In that case, is there QuteCsound for Mac? 
I like the Cecilia GUI layout, I need to 
look at that again. Have a G4 Desktop and 
a Power Book G4 running 10.3.5 and 10.3.9
respectively. Any chance this stuff will 
run on my set-up rig?

-Partev


=================================================================



--- rboulanger@berklee.edu wrote:

From: "Dr. Richard Boulanger" 
To: csound@lists.bath.ac.uk
Subject: [Csnd] Re: Csound's adoption
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 2009 11:19:19 -0400

Dear Victor, Andres, John, Michael,

For my students and classes (and that's 50 students per year or more)

The QuteCsound frontEnd is the "way" for them to use, develop, and  
learn Csound.

The connecting piece
The missing piece

We do use the terminal some
We do use Cecilia and Blue (later in the semesters)

But...  they work "through" QuteCsound...

And so... the fact that it is not "obviously and intuitively" a part  
of Csound
or installed with Csound  has been a stumbling block.... a stopping  
point...
a source of confusion.  A loss of a week or two.  A way to fall behind.

In class 1 on Wednesday...

"OK wait... not that you've installed all four of the Csound  
packages.....
You need to look for - and find the right version of QuteCsound and
download and install that..."  Make sure you do all this correctly again
at home tonight and email me that you have succeeded."  (There
will at least be one or two who couldn't find it or combined the wrong
versions of this with that.)

For my teaching and students:

QuteCsound is a "pretty important" part of Csound (the word essential  
comes to mind)
- especially since it is so well maintained and supported
- especially since it is so full-featured
- especially since it has such wonderful examples


I hope you can come up with a way of making the association more  
obvious.

Dr. B.

PS.  We are working on creating some ABSOLUTE BEGINNER and FIRST  
TIMERS webpages and documents
at cSounds.com

Dr. Richard Boulanger  -  rboulanger@berklee.edu



On Sep 12, 2009, at 10:51 AM, Victor Lazzarini wrote:

> Well, it's a tradeoff.
>
> You could also incude csound with QuteCsound and then the confusion  
> would
> be reduced. We could just duplicate everything...
>
> Victor
> On 12 Sep 2009, at 15:43, Andres Cabrera wrote:
>
>> Yes, one of the main stumblimg blocks for newbies is matching the
>> correct version of Csound to QuteCsound... But maybe the package will
>> get too large since most of Qt also needs to be included?
>>
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Andrés
>>
>> On Sat, Sep 12, 2009 at 9:39 AM, Dr. Richard Boulanger
>>  wrote:
>>> Victor,
>>>
>>> Having a QuteCsound as a part of the Mac Packages for OS X would  
>>> be a huge
>>> help.
>>>
>>> The growing collection of  QuteCsound examples are fantastic!
>>> Hopefully they will continue to grow.
>>>
>>> (Thanks especially to Joachim and Andres for all their work on the  
>>> program
>>> and the examples.)
>>>
>>> -dB
>>>
>>> Dr. Richard Boulanger  -  rboulanger@berklee.edu
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sep 12, 2009, at 10:25 AM, Victor Lazzarini wrote:
>>>
>>>> I could always include the QuteCsound installer with the OSX  
>>>> packages too,
>>>> it should be no problem, just another file. Would you think this  
>>>> should
>>>> help?
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>> Victor
>>>>
>>>> On 12 Sep 2009, at 15:17, Andres Cabrera wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> I think these issues you mention are mostly being addressed with  
>>>>> the
>>>>> new upcoming release (it's been delayed for some time due to
>>>>> scheduling conflicts between devels). Michael has worked hard to
>>>>> ensure the new installers will not have the python dependency  
>>>>> problem,
>>>>> and also the new windows installers will include QuteCsound (which
>>>>> IMO, but I'm biased =) ), is easy to use for newbies, and  
>>>>> includes a
>>>>> set of examples that can show a few things Csound can do. More
>>>>> examples and suggestions are of course very welcome.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> Andrés
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, Sep 12, 2009 at 9:02 AM, Aaron Johnson  
>>>>> 
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hey all,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There's been a discussion over on the Yahoogroups tuning list  
>>>>>> re:Csound.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The discussion brought up some valid points and criticisms of the
>>>>>> whole world of Csound. While no one denied Csound was powerful,
>>>>>> everyone agreed that it was the height of 'unfriendly'....
>>>>>>
>>>>>> consider the following:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1) the installs are broken. they 'work', give a brief ok  
>>>>>> message, but
>>>>>> then you find out you're missing certain components (I haven't  
>>>>>> tried
>>>>>> the latest install, if there is one past 5.10, but that's been my
>>>>>> experience in the past)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1a) If you decide to compile, then you have to deal with Scons,  
>>>>>> which
>>>>>> I think does not live up to it's hype for being easier than  
>>>>>> configure,
>>>>>> make, make install. I want to like Scons, it's written in  
>>>>>> Python after
>>>>>> all, but let's face it, it causes more problems than it solves.  
>>>>>> Having
>>>>>> to edit a file, and hand search for parameters you don't even  
>>>>>> know
>>>>>> exist, or are relevant, is a BIG problem. I miss the old ./ 
>>>>>> configure
>>>>>> --help, look at options, pick them, and do the actual ./configure
>>>>>> --with-whatever
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2) you install, and then there's nothing fun to whet the appetite
>>>>>> after you're done. No demos packaged in, no super-cool  
>>>>>> orchestras or
>>>>>> sounds to say "wow---I can do THAT with Csound???". "Trapped" is
>>>>>> great, but I mean, how about something equivalent to a  
>>>>>> community built
>>>>>> GM patchset that people can just "plug 'n play"? You are  
>>>>>> basically
>>>>>> given a gas can with your new car, and told to walk 5 miles to  
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> nearest gas station....enjoy your new car, pal---wait you  
>>>>>> wanted gas,
>>>>>> too---no pal, this is free software! :) Basically, this  
>>>>>> translates to
>>>>>> using Google to do hours of research on instrument building and
>>>>>> finding example sco/orc or .csd files on the web from disparate
>>>>>> sources. We've all done it, but can't we agree that it can and  
>>>>>> should
>>>>>> be easier than this? Do we want Csound to grow and compete for
>>>>>> mindshare with Reaktor?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 3) frontends like Blue intend to solve this problem to some  
>>>>>> degree,
>>>>>> but they have their own problems, mainly the 800-pound ugly  
>>>>>> that is
>>>>>> Java. Maybe this is my personal issue, but I have a rule: I  
>>>>>> will not
>>>>>> install an entire Java runtime environment for one piece of  
>>>>>> software.
>>>>>> It would be an altogether different story if it were a Python  
>>>>>> GUI.
>>>>>> Python is great, it's completely un-corporate and free, and  
>>>>>> everything
>>>>>> these days uses Python, so it's already on my system. Also, my  
>>>>>> limited
>>>>>> experience with Blue is that it also a bit more confusing at  
>>>>>> first
>>>>>> than promised; however, I have only limited experience with it,  
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> perhaps am biased, as I have lots of experience making my own  
>>>>>> text
>>>>>> orchestras. What we need is a Csound5-like front end that comes  
>>>>>> with
>>>>>> the package with lots of presets that people can set up to  
>>>>>> their MIDI
>>>>>> keyboards and play right away with, from the get-go...the Python
>>>>>> community calls this "batteries included"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That said, I still love Csound, but I wish my love could be more
>>>>>> contagious. But I think others are less forgiving of these  
>>>>>> faults,
>>>>>> which are basically packaging issues. In it's current state,  
>>>>>> Csound is
>>>>>> 'packaged for the choir'---people who already love it---made by  
>>>>>> geeks,
>>>>>> for geeks.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Am I wrong here?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Aaron Krister Johnson
>>>>>> http://www.akjmusic.com
>>>>>> http://www.untwelve.org
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Send bugs reports to this list.
>>>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body  
>>>>>> "unsubscribe
>>>>>> csound"
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Andrés
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Send bugs reports to this list.
>>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body  
>>>>> "unsubscribe
>>>>> csound"
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Send bugs reports to this list.
>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body  
>>>> "unsubscribe
>>>> csound"
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Send bugs reports to this list.
>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body  
>>> "unsubscribe
>>> csound"
>>
>>
>>
>> -- 
>>
>>
>> Andrés
>>
>>
>> Send bugs reports to this list.
>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body  
>> "unsubscribe csound"
>
>
>
> Send bugs reports to this list.
> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body  
> "unsubscribe csound"



Send bugs reports to this list.
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"



_____________________________________________________________
Netscape.  Just the Net You Need.
Send bugs reports to this list.
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"

Hi Partev,

On Sat, Sep 12, 2009 at 5:15 PM, Partev Barr Sarkissian
 wrote:
> In that case, is there QuteCsound for Mac?
> I like the Cecilia GUI layout, I need to
> look at that again. Have a G4 Desktop and
> a Power Book G4 running 10.3.5 and 10.3.9
> respectively. Any chance this stuff will
> run on my set-up rig?
>
> -Partev

Yes. Current QuteCsound requires Csound 5.09 or 5.10, but it can be
built for earlier versions as well if needed. There are both Intel and
PPC versions.

Cheers,
Andrés


Send bugs reports to this list.
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"