too like and use clean, extended highs and I can assure you that Csound does this very well. I normally render everything I do at 96 KHz to 32 bit floating point soundfiles. It is easy to use even higher sampling rates with 64 bit floating point soundfiles. When you hear this over reference quality speakers the quality is awesome.
Modular analog synthesizers such as Eurorack or Buchla do have a distinct sound that arises from nonlinear distortion in the analog signal path. This can be very well emulated by digital synthesizers such as Csound, but only with additional work -- sometimes, a lot of additional work.
Csound provides a flexible low-level score representation and automatically allocates additional instances of polyphonic instruments as required. Depending on your style of composition, this might be a major advantage; it is for me, as I use complex textures of overlapping notes that MIDI does not handle properly.
In short, I think it VERY unlikely that any other synthesizer would actually sound better, in the end, than Csound. But you may well get a good sound out of another synthesizer with less work. To use Csound to its full potential does require, as you suspect, a level of skill and knowledge. Often, manufacturers have employed outstanding sound designers and engineers to create their canned instruments. To equal this with Csound is entirely feasible but, again, only with some real work and understanding,
On the plus side of this, because Csound is an old program initially released in 1986, and has maintained pretty complete backward compatibility, there is an online collection of freely available examples, pieces, and instrument designs that is a huge, huge resource and that I use all the time. I think this is one of the best reasons to use Csound.
Only you can determine how much learning and work you are willing to spend to get great sounds. I suggest you trawl through some of the many Csound example instruments online. Bear in mind that if you borrow these examples, it is often possible to improve them for your own purposes.
Hope this helps,
Mike

On Sat, Mar 2, 2019, 10:17 Michael Mossey <michaelmossey@gmail.com> wrote:
I compose mostly for acoustic instruments, but I've dabbled in Csound and software synthesizers also. I'm a professional programmer so I like Csound.
I now face a choice between getting more into CSound on the one hand, or exploring a general purpose software synthesizer. I own "Falcon" and like its potential.
Could I get some advice?
My goal is to
- write some original electronic compositions
- they will be fairly traditional 12-ET stuff, perhaps even tonal
- I'm not interested in far-out electronic sounds -- I'm much more interested in learning to "orchestrate" combinations of sounds in pleasing ways. Mainly this is about having fun and learning new things.
- Among existing synths, I quite like analog synths with extended high harmonics -- I don't mean loud highs -- I mean very clean and extended highs, which often analog synths do better than digital. Of course, Csound is not an analog synth but I can run it at a high sample rate and use subtractive synthesis techniques to get similar sounds.
As a programmer, I like how quickly it's possible to slap together a sophisticated Csound instrument and use it any way I want. By comparison, Falcon is hard to configure, as it requires dozens if not hundreds of clicks, and configurations are clumsy to reuse.
But I wonder if Falcon would sound better on the whole. In a way they've selected the overall sound for me -- they provide a curated collection of filters, effects, etc. By comparison I feel that Csound requires a degree in signal processing to fully understand.
I tend toward Csound because of its ease in programming and reconfiguring existing programs, but I'd like advice about whether there's a significant consideration that it may perhaps be easier to get a really stellar/beautiful sound out of Falcon.
Mike
Csound mailing list Csound@listserv.heanet.ie https://listserv.heanet.ie/cgi-bin/wa?A0=CSOUND Send bugs reports to https://github.com/csound/csound/issues Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
Csound mailing list Csound@listserv.heanet.ie https://listserv.heanet.ie/cgi-bin/wa?A0=CSOUND Send bugs reports to https://github.com/csound/csound/issues Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here

 

 
Date2019-03-03 18:46
FromMichael Mossey
SubjectRe: [Csnd] looking for recommendation for synthesizer project
Thanks, everyone.

I've worked as a professional programmer for a while, so I have no trouble with the technical programming language side of things, but I don't have much sound design experience. That's the real challenge to getting great sounds out of it, I think. But I look forward to trying.

Mike


On Sat, Mar 2, 2019 at 3:23 AM <brian@amsynth.com> wrote:

If I may add to Michael's comments..  most software synths use a GUI, and these can sometimes take up precious resources, making an otherwise great instrument almost useless unless you use limited polyphony, quick envelope release times, little or no effects, etc.  Some softsynths require use within a DAW, which, while useful in many cases, may also end up making things a bit more prone to CPU excesses, crashes, hang-ups, etc.

In my humble opinion, Csound gives you practically every level of control you can dream of: signal depth and resolution, aliasing control/elimination, etc.  Need additional oscillators/filters/envelopes/etc?  Just add them!   With a few lines of code, you start doing things that you can't with pre-designed synths (hard/software).

The only thing is, you need to experiment and work at it.  I've been dabbling in Csound for a while now. It takes time and practice (that's what the Csound community is for! ;) ).  And it's worth it, when you start building what you need for your music.

 

Brian

 

On Sat, 2 Mar 2019 09:04:00 +1100, Michael Gogins wrote:

Thanks for your question, which deserves a full answer.
I have used Csound extensively for at least 25 years. I have contributed code to Csound. I have used other software synthesizers, Buchla modular analog synthesizers, and Korg hardware synthesizers. I tend to work in 12 tone equal temperament, I use harmony, and I focus on direct synthesis (rarely use sampled sounds). I can affirm the following with very high confidence:
There is a basic core of DSP functions/algorithms/modules used by all synthesizers, whether digital or analog. Csound implements all of these core functions as well as any other digital hardware or software synthesizer.
Each synthesizer in addition provides its own specialized toolbox of additional modules. Csound has, on the whole, the most extensive toolbox of additional modules, though there are some that other synthesizers such as SuperCollider have but Csound does not. There are also proprietary algorithms in software such as Autotune that exceed the capabilities of Csound.
The signal path in Csound is based on 64 bit double-precision floating point numbers. I am not aware of any synthesizer with a quieter signal path. I too like and use clean, extended highs and I can assure you that Csound does this very well. I normally render everything I do at 96 KHz to 32 bit floating point soundfiles. It is easy to use even higher sampling rates with 64 bit floating point soundfiles. When you hear this over reference quality speakers the quality is awesome.
Modular analog synthesizers such as Eurorack or Buchla do have a distinct sound that arises from nonlinear distortion in the analog signal path. This can be very well emulated by digital synthesizers such as Csound, but only with additional work -- sometimes, a lot of additional work.
Csound provides a flexible low-level score representation and automatically allocates additional instances of polyphonic instruments as required. Depending on your style of composition, this might be a major advantage; it is for me, as I use complex textures of overlapping notes that MIDI does not handle properly.
In short, I think it VERY unlikely that any other synthesizer would actually sound better, in the end, than Csound. But you may well get a good sound out of another synthesizer with less work. To use Csound to its full potential does require, as you suspect, a level of skill and knowledge. Often, manufacturers have employed outstanding sound designers and engineers to create their canned instruments. To equal this with Csound is entirely feasible but, again, only with some real work and understanding,
On the plus side of this, because Csound is an old program initially released in 1986, and has maintained pretty complete backward compatibility, there is an online collection of freely available examples, pieces, and instrument designs that is a huge, huge resource and that I use all the time. I think this is one of the best reasons to use Csound.
Only you can determine how much learning and work you are willing to spend to get great sounds. I suggest you trawl through some of the many Csound example instruments online. Bear in mind that if you borrow these examples, it is often possible to improve them for your own purposes.
Hope this helps,
Mike

On Sat, Mar 2, 2019, 10:17 Michael Mossey <michaelmossey@gmail.com> wrote:
I compose mostly for acoustic instruments, but I've dabbled in Csound and software synthesizers also. I'm a professional programmer so I like Csound.
I now face a choice between getting more into CSound on the one hand, or exploring a general purpose software synthesizer. I own "Falcon" and like its potential.
Could I get some advice?
My goal is to
- write some original electronic compositions
- they will be fairly traditional 12-ET stuff, perhaps even tonal
- I'm not interested in far-out electronic sounds -- I'm much more interested in learning to "orchestrate" combinations of sounds in pleasing ways. Mainly this is about having fun and learning new things.
- Among existing synths, I quite like analog synths with extended high harmonics -- I don't mean loud highs -- I mean very clean and extended highs, which often analog synths do better than digital. Of course, Csound is not an analog synth but I can run it at a high sample rate and use subtractive synthesis techniques to get similar sounds.
As a programmer, I like how quickly it's possible to slap together a sophisticated Csound instrument and use it any way I want. By comparison, Falcon is hard to configure, as it requires dozens if not hundreds of clicks, and configurations are clumsy to reuse.
But I wonder if Falcon would sound better on the whole. In a way they've selected the overall sound for me -- they provide a curated collection of filters, effects, etc. By comparison I feel that Csound requires a degree in signal processing to fully understand.
I tend toward Csound because of its ease in programming and reconfiguring existing programs, but I'd like advice about whether there's a significant consideration that it may perhaps be easier to get a really stellar/beautiful sound out of Falcon.
Mike
Csound mailing list Csound@listserv.heanet.ie https://listserv.heanet.ie/cgi-bin/wa?A0=CSOUND Send bugs reports to https://github.com/csound/csound/issues Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
Csound mailing list Csound@listserv.heanet.ie https://listserv.heanet.ie/cgi-bin/wa?A0=CSOUND Send bugs reports to https://github.com/csound/csound/issues Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here

 

 
Csound mailing list Csound@listserv.heanet.ie https://listserv.heanet.ie/cgi-bin/wa?A0=CSOUND Send bugs reports to https://github.com/csound/csound/issues Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
Csound mailing list Csound@listserv.heanet.ie https://listserv.heanet.ie/cgi-bin/wa?A0=CSOUND Send bugs reports to https://github.com/csound/csound/issues Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
Date2019-03-03 20:48
FromTarmo Johannes
SubjectRe: [Csnd] looking for recommendation for synthesizer project
Hi,

I suggest to start with Cabbage or CsoundQt - both have plenty of great examples, many of them by Iain McCurdy, that have a intuitive Gui, let play around with the sounds an let to tweak the code if you need .

Greetings,
Tarmo

P, 3. märts 2019 20:47 Michael Mossey <michaelmossey@gmail.com> kirjutas:
Thanks, everyone.

I've worked as a professional programmer for a while, so I have no trouble with the technical programming language side of things, but I don't have much sound design experience. That's the real challenge to getting great sounds out of it, I think. But I look forward to trying.

Mike


On Sat, Mar 2, 2019 at 3:23 AM <brian@amsynth.com> wrote:

If I may add to Michael's comments..  most software synths use a GUI, and these can sometimes take up precious resources, making an otherwise great instrument almost useless unless you use limited polyphony, quick envelope release times, little or no effects, etc.  Some softsynths require use within a DAW, which, while useful in many cases, may also end up making things a bit more prone to CPU excesses, crashes, hang-ups, etc.

In my humble opinion, Csound gives you practically every level of control you can dream of: signal depth and resolution, aliasing control/elimination, etc.  Need additional oscillators/filters/envelopes/etc?  Just add them!   With a few lines of code, you start doing things that you can't with pre-designed synths (hard/software).

The only thing is, you need to experiment and work at it.  I've been dabbling in Csound for a while now. It takes time and practice (that's what the Csound community is for! ;) ).  And it's worth it, when you start building what you need for your music.

 

Brian

 

On Sat, 2 Mar 2019 09:04:00 +1100, Michael Gogins wrote:

Thanks for your question, which deserves a full answer.
I have used Csound extensively for at least 25 years. I have contributed code to Csound. I have used other software synthesizers, Buchla modular analog synthesizers, and Korg hardware synthesizers. I tend to work in 12 tone equal temperament, I use harmony, and I focus on direct synthesis (rarely use sampled sounds). I can affirm the following with very high confidence:
There is a basic core of DSP functions/algorithms/modules used by all synthesizers, whether digital or analog. Csound implements all of these core functions as well as any other digital hardware or software synthesizer.
Each synthesizer in addition provides its own specialized toolbox of additional modules. Csound has, on the whole, the most extensive toolbox of additional modules, though there are some that other synthesizers such as SuperCollider have but Csound does not. There are also proprietary algorithms in software such as Autotune that exceed the capabilities of Csound.
The signal path in Csound is based on 64 bit double-precision floating point numbers. I am not aware of any synthesizer with a quieter signal path. I too like and use clean, extended highs and I can assure you that Csound does this very well. I normally render everything I do at 96 KHz to 32 bit floating point soundfiles. It is easy to use even higher sampling rates with 64 bit floating point soundfiles. When you hear this over reference quality speakers the quality is awesome.
Modular analog synthesizers such as Eurorack or Buchla do have a distinct sound that arises from nonlinear distortion in the analog signal path. This can be very well emulated by digital synthesizers such as Csound, but only with additional work -- sometimes, a lot of additional work.
Csound provides a flexible low-level score representation and automatically allocates additional instances of polyphonic instruments as required. Depending on your style of composition, this might be a major advantage; it is for me, as I use complex textures of overlapping notes that MIDI does not handle properly.
In short, I think it VERY unlikely that any other synthesizer would actually sound better, in the end, than Csound. But you may well get a good sound out of another synthesizer with less work. To use Csound to its full potential does require, as you suspect, a level of skill and knowledge. Often, manufacturers have employed outstanding sound designers and engineers to create their canned instruments. To equal this with Csound is entirely feasible but, again, only with some real work and understanding,
On the plus side of this, because Csound is an old program initially released in 1986, and has maintained pretty complete backward compatibility, there is an online collection of freely available examples, pieces, and instrument designs that is a huge, huge resource and that I use all the time. I think this is one of the best reasons to use Csound.
Only you can determine how much learning and work you are willing to spend to get great sounds. I suggest you trawl through some of the many Csound example instruments online. Bear in mind that if you borrow these examples, it is often possible to improve them for your own purposes.
Hope this helps,
Mike

On Sat, Mar 2, 2019, 10:17 Michael Mossey <michaelmossey@gmail.com> wrote:
I compose mostly for acoustic instruments, but I've dabbled in Csound and software synthesizers also. I'm a professional programmer so I like Csound.
I now face a choice between getting more into CSound on the one hand, or exploring a general purpose software synthesizer. I own "Falcon" and like its potential.
Could I get some advice?
My goal is to
- write some original electronic compositions
- they will be fairly traditional 12-ET stuff, perhaps even tonal
- I'm not interested in far-out electronic sounds -- I'm much more interested in learning to "orchestrate" combinations of sounds in pleasing ways. Mainly this is about having fun and learning new things.
- Among existing synths, I quite like analog synths with extended high harmonics -- I don't mean loud highs -- I mean very clean and extended highs, which often analog synths do better than digital. Of course, Csound is not an analog synth but I can run it at a high sample rate and use subtractive synthesis techniques to get similar sounds.
As a programmer, I like how quickly it's possible to slap together a sophisticated Csound instrument and use it any way I want. By comparison, Falcon is hard to configure, as it requires dozens if not hundreds of clicks, and configurations are clumsy to reuse.
But I wonder if Falcon would sound better on the whole. In a way they've selected the overall sound for me -- they provide a curated collection of filters, effects, etc. By comparison I feel that Csound requires a degree in signal processing to fully understand.
I tend toward Csound because of its ease in programming and reconfiguring existing programs, but I'd like advice about whether there's a significant consideration that it may perhaps be easier to get a really stellar/beautiful sound out of Falcon.
Mike
Csound mailing list Csound@listserv.heanet.ie https://listserv.heanet.ie/cgi-bin/wa?A0=CSOUND Send bugs reports to https://github.com/csound/csound/issues Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
Csound mailing list Csound@listserv.heanet.ie https://listserv.heanet.ie/cgi-bin/wa?A0=CSOUND Send bugs reports to https://github.com/csound/csound/issues Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here

 

 
Csound mailing list Csound@listserv.heanet.ie https://listserv.heanet.ie/cgi-bin/wa?A0=CSOUND Send bugs reports to https://github.com/csound/csound/issues Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
Csound mailing list Csound@listserv.heanet.ie https://listserv.heanet.ie/cgi-bin/wa?A0=CSOUND Send bugs reports to https://github.com/csound/csound/issues Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
Csound mailing list Csound@listserv.heanet.ie https://listserv.heanet.ie/cgi-bin/wa?A0=CSOUND Send bugs reports to https://github.com/csound/csound/issues Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here