I'd like to use the same table for generating k-rate signals reading  
the table forward in some cases and backwards in other cases.

Is there an opcode that reads a table from last entry to first entry  
at k-rate?

thanks!

-Lou Cohen



Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"

Can't you just use a table with an index and run the index from max to
min, instead of from min to max?

Such as using tablei with a normalized index and use kindex line 1, p3, 0

On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 10:45 AM, Louis Cohen  wrote:
> I'd like to use the same table for generating k-rate signals reading the
> table forward in some cases and backwards in other cases.
>
> Is there an opcode that reads a table from last entry to first entry at
> k-rate?
>
> thanks!
>
> -Lou Cohen
>
>
>
> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>           https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe
> csound"
>
>


Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"

Give your oscil a negative frequency. That will cause the sampling
increment to be a negative number thus the oscil will read backwards
through the table.


On 8 March 2011 15:45, Louis Cohen  wrote:
> I'd like to use the same table for generating k-rate signals reading the
> table forward in some cases and backwards in other cases.
>
> Is there an opcode that reads a table from last entry to first entry at
> k-rate?
>
> thanks!
>
> -Lou Cohen
>
>
>
> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>           https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe
> csound"
>
>


Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"

maybe you can do:

ilen = ftlen(itab)
kindex init ilen
kvalue table kindex, itab
kindex = kindex -1

then, if you want to loop:
kindex = (kindex == 0 ? ilen : kindex)

or if you want to stop:
if kindex == 0 goto stopMe
goto end
stopMe:
turnoff
end:

(not tested)
best
Oeyvind

2011/3/8 Louis Cohen :
> I'd like to use the same table for generating k-rate signals reading the
> table forward in some cases and backwards in other cases.
>
> Is there an opcode that reads a table from last entry to first entry at
> k-rate?
>
> thanks!
>
> -Lou Cohen
>
>
>
> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>           https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe
> csound"
>
>


Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"

Thanks, everyone for your rapid responses!!!

I just tested Rory's solution (using negative frequency) and it seems  
to work exactly as needed. Couldn't be simpler!

As far as I can see, this is not documented. I would expect to see  
mention of it in the documentation for oscil, but there's nary a trace.

Rory, how did you find out about it? (did you read the source code?)

best,
Lou

On Mar 8, 2011, at 10:52 AM, Rory Walsh wrote:

> Give your oscil a negative frequency. That will cause the sampling
> increment to be a negative number thus the oscil will read backwards
> through the table.
>
>
> On 8 March 2011 15:45, Louis Cohen  wrote:
>> I'd like to use the same table for generating k-rate signals  
>> reading the
>> table forward in some cases and backwards in other cases.
>>
>> Is there an opcode that reads a table from last entry to first  
>> entry at
>> k-rate?
>>
>> thanks!
>>
>> -Lou Cohen
>>
>>
>>
>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>           https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body  
>> "unsubscribe
>> csound"
>>
>>
>
>
> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body  
> "unsubscribe csound"
>



Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"

This is a given I think when it comes to table-lookup oscilators.

Peiman

On 8 March 2011 16:34, Louis Cohen  wrote:
> Thanks, everyone for your rapid responses!!!
>
> I just tested Rory's solution (using negative frequency) and it seems to
> work exactly as needed. Couldn't be simpler!
>
> As far as I can see, this is not documented. I would expect to see mention
> of it in the documentation for oscil, but there's nary a trace.
>
> Rory, how did you find out about it? (did you read the source code?)
>
> best,
> Lou
>
> On Mar 8, 2011, at 10:52 AM, Rory Walsh wrote:
>
>> Give your oscil a negative frequency. That will cause the sampling
>> increment to be a negative number thus the oscil will read backwards
>> through the table.
>>
>>
>> On 8 March 2011 15:45, Louis Cohen  wrote:
>>>
>>> I'd like to use the same table for generating k-rate signals reading the
>>> table forward in some cases and backwards in other cases.
>>>
>>> Is there an opcode that reads a table from last entry to first entry at
>>> k-rate?
>>>
>>> thanks!
>>>
>>> -Lou Cohen
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>          https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe
>>> csound"
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>           https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe
>> csound"
>>
>
>
>
> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>           https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe
> csound"
>
>


Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"

Yeah, like many things in csound it is not explicitly documented, but follows naturally from the principles of audio synthesis and the math behind it. You will get vastly from csound if you devote a bit of research into those subjects.

peiman khosravi wrote:
> This is a given I think when it comes to table-lookup oscilators.
> 
> Peiman
> 
> On 8 March 2011 16:34, Louis Cohen  wrote:
>> Thanks, everyone for your rapid responses!!!
>>
>> I just tested Rory's solution (using negative frequency) and it seems to
>> work exactly as needed. Couldn't be simpler!
>>
>> As far as I can see, this is not documented. I would expect to see mention
>> of it in the documentation for oscil, but there's nary a trace.
>>
>> Rory, how did you find out about it? (did you read the source code?)
>>
>> best,
>> Lou
>>
>> On Mar 8, 2011, at 10:52 AM, Rory Walsh wrote:
>>
>>> Give your oscil a negative frequency. That will cause the sampling
>>> increment to be a negative number thus the oscil will read backwards
>>> through the table.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 8 March 2011 15:45, Louis Cohen  wrote:
>>>> I'd like to use the same table for generating k-rate signals reading the
>>>> table forward in some cases and backwards in other cases.
>>>>
>>>> Is there an opcode that reads a table from last entry to first entry at
>>>> k-rate?
>>>>
>>>> thanks!
>>>>
>>>> -Lou Cohen
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>>          https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe
>>>> csound"
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>           https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe
>>> csound"
>>>
>>
>>
>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>           https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe
>> csound"
>>
>>
> 
> 
> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>             https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"
> 
> 



Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"

Sure enough, negative frequency is mentioned in "The Audio Programming  
Book."

Your comment, Justin, raises the question of what the purpose of  
Csound's documentation is: who is the expected audience? and for that  
matter, who is the expected audience for Csound itself?

I consider myself a seasoned programmer (I've been at it since 1959)  
and a composer (I've been at it since 1948), but not an audio  
synthesis specialist. I'm just a Csound user. These dates might  
suggest that the time I have for research into these topics is limited.

So it's great that I can rely on the manual and the Csound user  
community for questions like this one, although the more there is in  
the manual, the less likely I will need to bother the Csound community  
of experts.

Now, I'm curious: should negative frequency be documented in the  
manual or should it intentionally be left out? What's your opinion?

-Lou


On Mar 8, 2011, at 12:21 PM, Justin Glenn Smith wrote:

> Yeah, like many things in csound it is not explicitly documented,  
> but follows naturally from the principles of audio synthesis and the  
> math behind it. You will get vastly from csound if you devote a bit  
> of research into those subjects.
>
> peiman khosravi wrote:
>> This is a given I think when it comes to table-lookup oscilators.
>>
>> Peiman
>>
>> On 8 March 2011 16:34, Louis Cohen  wrote:
>>> Thanks, everyone for your rapid responses!!!
>>>
>>> I just tested Rory's solution (using negative frequency) and it  
>>> seems to
>>> work exactly as needed. Couldn't be simpler!
>>>
>>> As far as I can see, this is not documented. I would expect to see  
>>> mention
>>> of it in the documentation for oscil, but there's nary a trace.
>>>
>>> Rory, how did you find out about it? (did you read the source code?)
>>>
>>> best,
>>> Lou
>>>
>>> On Mar 8, 2011, at 10:52 AM, Rory Walsh wrote:
>>>
>>>> Give your oscil a negative frequency. That will cause the sampling
>>>> increment to be a negative number thus the oscil will read  
>>>> backwards
>>>> through the table.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 8 March 2011 15:45, Louis Cohen  wrote:
>>>>> I'd like to use the same table for generating k-rate signals  
>>>>> reading the
>>>>> table forward in some cases and backwards in other cases.
>>>>>
>>>>> Is there an opcode that reads a table from last entry to first  
>>>>> entry at
>>>>> k-rate?
>>>>>
>>>>> thanks!
>>>>>
>>>>> -Lou Cohen
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>>>         https://sourceforge.net/tracker/? 
>>>>> group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body  
>>>>> "unsubscribe
>>>>> csound"
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>>          https://sourceforge.net/tracker/? 
>>>> group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body  
>>>> "unsubscribe
>>>> csound"
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>          https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body  
>>> "unsubscribe
>>> csound"
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/? 
>> group_id=81968&atid=564599
>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body  
>> "unsubscribe csound"
>>
>>
>
>
>
> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body  
> "unsubscribe csound"
>



Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"

Hi,

I think it should, but where? In all the documentation for oscillators?

Cheers,
Andres

On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 5:41 PM, Louis Cohen  wrote:
> Sure enough, negative frequency is mentioned in "The Audio Programming
> Book."
>
> Your comment, Justin, raises the question of what the purpose of Csound's
> documentation is: who is the expected audience? and for that matter, who is
> the expected audience for Csound itself?
>
> I consider myself a seasoned programmer (I've been at it since 1959) and a
> composer (I've been at it since 1948), but not an audio synthesis
> specialist. I'm just a Csound user. These dates might suggest that the time
> I have for research into these topics is limited.
>
> So it's great that I can rely on the manual and the Csound user community
> for questions like this one, although the more there is in the manual, the
> less likely I will need to bother the Csound community of experts.
>
> Now, I'm curious: should negative frequency be documented in the manual or
> should it intentionally be left out? What's your opinion?
>
> -Lou
>
>
> On Mar 8, 2011, at 12:21 PM, Justin Glenn Smith wrote:
>
>> Yeah, like many things in csound it is not explicitly documented, but
>> follows naturally from the principles of audio synthesis and the math behind
>> it. You will get vastly from csound if you devote a bit of research into
>> those subjects.
>>
>> peiman khosravi wrote:
>>>
>>> This is a given I think when it comes to table-lookup oscilators.
>>>
>>> Peiman
>>>
>>> On 8 March 2011 16:34, Louis Cohen  wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Thanks, everyone for your rapid responses!!!
>>>>
>>>> I just tested Rory's solution (using negative frequency) and it seems to
>>>> work exactly as needed. Couldn't be simpler!
>>>>
>>>> As far as I can see, this is not documented. I would expect to see
>>>> mention
>>>> of it in the documentation for oscil, but there's nary a trace.
>>>>
>>>> Rory, how did you find out about it? (did you read the source code?)
>>>>
>>>> best,
>>>> Lou
>>>>
>>>> On Mar 8, 2011, at 10:52 AM, Rory Walsh wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Give your oscil a negative frequency. That will cause the sampling
>>>>> increment to be a negative number thus the oscil will read backwards
>>>>> through the table.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 8 March 2011 15:45, Louis Cohen  wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'd like to use the same table for generating k-rate signals reading
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> table forward in some cases and backwards in other cases.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is there an opcode that reads a table from last entry to first entry
>>>>>> at
>>>>>> k-rate?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> thanks!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -Lou Cohen
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>>>>        https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>>>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body
>>>>>> "unsubscribe
>>>>>> csound"
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>>>         https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body
>>>>> "unsubscribe
>>>>> csound"
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>>         https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe
>>>> csound"
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>           https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe
>>> csound"
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>           https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe
>> csound"
>>
>
>
>
> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>           https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe
> csound"
>
>


Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"

Maybe a general intro page for all the oscillators that describes how
the table data is read?

P

On 8 March 2011 17:46, Andres Cabrera  wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I think it should, but where? In all the documentation for oscillators?
>
> Cheers,
> Andres
>
> On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 5:41 PM, Louis Cohen  wrote:
>> Sure enough, negative frequency is mentioned in "The Audio Programming
>> Book."
>>
>> Your comment, Justin, raises the question of what the purpose of Csound's
>> documentation is: who is the expected audience? and for that matter, who is
>> the expected audience for Csound itself?
>>
>> I consider myself a seasoned programmer (I've been at it since 1959) and a
>> composer (I've been at it since 1948), but not an audio synthesis
>> specialist. I'm just a Csound user. These dates might suggest that the time
>> I have for research into these topics is limited.
>>
>> So it's great that I can rely on the manual and the Csound user community
>> for questions like this one, although the more there is in the manual, the
>> less likely I will need to bother the Csound community of experts.
>>
>> Now, I'm curious: should negative frequency be documented in the manual or
>> should it intentionally be left out? What's your opinion?
>>
>> -Lou
>>
>>
>> On Mar 8, 2011, at 12:21 PM, Justin Glenn Smith wrote:
>>
>>> Yeah, like many things in csound it is not explicitly documented, but
>>> follows naturally from the principles of audio synthesis and the math behind
>>> it. You will get vastly from csound if you devote a bit of research into
>>> those subjects.
>>>
>>> peiman khosravi wrote:
>>>>
>>>> This is a given I think when it comes to table-lookup oscilators.
>>>>
>>>> Peiman
>>>>
>>>> On 8 March 2011 16:34, Louis Cohen  wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks, everyone for your rapid responses!!!
>>>>>
>>>>> I just tested Rory's solution (using negative frequency) and it seems to
>>>>> work exactly as needed. Couldn't be simpler!
>>>>>
>>>>> As far as I can see, this is not documented. I would expect to see
>>>>> mention
>>>>> of it in the documentation for oscil, but there's nary a trace.
>>>>>
>>>>> Rory, how did you find out about it? (did you read the source code?)
>>>>>
>>>>> best,
>>>>> Lou
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mar 8, 2011, at 10:52 AM, Rory Walsh wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Give your oscil a negative frequency. That will cause the sampling
>>>>>> increment to be a negative number thus the oscil will read backwards
>>>>>> through the table.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 8 March 2011 15:45, Louis Cohen  wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'd like to use the same table for generating k-rate signals reading
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> table forward in some cases and backwards in other cases.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Is there an opcode that reads a table from last entry to first entry
>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>> k-rate?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> thanks!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -Lou Cohen
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>>>>>        https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>>>>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body
>>>>>>> "unsubscribe
>>>>>>> csound"
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>>>>         https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>>>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body
>>>>>> "unsubscribe
>>>>>> csound"
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>>>         https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe
>>>>> csound"
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>>           https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe
>>>> csound"
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>           https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe
>>> csound"
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>           https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe
>> csound"
>>
>>
>
>
> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"
>
>


Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"

Negative frequency should be mentioned, as a hint for where to go for
more information.

In general, software documentation usually comes in two parts, a
"Reference Manual" and a "User Guide." The user guide is for users
some of whom will definitely not be experts, and the reference manual
is to settle niggling questions or provide complete answers. The
answers must be complete and accurate, but this is more important by
far than that they be understandable by non-experts.

As for the audience for Csound itself, I wish I knew. It is the best
instrument that I know of for what I do -- algorithmic composition --
if I knew of something better, I would surely switch, and I am always
looking.

Because of this very favorable experience with Csound, I am constantly
mystified as to why more people don't use it. I should think the
audience for Csound would include most people who do algorithmic
composition or sound design, as well as many people interested in
interactive computer music. But most people seem to use Max/MSP.

No doubt the steep initial learning curve is a factor, but come on,
most grown ups these days can type.

Regards,
Mike

On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 12:41 PM, Louis Cohen  wrote:
> Sure enough, negative frequency is mentioned in "The Audio Programming
> Book."
>
> Your comment, Justin, raises the question of what the purpose of Csound's
> documentation is: who is the expected audience? and for that matter, who is
> the expected audience for Csound itself?
>
> I consider myself a seasoned programmer (I've been at it since 1959) and a
> composer (I've been at it since 1948), but not an audio synthesis
> specialist. I'm just a Csound user. These dates might suggest that the time
> I have for research into these topics is limited.
>
> So it's great that I can rely on the manual and the Csound user community
> for questions like this one, although the more there is in the manual, the
> less likely I will need to bother the Csound community of experts.
>
> Now, I'm curious: should negative frequency be documented in the manual or
> should it intentionally be left out? What's your opinion?
>
> -Lou
>
>
> On Mar 8, 2011, at 12:21 PM, Justin Glenn Smith wrote:
>
>> Yeah, like many things in csound it is not explicitly documented, but
>> follows naturally from the principles of audio synthesis and the math behind
>> it. You will get vastly from csound if you devote a bit of research into
>> those subjects.
>>
>> peiman khosravi wrote:
>>>
>>> This is a given I think when it comes to table-lookup oscilators.
>>>
>>> Peiman
>>>
>>> On 8 March 2011 16:34, Louis Cohen  wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Thanks, everyone for your rapid responses!!!
>>>>
>>>> I just tested Rory's solution (using negative frequency) and it seems to
>>>> work exactly as needed. Couldn't be simpler!
>>>>
>>>> As far as I can see, this is not documented. I would expect to see
>>>> mention
>>>> of it in the documentation for oscil, but there's nary a trace.
>>>>
>>>> Rory, how did you find out about it? (did you read the source code?)
>>>>
>>>> best,
>>>> Lou
>>>>
>>>> On Mar 8, 2011, at 10:52 AM, Rory Walsh wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Give your oscil a negative frequency. That will cause the sampling
>>>>> increment to be a negative number thus the oscil will read backwards
>>>>> through the table.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 8 March 2011 15:45, Louis Cohen  wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'd like to use the same table for generating k-rate signals reading
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> table forward in some cases and backwards in other cases.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is there an opcode that reads a table from last entry to first entry
>>>>>> at
>>>>>> k-rate?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> thanks!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -Lou Cohen
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>>>>        https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>>>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body
>>>>>> "unsubscribe
>>>>>> csound"
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>>>         https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body
>>>>> "unsubscribe
>>>>> csound"
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>>         https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe
>>>> csound"
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>           https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe
>>> csound"
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>           https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe
>> csound"
>>
>
>
>
> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>           https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe
> csound"
>
>



-- 
Michael Gogins
Irreducible Productions
http://www.michael-gogins.com
Michael dot Gogins at gmail dot com


Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"

I like Miller Puckette's approach with PD - PD itself comes with various terse documentation-by-example style entries (pretty analogous to the csound docs), and then he has a textbook that uses PD as the programming environment for teaching audio synthesis.

I use the csound manual as a reference when I forget which opcode name I wanted or what some of the parameters mean. I have separate resources for mathematics and signal processing. The theoretical type resources apply not just to csound but any digital audio synthesis tool I happen to use. In fact I even reference the Puckette guide and translate the patches into csound mentally. The interface is different (and number crunching / control flow in PD are just plain *weird*) but the signal flow architecture is almost identical, as it is for pretty much every digital audio synthesis environment ever.

So in this specific example, maybe a helpful note about negative frequency could be called for, but it opens a huge can of worms. I think csound documentation as a reference to what is specific to csound, then the standard texts on digital audio synthesis techniques and algorithms for what is relevant beyond csound is a much better approach.

Louis Cohen wrote:
> Sure enough, negative frequency is mentioned in "The Audio Programming
> Book."
> 
> Your comment, Justin, raises the question of what the purpose of
> Csound's documentation is: who is the expected audience? and for that
> matter, who is the expected audience for Csound itself?
> 
> I consider myself a seasoned programmer (I've been at it since 1959) and
> a composer (I've been at it since 1948), but not an audio synthesis
> specialist. I'm just a Csound user. These dates might suggest that the
> time I have for research into these topics is limited.
> 
> So it's great that I can rely on the manual and the Csound user
> community for questions like this one, although the more there is in the
> manual, the less likely I will need to bother the Csound community of
> experts.
> 
> Now, I'm curious: should negative frequency be documented in the manual
> or should it intentionally be left out? What's your opinion?
> 
> -Lou
> 
> 
> On Mar 8, 2011, at 12:21 PM, Justin Glenn Smith wrote:
> 
>> Yeah, like many things in csound it is not explicitly documented, but
>> follows naturally from the principles of audio synthesis and the math
>> behind it. You will get vastly from csound if you devote a bit of
>> research into those subjects.
>>
>> peiman khosravi wrote:
>>> This is a given I think when it comes to table-lookup oscilators.
>>>
>>> Peiman
>>>
>>> On 8 March 2011 16:34, Louis Cohen  wrote:
>>>> Thanks, everyone for your rapid responses!!!
>>>>
>>>> I just tested Rory's solution (using negative frequency) and it
>>>> seems to
>>>> work exactly as needed. Couldn't be simpler!
>>>>
>>>> As far as I can see, this is not documented. I would expect to see
>>>> mention
>>>> of it in the documentation for oscil, but there's nary a trace.
>>>>
>>>> Rory, how did you find out about it? (did you read the source code?)
>>>>
>>>> best,
>>>> Lou
>>>>
>>>> On Mar 8, 2011, at 10:52 AM, Rory Walsh wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Give your oscil a negative frequency. That will cause the sampling
>>>>> increment to be a negative number thus the oscil will read backwards
>>>>> through the table.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 8 March 2011 15:45, Louis Cohen  wrote:
>>>>>> I'd like to use the same table for generating k-rate signals
>>>>>> reading the
>>>>>> table forward in some cases and backwards in other cases.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is there an opcode that reads a table from last entry to first
>>>>>> entry at
>>>>>> k-rate?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> thanks!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -Lou Cohen
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>>>>         https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>>>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body
>>>>>> "unsubscribe
>>>>>> csound"
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>>>          https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body
>>>>> "unsubscribe
>>>>> csound"
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>>          https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body
>>>> "unsubscribe
>>>> csound"
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body
>>> "unsubscribe csound"
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body
>> "unsubscribe csound"
>>
> 
> 
> 
> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe
> csound"
> 
> 



Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"

Hi,

You are right Michael, maybe this information belongs better in the
FLOSS manual rather than the Reference Manual.

Cheers,
Andres

On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 5:50 PM, Michael Gogins  wrote:
> Negative frequency should be mentioned, as a hint for where to go for
> more information.
>
> In general, software documentation usually comes in two parts, a
> "Reference Manual" and a "User Guide." The user guide is for users
> some of whom will definitely not be experts, and the reference manual
> is to settle niggling questions or provide complete answers. The
> answers must be complete and accurate, but this is more important by
> far than that they be understandable by non-experts.
>
> As for the audience for Csound itself, I wish I knew. It is the best
> instrument that I know of for what I do -- algorithmic composition --
> if I knew of something better, I would surely switch, and I am always
> looking.
>
> Because of this very favorable experience with Csound, I am constantly
> mystified as to why more people don't use it. I should think the
> audience for Csound would include most people who do algorithmic
> composition or sound design, as well as many people interested in
> interactive computer music. But most people seem to use Max/MSP.
>
> No doubt the steep initial learning curve is a factor, but come on,
> most grown ups these days can type.
>
> Regards,
> Mike
>
> On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 12:41 PM, Louis Cohen  wrote:
>> Sure enough, negative frequency is mentioned in "The Audio Programming
>> Book."
>>
>> Your comment, Justin, raises the question of what the purpose of Csound's
>> documentation is: who is the expected audience? and for that matter, who is
>> the expected audience for Csound itself?
>>
>> I consider myself a seasoned programmer (I've been at it since 1959) and a
>> composer (I've been at it since 1948), but not an audio synthesis
>> specialist. I'm just a Csound user. These dates might suggest that the time
>> I have for research into these topics is limited.
>>
>> So it's great that I can rely on the manual and the Csound user community
>> for questions like this one, although the more there is in the manual, the
>> less likely I will need to bother the Csound community of experts.
>>
>> Now, I'm curious: should negative frequency be documented in the manual or
>> should it intentionally be left out? What's your opinion?
>>
>> -Lou
>>
>>
>> On Mar 8, 2011, at 12:21 PM, Justin Glenn Smith wrote:
>>
>>> Yeah, like many things in csound it is not explicitly documented, but
>>> follows naturally from the principles of audio synthesis and the math behind
>>> it. You will get vastly from csound if you devote a bit of research into
>>> those subjects.
>>>
>>> peiman khosravi wrote:
>>>>
>>>> This is a given I think when it comes to table-lookup oscilators.
>>>>
>>>> Peiman
>>>>
>>>> On 8 March 2011 16:34, Louis Cohen  wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks, everyone for your rapid responses!!!
>>>>>
>>>>> I just tested Rory's solution (using negative frequency) and it seems to
>>>>> work exactly as needed. Couldn't be simpler!
>>>>>
>>>>> As far as I can see, this is not documented. I would expect to see
>>>>> mention
>>>>> of it in the documentation for oscil, but there's nary a trace.
>>>>>
>>>>> Rory, how did you find out about it? (did you read the source code?)
>>>>>
>>>>> best,
>>>>> Lou
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mar 8, 2011, at 10:52 AM, Rory Walsh wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Give your oscil a negative frequency. That will cause the sampling
>>>>>> increment to be a negative number thus the oscil will read backwards
>>>>>> through the table.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 8 March 2011 15:45, Louis Cohen  wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'd like to use the same table for generating k-rate signals reading
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> table forward in some cases and backwards in other cases.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Is there an opcode that reads a table from last entry to first entry
>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>> k-rate?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> thanks!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -Lou Cohen
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>>>>>        https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>>>>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body
>>>>>>> "unsubscribe
>>>>>>> csound"
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>>>>         https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>>>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body
>>>>>> "unsubscribe
>>>>>> csound"
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>>>         https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe
>>>>> csound"
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>>           https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe
>>>> csound"
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>           https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe
>>> csound"
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>           https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe
>> csound"
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Michael Gogins
> Irreducible Productions
> http://www.michael-gogins.com
> Michael dot Gogins at gmail dot com
>
>
> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"
>
>


Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"

On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 1:25 PM, Andres Cabrera  wrote:
> You are right Michael, maybe this information belongs better in the
> FLOSS manual rather than the Reference Manual.

Where is the FLOSS manual?  I had a link from January, but it seems to
not work anymore.

~ af


Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"

Aaron Krister Johnson wrote:
>  I think the negative frequency should *at least* be mentioned
> somewhere as a general intro to oscillators and tables, if not put into
> every opcode dealing with oscillator frequency. That being said, it does

This just adds clutter which makes the manual harder for me to use. I only need to find out about negative frequency once. I will visit the manual pages for the various oscillators multiple times to clarify how they are distinct from one another and their argument order etc. etc. and the more information is on the page, the harder it is to get the basic reference information I need.

And it isn't just negative frequency - there are so many little things that a new user can't be expected to know: for example that changing amplitude is the equivalent of multiplication of a signal, that zipper noise can be reduced by using a instead of k rate variables, that control rate signals will often work better if you use a k-rate filter like port or portk to smooth the changes, that amplitudes should generally be enveloped and the shape of the envelope will drastically affect how a sound is perceived, that amplitude and frequency are perceived on logarithmic rather than linear scales... these things are all essential for anyone coming from a more conventional way of doing computer music to csound, and they all belong in a tutorial, not a manual.

Regarding PD and ease of use, bangs are no more inherently confusing than a trigger input to a ugen, and multiple outlets is exactly equivalent to multiple output variables on a ugen - there are reasonable conventions for all these things. The main problem for me (aside from the aforementioned learning curve for doing formulas via patching - actually not too hard if you learn a prefix language like lisp first) was the lack of a high level tool (like emacs, vi, eclipse, etc. are for text) that could do transformations to a patch algorithmically, automatically straighten messy patches, etc. etc. My most recent conclusion is that PD has a shallower learning curve in the beginning, and gets very steep very fast if you try to do anything interesting, while csound is the opposite, harder to get 
 started and scales much better. Regarding real time and GUI csound performs much better (in terms of CPU), ease of use wise it just isn't shipped with a big button that says play and a sandb
ox environment where you can add oscillators filters etc. to a patch one at a time, so the initial impression is a bit more daunting.

> follow a very logical common sense "number line" approach where
> "positive=forwards" and "negative=backwards". 
> 
>  I tried PD (which is basically the same interface as MAX), but I
> didn't like it.
> 
> Ironically, I found it very confusing to see signal flow!!! One wouldn't
> think this is the case with a GUI, but it was.
> 
> I also think that PD has, for me, many unclear things that I never could get
> used to: like, what does it mean to have a left and right outlet, and what's
> with all the BANG units, etc. I just found it slowed down, rather severely
> so, my ability to construct simple instruments. Maybe coming from Csound,
> where I feel I can do things methodically and sometimes really fast, I found
> it disappointing.
> 
> I don't know why more folks don't use Csound, but maybe it doesn't matter.
> We have a strong community, and the development isn't stopping anytime soon.
> I have one composition student, aged 12!!!, and he's learning Csound bit by
> bit. We haven't hit any hurdles he hasn't been able to climb yet.
> 
> Other languages for sound have come and gone but I think Csound and MAX are
> the two dominant paradigms that are here to stay. Csound wins hands down in
> my book, although I think MAX/PD may have an edge in terms of GUI/RT
> performance, and certainly popularity. But popularity should never be
> equated with goodness...
> 
> Best,
> AKJ
> 
> On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 12:03 PM, Justin Glenn Smith wrote:
> 
>> I like Miller Puckette's approach with PD - PD itself comes with various
>> terse documentation-by-example style entries (pretty analogous to the csound
>> docs), and then he has a textbook that uses PD as the programming
>> environment for teaching audio synthesis.
>>
>> I use the csound manual as a reference when I forget which opcode name I
>> wanted or what some of the parameters mean. I have separate resources for
>> mathematics and signal processing. The theoretical type resources apply not
>> just to csound but any digital audio synthesis tool I happen to use. In fact
>> I even reference the Puckette guide and translate the patches into csound
>> mentally. The interface is different (and number crunching / control flow in
>> PD are just plain *weird*) but the signal flow architecture is almost
>> identical, as it is for pretty much every digital audio synthesis
>> environment ever.
>>
>> So in this specific example, maybe a helpful note about negative frequency
>> could be called for, but it opens a huge can of worms. I think csound
>> documentation as a reference to what is specific to csound, then the
>> standard texts on digital audio synthesis techniques and algorithms for what
>> is relevant beyond csound is a much better approach.
>>
>> Louis Cohen wrote:
>>> Sure enough, negative frequency is mentioned in "The Audio Programming
>>> Book."
>>>
>>> Your comment, Justin, raises the question of what the purpose of
>>> Csound's documentation is: who is the expected audience? and for that
>>> matter, who is the expected audience for Csound itself?
>>>
>>> I consider myself a seasoned programmer (I've been at it since 1959) and
>>> a composer (I've been at it since 1948), but not an audio synthesis
>>> specialist. I'm just a Csound user. These dates might suggest that the
>>> time I have for research into these topics is limited.
>>>
>>> So it's great that I can rely on the manual and the Csound user
>>> community for questions like this one, although the more there is in the
>>> manual, the less likely I will need to bother the Csound community of
>>> experts.
>>>
>>> Now, I'm curious: should negative frequency be documented in the manual
>>> or should it intentionally be left out? What's your opinion?
>>>
>>> -Lou
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mar 8, 2011, at 12:21 PM, Justin Glenn Smith wrote:
>>>
>>>> Yeah, like many things in csound it is not explicitly documented, but
>>>> follows naturally from the principles of audio synthesis and the math
>>>> behind it. You will get vastly from csound if you devote a bit of
>>>> research into those subjects.
>>>>
>>>> peiman khosravi wrote:
>>>>> This is a given I think when it comes to table-lookup oscilators.
>>>>>
>>>>> Peiman
>>>>>
>>>>> On 8 March 2011 16:34, Louis Cohen  wrote:
>>>>>> Thanks, everyone for your rapid responses!!!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I just tested Rory's solution (using negative frequency) and it
>>>>>> seems to
>>>>>> work exactly as needed. Couldn't be simpler!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As far as I can see, this is not documented. I would expect to see
>>>>>> mention
>>>>>> of it in the documentation for oscil, but there's nary a trace.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Rory, how did you find out about it? (did you read the source code?)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> best,
>>>>>> Lou
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mar 8, 2011, at 10:52 AM, Rory Walsh wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Give your oscil a negative frequency. That will cause the sampling
>>>>>>> increment to be a negative number thus the oscil will read backwards
>>>>>>> through the table.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 8 March 2011 15:45, Louis Cohen  wrote:
>>>>>>>> I'd like to use the same table for generating k-rate signals
>>>>>>>> reading the
>>>>>>>> table forward in some cases and backwards in other cases.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Is there an opcode that reads a table from last entry to first
>>>>>>>> entry at
>>>>>>>> k-rate?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> thanks!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> -Lou Cohen
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>>>>>>         https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>>>>>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body
>>>>>>>> "unsubscribe
>>>>>>>> csound"
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>>>>>          https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>>>>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body
>>>>>>> "unsubscribe
>>>>>>> csound"
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>>>>          https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>>>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body
>>>>>> "unsubscribe
>>>>>> csound"
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>>>            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body
>>>>> "unsubscribe csound"
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>>            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body
>>>> "unsubscribe csound"
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe
>>> csound"
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe
>> csound"
>>
>>
> 
> 



Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"

For what it's worth.... I really, REALLY don't like the documentation
of PD. I find it amazingly difficult to find information about it and
often resort to using MAX documentation and just hoping that it will
be the same or similar. On that note, I do really appreciate the work
put into the Csound manual. I find it very reassuring that there is a
page for every opcode and that there is a big list online that I can
browse, as well as pages for wider topics like score statements if I
know what I'm trying to do. In Max and PD it can be so frustrating to
know what you're trying to do but not be able to remember the weird
name of the object that will do it.

So a big thanks to you all who are trying to make the manual even better!

A

On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 2:31 PM, Justin Glenn Smith  wrote:
> Aaron Krister Johnson wrote:
>>  I think the negative frequency should *at least* be mentioned
>> somewhere as a general intro to oscillators and tables, if not put into
>> every opcode dealing with oscillator frequency. That being said, it does
>
> This just adds clutter which makes the manual harder for me to use. I only need to find out about negative frequency once. I will visit the manual pages for the various oscillators multiple times to clarify how they are distinct from one another and their argument order etc. etc. and the more information is on the page, the harder it is to get the basic reference information I need.
>
> And it isn't just negative frequency - there are so many little things that a new user can't be expected to know: for example that changing amplitude is the equivalent of multiplication of a signal, that zipper noise can be reduced by using a instead of k rate variables, that control rate signals will often work better if you use a k-rate filter like port or portk to smooth the changes, that amplitudes should generally be enveloped and the shape of the envelope will drastically affect how a sound is perceived, that amplitude and frequency are perceived on logarithmic rather than linear scales... these things are all essential for anyone coming from a more conventional way of doing computer music to csound, and they all belong in a tutorial, not a manual.
>
> Regarding PD and ease of use, bangs are no more inherently confusing than a trigger input to a ugen, and multiple outlets is exactly equivalent to multiple output variables on a ugen - there are reasonable conventions for all these things. The main problem for me (aside from the aforementioned learning curve for doing formulas via patching - actually not too hard if you learn a prefix language like lisp first) was the lack of a high level tool (like emacs, vi, eclipse, etc. are for text) that could do transformations to a patch algorithmically, automatically straighten messy patches, etc. etc. My most recent conclusion is that PD has a shallower learning curve in the beginning, and gets very steep very fast if you try to do anything interesting, while csound is the opposite, harder to get started and scales much better. Regarding real time and GUI csound performs much better (in terms of CPU), ease of use wise it just isn't shipped with a big button that says play and a sandb
> ox environment where you can add oscillators filters etc. to a patch one at a time, so the initial impression is a bit more daunting.
>
>> follow a very logical common sense "number line" approach where
>> "positive=forwards" and "negative=backwards". 
>>
>>  I tried PD (which is basically the same interface as MAX), but I
>> didn't like it.
>>
>> Ironically, I found it very confusing to see signal flow!!! One wouldn't
>> think this is the case with a GUI, but it was.
>>
>> I also think that PD has, for me, many unclear things that I never could get
>> used to: like, what does it mean to have a left and right outlet, and what's
>> with all the BANG units, etc. I just found it slowed down, rather severely
>> so, my ability to construct simple instruments. Maybe coming from Csound,
>> where I feel I can do things methodically and sometimes really fast, I found
>> it disappointing.
>>
>> I don't know why more folks don't use Csound, but maybe it doesn't matter.
>> We have a strong community, and the development isn't stopping anytime soon.
>> I have one composition student, aged 12!!!, and he's learning Csound bit by
>> bit. We haven't hit any hurdles he hasn't been able to climb yet.
>>
>> Other languages for sound have come and gone but I think Csound and MAX are
>> the two dominant paradigms that are here to stay. Csound wins hands down in
>> my book, although I think MAX/PD may have an edge in terms of GUI/RT
>> performance, and certainly popularity. But popularity should never be
>> equated with goodness...
>>
>> Best,
>> AKJ
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 12:03 PM, Justin Glenn Smith wrote:
>>
>>> I like Miller Puckette's approach with PD - PD itself comes with various
>>> terse documentation-by-example style entries (pretty analogous to the csound
>>> docs), and then he has a textbook that uses PD as the programming
>>> environment for teaching audio synthesis.
>>>
>>> I use the csound manual as a reference when I forget which opcode name I
>>> wanted or what some of the parameters mean. I have separate resources for
>>> mathematics and signal processing. The theoretical type resources apply not
>>> just to csound but any digital audio synthesis tool I happen to use. In fact
>>> I even reference the Puckette guide and translate the patches into csound
>>> mentally. The interface is different (and number crunching / control flow in
>>> PD are just plain *weird*) but the signal flow architecture is almost
>>> identical, as it is for pretty much every digital audio synthesis
>>> environment ever.
>>>
>>> So in this specific example, maybe a helpful note about negative frequency
>>> could be called for, but it opens a huge can of worms. I think csound
>>> documentation as a reference to what is specific to csound, then the
>>> standard texts on digital audio synthesis techniques and algorithms for what
>>> is relevant beyond csound is a much better approach.
>>>
>>> Louis Cohen wrote:
>>>> Sure enough, negative frequency is mentioned in "The Audio Programming
>>>> Book."
>>>>
>>>> Your comment, Justin, raises the question of what the purpose of
>>>> Csound's documentation is: who is the expected audience? and for that
>>>> matter, who is the expected audience for Csound itself?
>>>>
>>>> I consider myself a seasoned programmer (I've been at it since 1959) and
>>>> a composer (I've been at it since 1948), but not an audio synthesis
>>>> specialist. I'm just a Csound user. These dates might suggest that the
>>>> time I have for research into these topics is limited.
>>>>
>>>> So it's great that I can rely on the manual and the Csound user
>>>> community for questions like this one, although the more there is in the
>>>> manual, the less likely I will need to bother the Csound community of
>>>> experts.
>>>>
>>>> Now, I'm curious: should negative frequency be documented in the manual
>>>> or should it intentionally be left out? What's your opinion?
>>>>
>>>> -Lou
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mar 8, 2011, at 12:21 PM, Justin Glenn Smith wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Yeah, like many things in csound it is not explicitly documented, but
>>>>> follows naturally from the principles of audio synthesis and the math
>>>>> behind it. You will get vastly from csound if you devote a bit of
>>>>> research into those subjects.
>>>>>
>>>>> peiman khosravi wrote:
>>>>>> This is a given I think when it comes to table-lookup oscilators.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Peiman
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 8 March 2011 16:34, Louis Cohen  wrote:
>>>>>>> Thanks, everyone for your rapid responses!!!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I just tested Rory's solution (using negative frequency) and it
>>>>>>> seems to
>>>>>>> work exactly as needed. Couldn't be simpler!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As far as I can see, this is not documented. I would expect to see
>>>>>>> mention
>>>>>>> of it in the documentation for oscil, but there's nary a trace.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Rory, how did you find out about it? (did you read the source code?)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> best,
>>>>>>> Lou
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mar 8, 2011, at 10:52 AM, Rory Walsh wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Give your oscil a negative frequency. That will cause the sampling
>>>>>>>> increment to be a negative number thus the oscil will read backwards
>>>>>>>> through the table.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 8 March 2011 15:45, Louis Cohen  wrote:
>>>>>>>>> I'd like to use the same table for generating k-rate signals
>>>>>>>>> reading the
>>>>>>>>> table forward in some cases and backwards in other cases.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Is there an opcode that reads a table from last entry to first
>>>>>>>>> entry at
>>>>>>>>> k-rate?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> thanks!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> -Lou Cohen
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>>>>>>>         https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>>>>>>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body
>>>>>>>>> "unsubscribe
>>>>>>>>> csound"
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>>>>>>          https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>>>>>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body
>>>>>>>> "unsubscribe
>>>>>>>> csound"
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>>>>>          https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>>>>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body
>>>>>>> "unsubscribe
>>>>>>> csound"
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>>>>            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>>>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body
>>>>>> "unsubscribe csound"
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>>>            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body
>>>>> "unsubscribe csound"
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>>            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe
>>>> csound"
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe
>>> csound"
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"
>
>


Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"

On 8 March 2011 19:31, Justin Glenn Smith  wrote:

> Regarding PD and ease of use, bangs are no more inherently confusing than a trigger input to a ugen, and multiple outlets is exactly equivalent to multiple output variables on a ugen - there are reasonable conventions for all these things. The main problem for me (aside from the aforementioned learning curve for doing formulas via patching - actually not too hard if you learn a prefix language like lisp first) was the lack of a high level tool (like emacs, vi, eclipse, etc. are for text) that could do transformations to a patch algorithmically, automatically straighten messy patches, etc. etc. My most recent conclusion is that PD has a shallower learning curve in the beginning, and gets very steep very fast if you try to do anything interesting, while csound is the opposite, harder to get started and scales much better. Regarding real time and GUI csound performs much better (in terms of CPU), ease of use wise it just isn't shipped with a big button that says play and a sandb
> ox environment where you can add oscillators filters etc. to a patch one at a time, so the initial impression is a bit more daunting.
>

Yes I totally agree with you on this. And the same goes for maxmsp. I
often compare csound with a powerful modular synthesiser, with each
opcode being a ready-to-use unit. Max, pd and sc just don't work like
that. To start using them one has to initially approach them as a
language. I started using Csound as a sound processor and only later
began to think of it as a deeper programming language.

And I don't think there is another book  for maxmsp or SC that can
compare with the Csound book.

Best,

Peiman


Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"

peiman khosravi wrote:

> ... I don't think there is another book  for maxmsp or SC that can compare with the Csound book.
>
>   

Indeed. However:

    
http://mitpress.mit.edu/catalog/item/default.asp?ttype=2&tid=12571&mode=toc

I know some of the contributors, and I expect the book to be towards the 
same high caliber of the available Csound books.

Best,

dp


Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"

But there are Pd books! I'm not so sure I agree with some of the posts
regarding Pd. As far as I can tell all you really need to get going
with Pd is a good grasp of synthesis and digital audio. It's drag and
drop after that. With Csound you have to learn a programming language.
I use both systems in teaching and in my music making. I think it's
great to have two really powerful open and free software environments
for creating music. [I've never used SC :( ]


On 9 March 2011 11:46, peiman khosravi  wrote:
> On 8 March 2011 19:31, Justin Glenn Smith  wrote:
>
>> Regarding PD and ease of use, bangs are no more inherently confusing than a trigger input to a ugen, and multiple outlets is exactly equivalent to multiple output variables on a ugen - there are reasonable conventions for all these things. The main problem for me (aside from the aforementioned learning curve for doing formulas via patching - actually not too hard if you learn a prefix language like lisp first) was the lack of a high level tool (like emacs, vi, eclipse, etc. are for text) that could do transformations to a patch algorithmically, automatically straighten messy patches, etc. etc. My most recent conclusion is that PD has a shallower learning curve in the beginning, and gets very steep very fast if you try to do anything interesting, while csound is the opposite, harder to get started and scales much better. Regarding real time and GUI csound performs much better (in terms of CPU), ease of use wise it just isn't shipped with a big button that says play and a sandb
>> ox environment where you can add oscillators filters etc. to a patch one at a time, so the initial impression is a bit more daunting.
>>
>
> Yes I totally agree with you on this. And the same goes for maxmsp. I
> often compare csound with a powerful modular synthesiser, with each
> opcode being a ready-to-use unit. Max, pd and sc just don't work like
> that. To start using them one has to initially approach them as a
> language. I started using Csound as a sound processor and only later
> began to think of it as a deeper programming language.
>
> And I don't think there is another book  for maxmsp or SC that can
> compare with the Csound book.
>
> Best,
>
> Peiman
>
>
> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"
>
>


Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"

Rory Walsh wrote:

> But there are Pd books!

I have one book dedicated to Pd, and it is definitely not a tutorial or 
introduction to the system. It is a good book, just not for a beginner.


>  I'm not so sure I agree with some of the posts
> regarding Pd. As far as I can tell all you really need to get going
> with Pd is a good grasp of synthesis and digital audio. It's drag and
> drop after that. With Csound you have to learn a programming language.
>   

I agree with your assessment, but I think a little differently about it. 
For my purposes the Pd/GEM connection was of primary interest, so I've 
been less interested in Pd's synthesis capabilities per se.

As for relative ease of learning: Well, I won't touch that issue again 
with an 8-foot pole. I have strong opinions regarding effort.

I work occasionally with Pd and SC3, and I keep coming back to Csound. 
Probably because I know it best of the three systems, but I think it's 
fair to claim that it is also as advanced as any other system with 
similar goals. It suits my purposes.


> I use both systems in teaching and in my music making. I think it's
> great to have two really powerful open and free software environments
> for creating music. [I've never used SC :( ]
>   

"And SC makes three." :)


Best,

dp



Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"

Of course I did not mean to suggest that one of these tools is more
powerful than others. But in terms of the learning curve I still think
that csound is the smoother one. And SC3 is the most demanding because
of its object orientated nature.

As an example, when I first started reading general books on computer
sound synthesis I'd go to pd and think: OK it'd be really cool to try
some FFT or some FOF. But where do you start???

With Csound, do a search in the manual, copy and paste the opcode
examples and you're rocking. You don't even need to learn the language
as such. Of course the more you use it the deeper you can get into the
programming side of things.

My ideal tool: the engine of Csound + GUI facilities like Max +
timeline and score generation like blue + some of the elegance and
economy of the SC3 language.

My current tools bounded by reality: Csound/blue/jmask, Csound/max.

P

On 9 March 2011 12:33, Dave Phillips  wrote:
> Rory Walsh wrote:
>
>> But there are Pd books!
>
> I have one book dedicated to Pd, and it is definitely not a tutorial or
> introduction to the system. It is a good book, just not for a beginner.
>
>
>>  I'm not so sure I agree with some of the posts
>> regarding Pd. As far as I can tell all you really need to get going
>> with Pd is a good grasp of synthesis and digital audio. It's drag and
>> drop after that. With Csound you have to learn a programming language.
>>
>
> I agree with your assessment, but I think a little differently about it. For
> my purposes the Pd/GEM connection was of primary interest, so I've been less
> interested in Pd's synthesis capabilities per se.
>
> As for relative ease of learning: Well, I won't touch that issue again with
> an 8-foot pole. I have strong opinions regarding effort.
>
> I work occasionally with Pd and SC3, and I keep coming back to Csound.
> Probably because I know it best of the three systems, but I think it's fair
> to claim that it is also as advanced as any other system with similar goals.
> It suits my purposes.
>
>
>> I use both systems in teaching and in my music making. I think it's
>> great to have two really powerful open and free software environments
>> for creating music. [I've never used SC :( ]
>>
>
> "And SC makes three." :)
>
>
> Best,
>
> dp
>
>
>
> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>           https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe
> csound"
>
>


Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"

peiman khosravi wrote:
> Of course I did not mean to suggest that one of these tools is more
> powerful than others. But in terms of the learning curve I still think
> that csound is the smoother one. And SC3 is the most demanding because
> of its object orientated nature.
> 

Not at all. sc is very easy, in fact part of that ease of use is because of the object orientation (economy of expression via layers of abstraction, overloading of operators means '+' usally does what you think it would regardless of data type etc.). You don't need to get oo to be able to use sc any more than you need to get trig, hilbert spaces, or vector calculus to use oscillators, filters, and ffts. You mention copying and pasting from the manual to use csound without learning the language - this is much easier to do with sc than it is in csound (though their manual is not as well organized). I stopped using sc because the language server is a huge resource hog and as for the synth server their ugens sound like crap and use too much CPU doing it. And then I tried to do things that reli
 ed on interaction between the editor environment, the language server, and the synth server, and the asynchronous programming required for such things leads to huge intermittent slam-head-on
-wall bugs.

> As an example, when I first started reading general books on computer
> sound synthesis I'd go to pd and think: OK it'd be really cool to try
> some FFT or some FOF. But where do you start???

You open up the built in help browser (under the menu heading "help"), and browse to the heading that says: 3.audio.examples/ and then the subheading I01.Fourier.analysis.pd and that opens a patch that you can immediately hear and start experimenting with. Sadly this list is unalphebetized, as it is more of a tutorial than a reference.

Or you right click on the canvas, select "help", and it pops up a categorized (but yet again unalphabetized!) list of the basic units that you can immediately copy and paste into your patch, or right click on to pull up their docs (fft and ifft are under the heading "audio math").

The docs are there, just different (and yes, much less usable than csound's excellent docs).

Regarding fof vanilla pd is much smaller than csound - which is nice for a beginner because there are fewer objects to learn or sort out, but bad for the expert because you have to implement your own granulator, your own fof, your own waveshaper, your own fm setup, etc. out of the basic building blocks provided.

The real problem with pd is as soon as you start trying to do anything interesting your patch becomes this stupid tangle of patch lines and there is no regexp query search and replace like I would be able to use if I was using my beloved text editor, so refactoring is incredibly tedious. I have actually "saved time" in working on a pd patch by opening the nearly-gibberish patch file in emacs and editing that (I put "saved time" in quotes because of course at that point I would have been better off just using a textual language in the first place).

And pd ugens sound as bad as sc, if not worse.

> 
> With Csound, do a search in the manual, copy and paste the opcode
> examples and you're rocking. You don't even need to learn the language
> as such. Of course the more you use it the deeper you can get into the
> programming side of things.

Yes, I think a big strength with csound is being able to leverage the existing and very powerful general purpose tools since the patch is just text (so you can do everything in a standard browser, text editor, etc.).

> 
> My ideal tool: the engine of Csound + GUI facilities like Max +
> timeline and score generation like blue + some of the elegance and
> economy of the SC3 language.
> 
> My current tools bounded by reality: Csound/blue/jmask, Csound/max.
> 
> P
> 
> On 9 March 2011 12:33, Dave Phillips  wrote:
>> Rory Walsh wrote:
>>
>>> But there are Pd books!
>> I have one book dedicated to Pd, and it is definitely not a tutorial or
>> introduction to the system. It is a good book, just not for a beginner.
>>
>>
>>>  I'm not so sure I agree with some of the posts
>>> regarding Pd. As far as I can tell all you really need to get going
>>> with Pd is a good grasp of synthesis and digital audio. It's drag and
>>> drop after that. With Csound you have to learn a programming language.
>>>
>> I agree with your assessment, but I think a little differently about it. For
>> my purposes the Pd/GEM connection was of primary interest, so I've been less
>> interested in Pd's synthesis capabilities per se.
>>
>> As for relative ease of learning: Well, I won't touch that issue again with
>> an 8-foot pole. I have strong opinions regarding effort.
>>
>> I work occasionally with Pd and SC3, and I keep coming back to Csound.
>> Probably because I know it best of the three systems, but I think it's fair
>> to claim that it is also as advanced as any other system with similar goals.
>> It suits my purposes.
>>
>>
>>> I use both systems in teaching and in my music making. I think it's
>>> great to have two really powerful open and free software environments
>>> for creating music. [I've never used SC :( ]
>>>
>> "And SC makes three." :)
>>
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> dp
>>
>>
>>
>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>           https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe
>> csound"
>>
>>
> 
> 
> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>             https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"
> 
> 



Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"

peiman khosravi wrote:
> Of course I did not mean to suggest that one of these tools is more
> powerful than others. But in terms of the learning curve I still think
> that csound is the smoother one. And SC3 is the most demanding because
> of its object orientated nature.
> 

Not at all. sc is very easy, in fact part of that ease of use is because of the object orientation (economy of expression via layers of abstraction, overloading of operators means '+' usally does what you think it would regardless of data type etc.). You don't need to get oo to be able to use sc any more than you need to get trig, hilbert spaces, or vector calculus to use oscillators, filters, and ffts. You mention copying and pasting from the manual to use csound without learning the language - this is much easier to do with sc than it is in csound (though their manual is not as well organized). I stopped using sc because the language server is a huge resource hog and as for the synth server their ugens sound like crap and use too much CPU doing it. And then I tried to do things that reli
 ed on interaction between the editor environment, the language server, and the synth server, and the asynchronous programming required for such things leads to huge intermittent slam-head-on
-wall bugs.

> As an example, when I first started reading general books on computer
> sound synthesis I'd go to pd and think: OK it'd be really cool to try
> some FFT or some FOF. But where do you start???

You open up the built in help browser (under the menu heading "help"), and browse to the heading that says: 3.audio.examples/ and then the subheading I01.Fourier.analysis.pd and that opens a patch that you can immediately hear and start experimenting with. Sadly this list is unalphebetized, and more of a tutorial than a reference.

Or you right click on the canvas, select "help", and it pops up a categorized (but once again unalphabetized!) list of the basic units. Each of these units you can immediately copy and paste into your patch, or right click on to pull up their docs (fft and ifft are under the heading "audio math").

The docs are there, just different (and yes, much less usable than csound's excellent docs).

Regarding fof vanilla pd is much smaller than csound - which is nice for a beginner because there are fewer objects to learn or sort out, but bad for the expert because you have to implement your own granulator, your own fof, your own waveshaper, your own fm setup, etc. out of the basic building blocks provided.

The real problem with pd is as soon as you start trying to do anything interesting your patch becomes this stupid tangle of patch lines and there is no regexp query search and replace like I would be able to use if I was using my beloved text editor, so refactoring is incredibly tedious. At one point I "saved time" by opening a pd patch file in emacs and editing it there, I put "saved time" in quotes because by that point I would have been better off using a textual language in the first place.

And pd ugens sound as bad as sc, if not worse.

> 
> With Csound, do a search in the manual, copy and paste the opcode
> examples and you're rocking. You don't even need to learn the language
> as such. Of course the more you use it the deeper you can get into the
> programming side of things.

Yes, I think a big strength with csound is being able to leverage the existing and very powerful general purpose tools since the patch is just text (so you can do everything in a standard browser, text editor, etc.).

> 
> My ideal tool: the engine of Csound + GUI facilities like Max +
> timeline and score generation like blue + some of the elegance and
> economy of the SC3 language.
> 
> My current tools bounded by reality: Csound/blue/jmask, Csound/max.
> 
> P
> 
> On 9 March 2011 12:33, Dave Phillips  wrote:
>> Rory Walsh wrote:
>>
>>> But there are Pd books!
>> I have one book dedicated to Pd, and it is definitely not a tutorial or
>> introduction to the system. It is a good book, just not for a beginner.
>>
>>
>>>  I'm not so sure I agree with some of the posts
>>> regarding Pd. As far as I can tell all you really need to get going
>>> with Pd is a good grasp of synthesis and digital audio. It's drag and
>>> drop after that. With Csound you have to learn a programming language.
>>>
>> I agree with your assessment, but I think a little differently about it. For
>> my purposes the Pd/GEM connection was of primary interest, so I've been less
>> interested in Pd's synthesis capabilities per se.
>>
>> As for relative ease of learning: Well, I won't touch that issue again with
>> an 8-foot pole. I have strong opinions regarding effort.
>>
>> I work occasionally with Pd and SC3, and I keep coming back to Csound.
>> Probably because I know it best of the three systems, but I think it's fair
>> to claim that it is also as advanced as any other system with similar goals.
>> It suits my purposes.
>>
>>
>>> I use both systems in teaching and in my music making. I think it's
>>> great to have two really powerful open and free software environments
>>> for creating music. [I've never used SC :( ]
>>>
>> "And SC makes three." :)
>>
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> dp
>>
>>
>>
>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>           https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe
>> csound"
>>
>>
> 
> 
> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>             https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"
> 
> 




Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"

peiman khosravi wrote:
> Of course I did not mean to suggest that one of these tools is more
> powerful than others. But in terms of the learning curve I still think
> that csound is the smoother one. And SC3 is the most demanding because
> of its object orientated nature.
> 

Not at all. sc is very easy, in fact part of that ease of use is because of the object orientation (economy of expression via layers of abstraction, overloading of operators means '+' usally does what you think it would regardless of data type etc.). You don't need to get oo to be able to use sc any more than you need to get trig, hilbert spaces, or vector calculus to use oscillators, filters, and ffts. You mention copying and pasting from the manual to use csound without learning the language - this is much easier to do with sc than it is in csound (though their manual is not as well organized). I stopped using sc because the language server is a huge resource hog and as for the synth server their ugens sound like crap and use too much CPU doing it. And then I tried to do things that reli
 ed on interaction between the editor environment, the language server, and the synth server, and the asynchronous programming required for such things leads to huge intermittent slam-head-on
-wall bugs.

> As an example, when I first started reading general books on computer
> sound synthesis I'd go to pd and think: OK it'd be really cool to try
> some FFT or some FOF. But where do you start???

You open up the built in help browser (under the menu heading "help"), and browse to the heading that says: 3.audio.examples/ and then the subheading I01.Fourier.analysis.pd and that opens a patch that you can immediately hear and start experimenting with. Sadly this list is unalphebetized, and more of a tutorial than a reference.

Or you right click on the canvas, select "help", and it pops up a categorized (but once again unalphabetized!) list of the basic units. Each of these units you can immediately copy and paste into your patch, or right click on to pull up their docs (fft and ifft are under the heading "audio math").

The docs are there, just different (and yes, much less usable than csound's excellent docs).

Regarding fof vanilla pd is much smaller than csound - which is nice for a beginner because there are fewer objects to learn or sort out, but bad for the expert because you have to implement your own granulator, your own fof, your own waveshaper, your own fm setup, etc. out of the basic building blocks provided.

The real problem with pd is as soon as you start trying to do anything interesting your patch becomes this stupid tangle of patch lines and there is no regexp query search and replace like I would be able to use if I was using my beloved text editor, so refactoring is incredibly tedious. At one point I "saved time" by opening a pd patch file in emacs and editing it there, I put "saved time" in quotes because by that point I would have been better off using a textual language in the first place.

And pd ugens sound as bad as sc, if not worse.

> 
> With Csound, do a search in the manual, copy and paste the opcode
> examples and you're rocking. You don't even need to learn the language
> as such. Of course the more you use it the deeper you can get into the
> programming side of things.

Yes, I think a big strength with csound is being able to leverage the existing and very powerful general purpose tools since the patch is just text (so you can do everything in a standard browser, text editor, etc.).

> 
> My ideal tool: the engine of Csound + GUI facilities like Max +
> timeline and score generation like blue + some of the elegance and
> economy of the SC3 language.
> 
> My current tools bounded by reality: Csound/blue/jmask, Csound/max.
> 
> P
> 
> On 9 March 2011 12:33, Dave Phillips  wrote:
>> Rory Walsh wrote:
>>
>>> But there are Pd books!
>> I have one book dedicated to Pd, and it is definitely not a tutorial or
>> introduction to the system. It is a good book, just not for a beginner.
>>
>>
>>>  I'm not so sure I agree with some of the posts
>>> regarding Pd. As far as I can tell all you really need to get going
>>> with Pd is a good grasp of synthesis and digital audio. It's drag and
>>> drop after that. With Csound you have to learn a programming language.
>>>
>> I agree with your assessment, but I think a little differently about it. For
>> my purposes the Pd/GEM connection was of primary interest, so I've been less
>> interested in Pd's synthesis capabilities per se.
>>
>> As for relative ease of learning: Well, I won't touch that issue again with
>> an 8-foot pole. I have strong opinions regarding effort.
>>
>> I work occasionally with Pd and SC3, and I keep coming back to Csound.
>> Probably because I know it best of the three systems, but I think it's fair
>> to claim that it is also as advanced as any other system with similar goals.
>> It suits my purposes.
>>
>>
>>> I use both systems in teaching and in my music making. I think it's
>>> great to have two really powerful open and free software environments
>>> for creating music. [I've never used SC :( ]
>>>
>> "And SC makes three." :)
>>
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> dp
>>
>>
>>
>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>           https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe
>> csound"
>>
>>
> 
> 
> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>             https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"
> 
> 




Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"

Csound definitely has the most features. csound~ in max is great. I
wish they had a PD version, then it would be over.

I like using software sequencers, and while doing the orchestras don't
bother me I detest writing Csound scores, which is why I never used it
for anything serious until a couple months ago when I discovered
csound~. Making it integrate and pass data WITH the audio back and
forth natively in Ableton is fun times.

On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 8:30 AM, Aaron Krister Johnson
 wrote:
> Justin,
>
> You feel so strongly about these comparisons that you told us 3 times! ;)
>
> AKJ
>
> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 8:20 AM, Justin Glenn Smith 
> wrote:
>>
>> peiman khosravi wrote:
>> > Of course I did not mean to suggest that one of these tools is more
>> > powerful than others. But in terms of the learning curve I still think
>> > that csound is the smoother one. And SC3 is the most demanding because
>> > of its object orientated nature.
>> >
>>
>> Not at all. sc is very easy, in fact part of that ease of use is because
>> of the object orientation (economy of expression via layers of abstraction,
>> overloading of operators means '+' usally does what you think it would
>> regardless of data type etc.). You don't need to get oo to be able to use sc
>> any more than you need to get trig, hilbert spaces, or vector calculus to
>> use oscillators, filters, and ffts. You mention copying and pasting from the
>> manual to use csound without learning the language - this is much easier to
>> do with sc than it is in csound (though their manual is not as well
>> organized). I stopped using sc because the language server is a huge
>> resource hog and as for the synth server their ugens sound like crap and use
>> too much CPU doing it. And then I tried to do things that relied on
>> interaction between the editor environment, the language server, and the
>> synth server, and the asynchronous programming required for such things
>> leads to huge intermittent slam-head-on
>> -wall bugs.
>>
>> > As an example, when I first started reading general books on computer
>> > sound synthesis I'd go to pd and think: OK it'd be really cool to try
>> > some FFT or some FOF. But where do you start???
>>
>> You open up the built in help browser (under the menu heading "help"), and
>> browse to the heading that says: 3.audio.examples/ and then the subheading
>> I01.Fourier.analysis.pd and that opens a patch that you can immediately hear
>> and start experimenting with. Sadly this list is unalphebetized, as it is
>> more of a tutorial than a reference.
>>
>> Or you right click on the canvas, select "help", and it pops up a
>> categorized (but yet again unalphabetized!) list of the basic units that you
>> can immediately copy and paste into your patch, or right click on to pull up
>> their docs (fft and ifft are under the heading "audio math").
>>
>> The docs are there, just different (and yes, much less usable than
>> csound's excellent docs).
>>
>> Regarding fof vanilla pd is much smaller than csound - which is nice for a
>> beginner because there are fewer objects to learn or sort out, but bad for
>> the expert because you have to implement your own granulator, your own fof,
>> your own waveshaper, your own fm setup, etc. out of the basic building
>> blocks provided.
>>
>> The real problem with pd is as soon as you start trying to do anything
>> interesting your patch becomes this stupid tangle of patch lines and there
>> is no regexp query search and replace like I would be able to use if I was
>> using my beloved text editor, so refactoring is incredibly tedious. I have
>> actually "saved time" in working on a pd patch by opening the
>> nearly-gibberish patch file in emacs and editing that (I put "saved time" in
>> quotes because of course at that point I would have been better off just
>> using a textual language in the first place).
>>
>> And pd ugens sound as bad as sc, if not worse.
>>
>> >
>> > With Csound, do a search in the manual, copy and paste the opcode
>> > examples and you're rocking. You don't even need to learn the language
>> > as such. Of course the more you use it the deeper you can get into the
>> > programming side of things.
>>
>> Yes, I think a big strength with csound is being able to leverage the
>> existing and very powerful general purpose tools since the patch is just
>> text (so you can do everything in a standard browser, text editor, etc.).
>>
>> >
>> > My ideal tool: the engine of Csound + GUI facilities like Max +
>> > timeline and score generation like blue + some of the elegance and
>> > economy of the SC3 language.
>> >
>> > My current tools bounded by reality: Csound/blue/jmask, Csound/max.
>> >
>> > P
>> >
>> > On 9 March 2011 12:33, Dave Phillips  wrote:
>> >> Rory Walsh wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> But there are Pd books!
>> >> I have one book dedicated to Pd, and it is definitely not a tutorial or
>> >> introduction to the system. It is a good book, just not for a beginner.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>>  I'm not so sure I agree with some of the posts
>> >>> regarding Pd. As far as I can tell all you really need to get going
>> >>> with Pd is a good grasp of synthesis and digital audio. It's drag and
>> >>> drop after that. With Csound you have to learn a programming language.
>> >>>
>> >> I agree with your assessment, but I think a little differently about
>> >> it. For
>> >> my purposes the Pd/GEM connection was of primary interest, so I've been
>> >> less
>> >> interested in Pd's synthesis capabilities per se.
>> >>
>> >> As for relative ease of learning: Well, I won't touch that issue again
>> >> with
>> >> an 8-foot pole. I have strong opinions regarding effort.
>> >>
>> >> I work occasionally with Pd and SC3, and I keep coming back to Csound.
>> >> Probably because I know it best of the three systems, but I think it's
>> >> fair
>> >> to claim that it is also as advanced as any other system with similar
>> >> goals.
>> >> It suits my purposes.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>> I use both systems in teaching and in my music making. I think it's
>> >>> great to have two really powerful open and free software environments
>> >>> for creating music. [I've never used SC :( ]
>> >>>
>> >> "And SC makes three." :)
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Best,
>> >>
>> >> dp
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>> >>           https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>> >> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>> >> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body
>> >> "unsubscribe
>> >> csound"
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> > Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>> >             https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>> > Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>> > To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe
>> > csound"
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe
>> csound"
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Aaron Krister Johnson
> http://www.akjmusic.com
> http://www.untwelve.org
>
>


Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"

On 9 March 2011 16:40, Josh Moore  wrote:
> Csound definitely has the most features. csound~ in max is great. I
> wish they had a PD version, then it would be over.
>

But there is a pd version!!


> I like using software sequencers, and while doing the orchestras don't
> bother me I detest writing Csound scores, which is why I never used it
> for anything serious until a couple months ago when I discovered
> csound~. Making it integrate and pass data WITH the audio back and
> forth natively in Ableton is fun times.
>
> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 8:30 AM, Aaron Krister Johnson
>  wrote:
>> Justin,
>>
>> You feel so strongly about these comparisons that you told us 3 times! ;)
>>
>> AKJ
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 8:20 AM, Justin Glenn Smith 
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> peiman khosravi wrote:
>>> > Of course I did not mean to suggest that one of these tools is more
>>> > powerful than others. But in terms of the learning curve I still think
>>> > that csound is the smoother one. And SC3 is the most demanding because
>>> > of its object orientated nature.
>>> >
>>>
>>> Not at all. sc is very easy, in fact part of that ease of use is because
>>> of the object orientation (economy of expression via layers of abstraction,
>>> overloading of operators means '+' usally does what you think it would
>>> regardless of data type etc.). You don't need to get oo to be able to use sc
>>> any more than you need to get trig, hilbert spaces, or vector calculus to
>>> use oscillators, filters, and ffts. You mention copying and pasting from the
>>> manual to use csound without learning the language - this is much easier to
>>> do with sc than it is in csound (though their manual is not as well
>>> organized). I stopped using sc because the language server is a huge
>>> resource hog and as for the synth server their ugens sound like crap and use
>>> too much CPU doing it. And then I tried to do things that relied on
>>> interaction between the editor environment, the language server, and the
>>> synth server, and the asynchronous programming required for such things
>>> leads to huge intermittent slam-head-on
>>> -wall bugs.
>>>
>>> > As an example, when I first started reading general books on computer
>>> > sound synthesis I'd go to pd and think: OK it'd be really cool to try
>>> > some FFT or some FOF. But where do you start???
>>>
>>> You open up the built in help browser (under the menu heading "help"), and
>>> browse to the heading that says: 3.audio.examples/ and then the subheading
>>> I01.Fourier.analysis.pd and that opens a patch that you can immediately hear
>>> and start experimenting with. Sadly this list is unalphebetized, as it is
>>> more of a tutorial than a reference.
>>>
>>> Or you right click on the canvas, select "help", and it pops up a
>>> categorized (but yet again unalphabetized!) list of the basic units that you
>>> can immediately copy and paste into your patch, or right click on to pull up
>>> their docs (fft and ifft are under the heading "audio math").
>>>
>>> The docs are there, just different (and yes, much less usable than
>>> csound's excellent docs).
>>>
>>> Regarding fof vanilla pd is much smaller than csound - which is nice for a
>>> beginner because there are fewer objects to learn or sort out, but bad for
>>> the expert because you have to implement your own granulator, your own fof,
>>> your own waveshaper, your own fm setup, etc. out of the basic building
>>> blocks provided.
>>>
>>> The real problem with pd is as soon as you start trying to do anything
>>> interesting your patch becomes this stupid tangle of patch lines and there
>>> is no regexp query search and replace like I would be able to use if I was
>>> using my beloved text editor, so refactoring is incredibly tedious. I have
>>> actually "saved time" in working on a pd patch by opening the
>>> nearly-gibberish patch file in emacs and editing that (I put "saved time" in
>>> quotes because of course at that point I would have been better off just
>>> using a textual language in the first place).
>>>
>>> And pd ugens sound as bad as sc, if not worse.
>>>
>>> >
>>> > With Csound, do a search in the manual, copy and paste the opcode
>>> > examples and you're rocking. You don't even need to learn the language
>>> > as such. Of course the more you use it the deeper you can get into the
>>> > programming side of things.
>>>
>>> Yes, I think a big strength with csound is being able to leverage the
>>> existing and very powerful general purpose tools since the patch is just
>>> text (so you can do everything in a standard browser, text editor, etc.).
>>>
>>> >
>>> > My ideal tool: the engine of Csound + GUI facilities like Max +
>>> > timeline and score generation like blue + some of the elegance and
>>> > economy of the SC3 language.
>>> >
>>> > My current tools bounded by reality: Csound/blue/jmask, Csound/max.
>>> >
>>> > P
>>> >
>>> > On 9 March 2011 12:33, Dave Phillips  wrote:
>>> >> Rory Walsh wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >>> But there are Pd books!
>>> >> I have one book dedicated to Pd, and it is definitely not a tutorial or
>>> >> introduction to the system. It is a good book, just not for a beginner.
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>>  I'm not so sure I agree with some of the posts
>>> >>> regarding Pd. As far as I can tell all you really need to get going
>>> >>> with Pd is a good grasp of synthesis and digital audio. It's drag and
>>> >>> drop after that. With Csound you have to learn a programming language.
>>> >>>
>>> >> I agree with your assessment, but I think a little differently about
>>> >> it. For
>>> >> my purposes the Pd/GEM connection was of primary interest, so I've been
>>> >> less
>>> >> interested in Pd's synthesis capabilities per se.
>>> >>
>>> >> As for relative ease of learning: Well, I won't touch that issue again
>>> >> with
>>> >> an 8-foot pole. I have strong opinions regarding effort.
>>> >>
>>> >> I work occasionally with Pd and SC3, and I keep coming back to Csound.
>>> >> Probably because I know it best of the three systems, but I think it's
>>> >> fair
>>> >> to claim that it is also as advanced as any other system with similar
>>> >> goals.
>>> >> It suits my purposes.
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>> I use both systems in teaching and in my music making. I think it's
>>> >>> great to have two really powerful open and free software environments
>>> >>> for creating music. [I've never used SC :( ]
>>> >>>
>>> >> "And SC makes three." :)
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> Best,
>>> >>
>>> >> dp
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>> >>           https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>> >> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>> >> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body
>>> >> "unsubscribe
>>> >> csound"
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>> >             https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>> > Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>> > To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe
>>> > csound"
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe
>>> csound"
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Aaron Krister Johnson
>> http://www.akjmusic.com
>> http://www.untwelve.org
>>
>>
>
>
> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"
>
>


Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"

Really, where might that be? It wasn't on the csound~ site. :P

On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 9:35 AM, peiman khosravi
 wrote:
> On 9 March 2011 16:40, Josh Moore  wrote:
>> Csound definitely has the most features. csound~ in max is great. I
>> wish they had a PD version, then it would be over.
>>
>
> But there is a pd version!!
>
>
>> I like using software sequencers, and while doing the orchestras don't
>> bother me I detest writing Csound scores, which is why I never used it
>> for anything serious until a couple months ago when I discovered
>> csound~. Making it integrate and pass data WITH the audio back and
>> forth natively in Ableton is fun times.
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 8:30 AM, Aaron Krister Johnson
>>  wrote:
>>> Justin,
>>>
>>> You feel so strongly about these comparisons that you told us 3 times! ;)
>>>
>>> AKJ
>>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 8:20 AM, Justin Glenn Smith 
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> peiman khosravi wrote:
>>>> > Of course I did not mean to suggest that one of these tools is more
>>>> > powerful than others. But in terms of the learning curve I still think
>>>> > that csound is the smoother one. And SC3 is the most demanding because
>>>> > of its object orientated nature.
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>> Not at all. sc is very easy, in fact part of that ease of use is because
>>>> of the object orientation (economy of expression via layers of abstraction,
>>>> overloading of operators means '+' usally does what you think it would
>>>> regardless of data type etc.). You don't need to get oo to be able to use sc
>>>> any more than you need to get trig, hilbert spaces, or vector calculus to
>>>> use oscillators, filters, and ffts. You mention copying and pasting from the
>>>> manual to use csound without learning the language - this is much easier to
>>>> do with sc than it is in csound (though their manual is not as well
>>>> organized). I stopped using sc because the language server is a huge
>>>> resource hog and as for the synth server their ugens sound like crap and use
>>>> too much CPU doing it. And then I tried to do things that relied on
>>>> interaction between the editor environment, the language server, and the
>>>> synth server, and the asynchronous programming required for such things
>>>> leads to huge intermittent slam-head-on
>>>> -wall bugs.
>>>>
>>>> > As an example, when I first started reading general books on computer
>>>> > sound synthesis I'd go to pd and think: OK it'd be really cool to try
>>>> > some FFT or some FOF. But where do you start???
>>>>
>>>> You open up the built in help browser (under the menu heading "help"), and
>>>> browse to the heading that says: 3.audio.examples/ and then the subheading
>>>> I01.Fourier.analysis.pd and that opens a patch that you can immediately hear
>>>> and start experimenting with. Sadly this list is unalphebetized, as it is
>>>> more of a tutorial than a reference.
>>>>
>>>> Or you right click on the canvas, select "help", and it pops up a
>>>> categorized (but yet again unalphabetized!) list of the basic units that you
>>>> can immediately copy and paste into your patch, or right click on to pull up
>>>> their docs (fft and ifft are under the heading "audio math").
>>>>
>>>> The docs are there, just different (and yes, much less usable than
>>>> csound's excellent docs).
>>>>
>>>> Regarding fof vanilla pd is much smaller than csound - which is nice for a
>>>> beginner because there are fewer objects to learn or sort out, but bad for
>>>> the expert because you have to implement your own granulator, your own fof,
>>>> your own waveshaper, your own fm setup, etc. out of the basic building
>>>> blocks provided.
>>>>
>>>> The real problem with pd is as soon as you start trying to do anything
>>>> interesting your patch becomes this stupid tangle of patch lines and there
>>>> is no regexp query search and replace like I would be able to use if I was
>>>> using my beloved text editor, so refactoring is incredibly tedious. I have
>>>> actually "saved time" in working on a pd patch by opening the
>>>> nearly-gibberish patch file in emacs and editing that (I put "saved time" in
>>>> quotes because of course at that point I would have been better off just
>>>> using a textual language in the first place).
>>>>
>>>> And pd ugens sound as bad as sc, if not worse.
>>>>
>>>> >
>>>> > With Csound, do a search in the manual, copy and paste the opcode
>>>> > examples and you're rocking. You don't even need to learn the language
>>>> > as such. Of course the more you use it the deeper you can get into the
>>>> > programming side of things.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, I think a big strength with csound is being able to leverage the
>>>> existing and very powerful general purpose tools since the patch is just
>>>> text (so you can do everything in a standard browser, text editor, etc.).
>>>>
>>>> >
>>>> > My ideal tool: the engine of Csound + GUI facilities like Max +
>>>> > timeline and score generation like blue + some of the elegance and
>>>> > economy of the SC3 language.
>>>> >
>>>> > My current tools bounded by reality: Csound/blue/jmask, Csound/max.
>>>> >
>>>> > P
>>>> >
>>>> > On 9 March 2011 12:33, Dave Phillips  wrote:
>>>> >> Rory Walsh wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >>> But there are Pd books!
>>>> >> I have one book dedicated to Pd, and it is definitely not a tutorial or
>>>> >> introduction to the system. It is a good book, just not for a beginner.
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >>>  I'm not so sure I agree with some of the posts
>>>> >>> regarding Pd. As far as I can tell all you really need to get going
>>>> >>> with Pd is a good grasp of synthesis and digital audio. It's drag and
>>>> >>> drop after that. With Csound you have to learn a programming language.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >> I agree with your assessment, but I think a little differently about
>>>> >> it. For
>>>> >> my purposes the Pd/GEM connection was of primary interest, so I've been
>>>> >> less
>>>> >> interested in Pd's synthesis capabilities per se.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> As for relative ease of learning: Well, I won't touch that issue again
>>>> >> with
>>>> >> an 8-foot pole. I have strong opinions regarding effort.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> I work occasionally with Pd and SC3, and I keep coming back to Csound.
>>>> >> Probably because I know it best of the three systems, but I think it's
>>>> >> fair
>>>> >> to claim that it is also as advanced as any other system with similar
>>>> >> goals.
>>>> >> It suits my purposes.
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >>> I use both systems in teaching and in my music making. I think it's
>>>> >>> great to have two really powerful open and free software environments
>>>> >>> for creating music. [I've never used SC :( ]
>>>> >>>
>>>> >> "And SC makes three." :)
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Best,
>>>> >>
>>>> >> dp
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>> >>           https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>>> >> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>>> >> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body
>>>> >> "unsubscribe
>>>> >> csound"
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>> >             https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>>> > Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>>> > To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe
>>>> > csound"
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>>            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe
>>>> csound"
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Aaron Krister Johnson
>>> http://www.akjmusic.com
>>> http://www.untwelve.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"
>>
>>
>
>
> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"
>
>


Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"

There is a build time option to create it. I don't know if it comes with the standard distro? There is also a "pd-csound" .deb for debian based systems if you install that way. I am not knowledgable about windows / osx, but I am pretty sure it must exist for those platforms too if you look around (maybe it even ships with csound and you need to copy it to the right place for pd to find?).

Josh Moore wrote:
> Really, where might that be? It wasn't on the csound~ site. :P
> 
> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 9:35 AM, peiman khosravi
>  wrote:
>> On 9 March 2011 16:40, Josh Moore  wrote:
>>> Csound definitely has the most features. csound~ in max is great. I
>>> wish they had a PD version, then it would be over.
>>>
>> But there is a pd version!!
>>
>>
>>> I like using software sequencers, and while doing the orchestras don't
>>> bother me I detest writing Csound scores, which is why I never used it
>>> for anything serious until a couple months ago when I discovered
>>> csound~. Making it integrate and pass data WITH the audio back and
>>> forth natively in Ableton is fun times.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 8:30 AM, Aaron Krister Johnson
>>>  wrote:
>>>> Justin,
>>>>
>>>> You feel so strongly about these comparisons that you told us 3 times! ;)
>>>>
>>>> AKJ
icedove kept telling me it could not contact gmail and then creashing, it didn't occur to me at all that it would send the message successfully, then tell me the server was unavailable, then crash!

>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 8:20 AM, Justin Glenn Smith 
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> peiman khosravi wrote:
>>>>>> Of course I did not mean to suggest that one of these tools is more
>>>>>> powerful than others. But in terms of the learning curve I still think
>>>>>> that csound is the smoother one. And SC3 is the most demanding because
>>>>>> of its object orientated nature.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Not at all. sc is very easy, in fact part of that ease of use is because
>>>>> of the object orientation (economy of expression via layers of abstraction,
>>>>> overloading of operators means '+' usally does what you think it would
>>>>> regardless of data type etc.). You don't need to get oo to be able to use sc
>>>>> any more than you need to get trig, hilbert spaces, or vector calculus to
>>>>> use oscillators, filters, and ffts. You mention copying and pasting from the
>>>>> manual to use csound without learning the language - this is much easier to
>>>>> do with sc than it is in csound (though their manual is not as well
>>>>> organized). I stopped using sc because the language server is a huge
>>>>> resource hog and as for the synth server their ugens sound like crap and use
>>>>> too much CPU doing it. And then I tried to do things that relied on
>>>>> interaction between the editor environment, the language server, and the
>>>>> synth server, and the asynchronous programming required for such things
>>>>> leads to huge intermittent slam-head-on
>>>>> -wall bugs.
>>>>>
>>>>>> As an example, when I first started reading general books on computer
>>>>>> sound synthesis I'd go to pd and think: OK it'd be really cool to try
>>>>>> some FFT or some FOF. But where do you start???
>>>>> You open up the built in help browser (under the menu heading "help"), and
>>>>> browse to the heading that says: 3.audio.examples/ and then the subheading
>>>>> I01.Fourier.analysis.pd and that opens a patch that you can immediately hear
>>>>> and start experimenting with. Sadly this list is unalphebetized, as it is
>>>>> more of a tutorial than a reference.
>>>>>
>>>>> Or you right click on the canvas, select "help", and it pops up a
>>>>> categorized (but yet again unalphabetized!) list of the basic units that you
>>>>> can immediately copy and paste into your patch, or right click on to pull up
>>>>> their docs (fft and ifft are under the heading "audio math").
>>>>>
>>>>> The docs are there, just different (and yes, much less usable than
>>>>> csound's excellent docs).
>>>>>
>>>>> Regarding fof vanilla pd is much smaller than csound - which is nice for a
>>>>> beginner because there are fewer objects to learn or sort out, but bad for
>>>>> the expert because you have to implement your own granulator, your own fof,
>>>>> your own waveshaper, your own fm setup, etc. out of the basic building
>>>>> blocks provided.
>>>>>
>>>>> The real problem with pd is as soon as you start trying to do anything
>>>>> interesting your patch becomes this stupid tangle of patch lines and there
>>>>> is no regexp query search and replace like I would be able to use if I was
>>>>> using my beloved text editor, so refactoring is incredibly tedious. I have
>>>>> actually "saved time" in working on a pd patch by opening the
>>>>> nearly-gibberish patch file in emacs and editing that (I put "saved time" in
>>>>> quotes because of course at that point I would have been better off just
>>>>> using a textual language in the first place).
>>>>>
>>>>> And pd ugens sound as bad as sc, if not worse.
>>>>>
>>>>>> With Csound, do a search in the manual, copy and paste the opcode
>>>>>> examples and you're rocking. You don't even need to learn the language
>>>>>> as such. Of course the more you use it the deeper you can get into the
>>>>>> programming side of things.
>>>>> Yes, I think a big strength with csound is being able to leverage the
>>>>> existing and very powerful general purpose tools since the patch is just
>>>>> text (so you can do everything in a standard browser, text editor, etc.).
>>>>>
>>>>>> My ideal tool: the engine of Csound + GUI facilities like Max +
>>>>>> timeline and score generation like blue + some of the elegance and
>>>>>> economy of the SC3 language.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My current tools bounded by reality: Csound/blue/jmask, Csound/max.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> P
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 9 March 2011 12:33, Dave Phillips  wrote:
>>>>>>> Rory Walsh wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> But there are Pd books!
>>>>>>> I have one book dedicated to Pd, and it is definitely not a tutorial or
>>>>>>> introduction to the system. It is a good book, just not for a beginner.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  I'm not so sure I agree with some of the posts
>>>>>>>> regarding Pd. As far as I can tell all you really need to get going
>>>>>>>> with Pd is a good grasp of synthesis and digital audio. It's drag and
>>>>>>>> drop after that. With Csound you have to learn a programming language.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I agree with your assessment, but I think a little differently about
>>>>>>> it. For
>>>>>>> my purposes the Pd/GEM connection was of primary interest, so I've been
>>>>>>> less
>>>>>>> interested in Pd's synthesis capabilities per se.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As for relative ease of learning: Well, I won't touch that issue again
>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>> an 8-foot pole. I have strong opinions regarding effort.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I work occasionally with Pd and SC3, and I keep coming back to Csound.
>>>>>>> Probably because I know it best of the three systems, but I think it's
>>>>>>> fair
>>>>>>> to claim that it is also as advanced as any other system with similar
>>>>>>> goals.
>>>>>>> It suits my purposes.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I use both systems in teaching and in my music making. I think it's
>>>>>>>> great to have two really powerful open and free software environments
>>>>>>>> for creating music. [I've never used SC :( ]
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "And SC makes three." :)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> dp
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>>>>>           https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>>>>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body
>>>>>>> "unsubscribe
>>>>>>> csound"
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>>>>             https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>>>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe
>>>>>> csound"
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>>>            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe
>>>>> csound"
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Aaron Krister Johnson
>>>> http://www.akjmusic.com
>>>> http://www.untwelve.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"
>>
>>
> 
> 
> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>             https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"
> 
> 



Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"

On 9 March 2011 14:20, Justin Glenn Smith  wrote:
> peiman khosravi wrote:
>> Of course I did not mean to suggest that one of these tools is more
>> powerful than others. But in terms of the learning curve I still think
>> that csound is the smoother one. And SC3 is the most demanding because
>> of its object orientated nature.
>>
>
> Not at all. sc is very easy, in fact part of that ease of use is because of the object orientation (economy of expression via layers of abstraction, overloading of operators means '+' usally does what you think it would regardless of data type etc.). You don't need to get oo to be able to use sc any more than you need to get trig, hilbert spaces, or vector calculus to use oscillators, filters, and ffts. You mention copying and pasting from the manual to use csound without learning the language - this is much easier to do with sc than it is in csound (though their manual is not as well organized). I stopped using sc because the language server is a huge resource hog and as for the synth server their ugens sound like crap and use too much CPU doing it. And then I tried to do things that relied on interaction between the editor environment, the language server, and the synth server, and the asynchronous programming required for such things leads to huge intermittent slam-head-on
> -wall bugs.
>
For someone with no programming background SC3 is much more difficult
to grasp. It being object orientated makes is user friendly at a later
stage but certainly not at the initial stage of learning the language.

You are right about copy pasting from the SC manual but then the ugen
collection is not nearly as vast and divers as the opcode collection
in Csound. And the same goes for pd. I mean the fft help patch in pd
may be very useful but does not even go close to what csound can do
straight out of the box with all the non-real-time and more recent pvs
FFT stuff (the same goes for granular synth and so on). You can
actually make interesting sounds with csound by just tweaking the
variables of a single opcode. Each opcode is in many cases like a
whole max or pd patch.

As far as the sound quality of SC is concerned I think we may be
talking about different programmes here. To me SC3 filters and
oscillators sound just amazing, you're the first person I've come
across to say otherwise. True I am not a big fan of their FFT stuff
but everything else sounds pretty good to my ears (not necessarily
better than Csound but not worst either.


>> As an example, when I first started reading general books on computer
>> sound synthesis I'd go to pd and think: OK it'd be really cool to try
>> some FFT or some FOF. But where do you start???
>
> You open up the built in help browser (under the menu heading "help"), and browse to the heading that says: 3.audio.examples/ and then the subheading I01.Fourier.analysis.pd and that opens a patch that you can immediately hear and start experimenting with. Sadly this list is unalphebetized, as it is more of a tutorial than a reference.
>
> Or you right click on the canvas, select "help", and it pops up a categorized (but yet again unalphabetized!) list of the basic units that you can immediately copy and paste into your patch, or right click on to pull up their docs (fft and ifft are under the heading "audio math").
>
> The docs are there, just different (and yes, much less usable than csound's excellent docs).
>
> Regarding fof vanilla pd is much smaller than csound - which is nice for a beginner because there are fewer objects to learn or sort out, but bad for the expert because you have to implement your own granulator, your own fof, your own waveshaper, your own fm setup, etc. out of the basic building blocks provided.
>
> The real problem with pd is as soon as you start trying to do anything interesting your patch becomes this stupid tangle of patch lines and there is no regexp query search and replace like I would be able to use if I was using my beloved text editor, so refactoring is incredibly tedious. I have actually "saved time" in working on a pd patch by opening the nearly-gibberish patch file in emacs and editing that (I put "saved time" in quotes because of course at that point I would have been better off just using a textual language in the first place).
>
> And pd ugens sound as bad as sc, if not worse.
>
>>
>> With Csound, do a search in the manual, copy and paste the opcode
>> examples and you're rocking. You don't even need to learn the language
>> as such. Of course the more you use it the deeper you can get into the
>> programming side of things.
>
> Yes, I think a big strength with csound is being able to leverage the existing and very powerful general purpose tools since the patch is just text (so you can do everything in a standard browser, text editor, etc.).
>
>>
>> My ideal tool: the engine of Csound + GUI facilities like Max +
>> timeline and score generation like blue + some of the elegance and
>> economy of the SC3 language.
>>
>> My current tools bounded by reality: Csound/blue/jmask, Csound/max.
>>
>> P
>>
>> On 9 March 2011 12:33, Dave Phillips  wrote:
>>> Rory Walsh wrote:
>>>
>>>> But there are Pd books!
>>> I have one book dedicated to Pd, and it is definitely not a tutorial or
>>> introduction to the system. It is a good book, just not for a beginner.
>>>
>>>
>>>>  I'm not so sure I agree with some of the posts
>>>> regarding Pd. As far as I can tell all you really need to get going
>>>> with Pd is a good grasp of synthesis and digital audio. It's drag and
>>>> drop after that. With Csound you have to learn a programming language.
>>>>
>>> I agree with your assessment, but I think a little differently about it. For
>>> my purposes the Pd/GEM connection was of primary interest, so I've been less
>>> interested in Pd's synthesis capabilities per se.
>>>
>>> As for relative ease of learning: Well, I won't touch that issue again with
>>> an 8-foot pole. I have strong opinions regarding effort.
>>>
>>> I work occasionally with Pd and SC3, and I keep coming back to Csound.
>>> Probably because I know it best of the three systems, but I think it's fair
>>> to claim that it is also as advanced as any other system with similar goals.
>>> It suits my purposes.
>>>
>>>
>>>> I use both systems in teaching and in my music making. I think it's
>>>> great to have two really powerful open and free software environments
>>>> for creating music. [I've never used SC :( ]
>>>>
>>> "And SC makes three." :)
>>>
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> dp
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>           https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe
>>> csound"
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>             https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"
>>
>>
>
>
>
> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"
>
>


Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"

I just had a look there and it seems it's not included with the
standard windows build at least. I'm not near an OSX machine to check.
I would have thought it was included. It's a simple build, you
shouldn't have to bother with scons to create it. What OS are you
using? I've used the csoundapi~ object for a few different pieces and
it's great. Kudos to Victor.

Rory.




On 9 March 2011 18:20, Justin Glenn Smith  wrote:
> There is a build time option to create it. I don't know if it comes with the standard distro? There is also a "pd-csound" .deb for debian based systems if you install that way. I am not knowledgable about windows / osx, but I am pretty sure it must exist for those platforms too if you look around (maybe it even ships with csound and you need to copy it to the right place for pd to find?).
>
> Josh Moore wrote:
>> Really, where might that be? It wasn't on the csound~ site. :P
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 9:35 AM, peiman khosravi
>>  wrote:
>>> On 9 March 2011 16:40, Josh Moore  wrote:
>>>> Csound definitely has the most features. csound~ in max is great. I
>>>> wish they had a PD version, then it would be over.
>>>>
>>> But there is a pd version!!
>>>
>>>
>>>> I like using software sequencers, and while doing the orchestras don't
>>>> bother me I detest writing Csound scores, which is why I never used it
>>>> for anything serious until a couple months ago when I discovered
>>>> csound~. Making it integrate and pass data WITH the audio back and
>>>> forth natively in Ableton is fun times.
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 8:30 AM, Aaron Krister Johnson
>>>>  wrote:
>>>>> Justin,
>>>>>
>>>>> You feel so strongly about these comparisons that you told us 3 times! ;)
>>>>>
>>>>> AKJ
> icedove kept telling me it could not contact gmail and then creashing, it didn't occur to me at all that it would send the message successfully, then tell me the server was unavailable, then crash!
>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 8:20 AM, Justin Glenn Smith 
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> peiman khosravi wrote:
>>>>>>> Of course I did not mean to suggest that one of these tools is more
>>>>>>> powerful than others. But in terms of the learning curve I still think
>>>>>>> that csound is the smoother one. And SC3 is the most demanding because
>>>>>>> of its object orientated nature.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Not at all. sc is very easy, in fact part of that ease of use is because
>>>>>> of the object orientation (economy of expression via layers of abstraction,
>>>>>> overloading of operators means '+' usally does what you think it would
>>>>>> regardless of data type etc.). You don't need to get oo to be able to use sc
>>>>>> any more than you need to get trig, hilbert spaces, or vector calculus to
>>>>>> use oscillators, filters, and ffts. You mention copying and pasting from the
>>>>>> manual to use csound without learning the language - this is much easier to
>>>>>> do with sc than it is in csound (though their manual is not as well
>>>>>> organized). I stopped using sc because the language server is a huge
>>>>>> resource hog and as for the synth server their ugens sound like crap and use
>>>>>> too much CPU doing it. And then I tried to do things that relied on
>>>>>> interaction between the editor environment, the language server, and the
>>>>>> synth server, and the asynchronous programming required for such things
>>>>>> leads to huge intermittent slam-head-on
>>>>>> -wall bugs.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As an example, when I first started reading general books on computer
>>>>>>> sound synthesis I'd go to pd and think: OK it'd be really cool to try
>>>>>>> some FFT or some FOF. But where do you start???
>>>>>> You open up the built in help browser (under the menu heading "help"), and
>>>>>> browse to the heading that says: 3.audio.examples/ and then the subheading
>>>>>> I01.Fourier.analysis.pd and that opens a patch that you can immediately hear
>>>>>> and start experimenting with. Sadly this list is unalphebetized, as it is
>>>>>> more of a tutorial than a reference.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Or you right click on the canvas, select "help", and it pops up a
>>>>>> categorized (but yet again unalphabetized!) list of the basic units that you
>>>>>> can immediately copy and paste into your patch, or right click on to pull up
>>>>>> their docs (fft and ifft are under the heading "audio math").
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The docs are there, just different (and yes, much less usable than
>>>>>> csound's excellent docs).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regarding fof vanilla pd is much smaller than csound - which is nice for a
>>>>>> beginner because there are fewer objects to learn or sort out, but bad for
>>>>>> the expert because you have to implement your own granulator, your own fof,
>>>>>> your own waveshaper, your own fm setup, etc. out of the basic building
>>>>>> blocks provided.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The real problem with pd is as soon as you start trying to do anything
>>>>>> interesting your patch becomes this stupid tangle of patch lines and there
>>>>>> is no regexp query search and replace like I would be able to use if I was
>>>>>> using my beloved text editor, so refactoring is incredibly tedious. I have
>>>>>> actually "saved time" in working on a pd patch by opening the
>>>>>> nearly-gibberish patch file in emacs and editing that (I put "saved time" in
>>>>>> quotes because of course at that point I would have been better off just
>>>>>> using a textual language in the first place).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And pd ugens sound as bad as sc, if not worse.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> With Csound, do a search in the manual, copy and paste the opcode
>>>>>>> examples and you're rocking. You don't even need to learn the language
>>>>>>> as such. Of course the more you use it the deeper you can get into the
>>>>>>> programming side of things.
>>>>>> Yes, I think a big strength with csound is being able to leverage the
>>>>>> existing and very powerful general purpose tools since the patch is just
>>>>>> text (so you can do everything in a standard browser, text editor, etc.).
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> My ideal tool: the engine of Csound + GUI facilities like Max +
>>>>>>> timeline and score generation like blue + some of the elegance and
>>>>>>> economy of the SC3 language.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> My current tools bounded by reality: Csound/blue/jmask, Csound/max.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> P
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 9 March 2011 12:33, Dave Phillips  wrote:
>>>>>>>> Rory Walsh wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> But there are Pd books!
>>>>>>>> I have one book dedicated to Pd, and it is definitely not a tutorial or
>>>>>>>> introduction to the system. It is a good book, just not for a beginner.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>  I'm not so sure I agree with some of the posts
>>>>>>>>> regarding Pd. As far as I can tell all you really need to get going
>>>>>>>>> with Pd is a good grasp of synthesis and digital audio. It's drag and
>>>>>>>>> drop after that. With Csound you have to learn a programming language.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I agree with your assessment, but I think a little differently about
>>>>>>>> it. For
>>>>>>>> my purposes the Pd/GEM connection was of primary interest, so I've been
>>>>>>>> less
>>>>>>>> interested in Pd's synthesis capabilities per se.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> As for relative ease of learning: Well, I won't touch that issue again
>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>> an 8-foot pole. I have strong opinions regarding effort.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I work occasionally with Pd and SC3, and I keep coming back to Csound.
>>>>>>>> Probably because I know it best of the three systems, but I think it's
>>>>>>>> fair
>>>>>>>> to claim that it is also as advanced as any other system with similar
>>>>>>>> goals.
>>>>>>>> It suits my purposes.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I use both systems in teaching and in my music making. I think it's
>>>>>>>>> great to have two really powerful open and free software environments
>>>>>>>>> for creating music. [I've never used SC :( ]
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "And SC makes three." :)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> dp
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>>>>>>           https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>>>>>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body
>>>>>>>> "unsubscribe
>>>>>>>> csound"
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>>>>>             https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>>>>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe
>>>>>>> csound"
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>>>>            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>>>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe
>>>>>> csound"
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Aaron Krister Johnson
>>>>> http://www.akjmusic.com
>>>>> http://www.untwelve.org
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>>            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>             https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"
>>
>>
>
>
>
> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"
>
>


Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"

In Csound 5.13, if you install everything in the Windows installer you
get csoundapi~.dll in the Csound bin directory. I haven't tested it,
but it is buiilt and it does install.

Regards,
Mike

On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 1:53 PM, Rory Walsh  wrote:
> I just had a look there and it seems it's not included with the
> standard windows build at least. I'm not near an OSX machine to check.
> I would have thought it was included. It's a simple build, you
> shouldn't have to bother with scons to create it. What OS are you
> using? I've used the csoundapi~ object for a few different pieces and
> it's great. Kudos to Victor.
>
> Rory.
>
>
>
>
> On 9 March 2011 18:20, Justin Glenn Smith  wrote:
>> There is a build time option to create it. I don't know if it comes with the standard distro? There is also a "pd-csound" .deb for debian based systems if you install that way. I am not knowledgable about windows / osx, but I am pretty sure it must exist for those platforms too if you look around (maybe it even ships with csound and you need to copy it to the right place for pd to find?).
>>
>> Josh Moore wrote:
>>> Really, where might that be? It wasn't on the csound~ site. :P
>>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 9:35 AM, peiman khosravi
>>>  wrote:
>>>> On 9 March 2011 16:40, Josh Moore  wrote:
>>>>> Csound definitely has the most features. csound~ in max is great. I
>>>>> wish they had a PD version, then it would be over.
>>>>>
>>>> But there is a pd version!!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> I like using software sequencers, and while doing the orchestras don't
>>>>> bother me I detest writing Csound scores, which is why I never used it
>>>>> for anything serious until a couple months ago when I discovered
>>>>> csound~. Making it integrate and pass data WITH the audio back and
>>>>> forth natively in Ableton is fun times.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 8:30 AM, Aaron Krister Johnson
>>>>>  wrote:
>>>>>> Justin,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You feel so strongly about these comparisons that you told us 3 times! ;)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> AKJ
>> icedove kept telling me it could not contact gmail and then creashing, it didn't occur to me at all that it would send the message successfully, then tell me the server was unavailable, then crash!
>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 8:20 AM, Justin Glenn Smith 
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> peiman khosravi wrote:
>>>>>>>> Of course I did not mean to suggest that one of these tools is more
>>>>>>>> powerful than others. But in terms of the learning curve I still think
>>>>>>>> that csound is the smoother one. And SC3 is the most demanding because
>>>>>>>> of its object orientated nature.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Not at all. sc is very easy, in fact part of that ease of use is because
>>>>>>> of the object orientation (economy of expression via layers of abstraction,
>>>>>>> overloading of operators means '+' usally does what you think it would
>>>>>>> regardless of data type etc.). You don't need to get oo to be able to use sc
>>>>>>> any more than you need to get trig, hilbert spaces, or vector calculus to
>>>>>>> use oscillators, filters, and ffts. You mention copying and pasting from the
>>>>>>> manual to use csound without learning the language - this is much easier to
>>>>>>> do with sc than it is in csound (though their manual is not as well
>>>>>>> organized). I stopped using sc because the language server is a huge
>>>>>>> resource hog and as for the synth server their ugens sound like crap and use
>>>>>>> too much CPU doing it. And then I tried to do things that relied on
>>>>>>> interaction between the editor environment, the language server, and the
>>>>>>> synth server, and the asynchronous programming required for such things
>>>>>>> leads to huge intermittent slam-head-on
>>>>>>> -wall bugs.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> As an example, when I first started reading general books on computer
>>>>>>>> sound synthesis I'd go to pd and think: OK it'd be really cool to try
>>>>>>>> some FFT or some FOF. But where do you start???
>>>>>>> You open up the built in help browser (under the menu heading "help"), and
>>>>>>> browse to the heading that says: 3.audio.examples/ and then the subheading
>>>>>>> I01.Fourier.analysis.pd and that opens a patch that you can immediately hear
>>>>>>> and start experimenting with. Sadly this list is unalphebetized, as it is
>>>>>>> more of a tutorial than a reference.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Or you right click on the canvas, select "help", and it pops up a
>>>>>>> categorized (but yet again unalphabetized!) list of the basic units that you
>>>>>>> can immediately copy and paste into your patch, or right click on to pull up
>>>>>>> their docs (fft and ifft are under the heading "audio math").
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The docs are there, just different (and yes, much less usable than
>>>>>>> csound's excellent docs).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regarding fof vanilla pd is much smaller than csound - which is nice for a
>>>>>>> beginner because there are fewer objects to learn or sort out, but bad for
>>>>>>> the expert because you have to implement your own granulator, your own fof,
>>>>>>> your own waveshaper, your own fm setup, etc. out of the basic building
>>>>>>> blocks provided.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The real problem with pd is as soon as you start trying to do anything
>>>>>>> interesting your patch becomes this stupid tangle of patch lines and there
>>>>>>> is no regexp query search and replace like I would be able to use if I was
>>>>>>> using my beloved text editor, so refactoring is incredibly tedious. I have
>>>>>>> actually "saved time" in working on a pd patch by opening the
>>>>>>> nearly-gibberish patch file in emacs and editing that (I put "saved time" in
>>>>>>> quotes because of course at that point I would have been better off just
>>>>>>> using a textual language in the first place).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And pd ugens sound as bad as sc, if not worse.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> With Csound, do a search in the manual, copy and paste the opcode
>>>>>>>> examples and you're rocking. You don't even need to learn the language
>>>>>>>> as such. Of course the more you use it the deeper you can get into the
>>>>>>>> programming side of things.
>>>>>>> Yes, I think a big strength with csound is being able to leverage the
>>>>>>> existing and very powerful general purpose tools since the patch is just
>>>>>>> text (so you can do everything in a standard browser, text editor, etc.).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> My ideal tool: the engine of Csound + GUI facilities like Max +
>>>>>>>> timeline and score generation like blue + some of the elegance and
>>>>>>>> economy of the SC3 language.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> My current tools bounded by reality: Csound/blue/jmask, Csound/max.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> P
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 9 March 2011 12:33, Dave Phillips  wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Rory Walsh wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> But there are Pd books!
>>>>>>>>> I have one book dedicated to Pd, and it is definitely not a tutorial or
>>>>>>>>> introduction to the system. It is a good book, just not for a beginner.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  I'm not so sure I agree with some of the posts
>>>>>>>>>> regarding Pd. As far as I can tell all you really need to get going
>>>>>>>>>> with Pd is a good grasp of synthesis and digital audio. It's drag and
>>>>>>>>>> drop after that. With Csound you have to learn a programming language.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I agree with your assessment, but I think a little differently about
>>>>>>>>> it. For
>>>>>>>>> my purposes the Pd/GEM connection was of primary interest, so I've been
>>>>>>>>> less
>>>>>>>>> interested in Pd's synthesis capabilities per se.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> As for relative ease of learning: Well, I won't touch that issue again
>>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>>> an 8-foot pole. I have strong opinions regarding effort.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I work occasionally with Pd and SC3, and I keep coming back to Csound.
>>>>>>>>> Probably because I know it best of the three systems, but I think it's
>>>>>>>>> fair
>>>>>>>>> to claim that it is also as advanced as any other system with similar
>>>>>>>>> goals.
>>>>>>>>> It suits my purposes.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I use both systems in teaching and in my music making. I think it's
>>>>>>>>>> great to have two really powerful open and free software environments
>>>>>>>>>> for creating music. [I've never used SC :( ]
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "And SC makes three." :)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> dp
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>>>>>>>           https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>>>>>>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body
>>>>>>>>> "unsubscribe
>>>>>>>>> csound"
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>>>>>>             https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>>>>>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe
>>>>>>>> csound"
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>>>>>            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>>>>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe
>>>>>>> csound"
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Aaron Krister Johnson
>>>>>> http://www.akjmusic.com
>>>>>> http://www.untwelve.org
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>>>            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>>            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>             https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"
>>
>>
>
>
> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"
>
>



-- 
Michael Gogins
Irreducible Productions
http://www.michael-gogins.com
Michael dot Gogins at gmail dot com


Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"

Sorry Mike, I was checking a Csound 5.12 install. The only thing that
might cause an issue is conflicting versions of Pd, i.e, if the user
is using a different version of Pd to the one you linked to when
building. Apologies again, I should have installed the latest version
and checked before reporting it missing!


On 9 March 2011 19:37, Michael Gogins  wrote:
> In Csound 5.13, if you install everything in the Windows installer you
> get csoundapi~.dll in the Csound bin directory. I haven't tested it,
> but it is buiilt and it does install.
>
> Regards,
> Mike
>
> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 1:53 PM, Rory Walsh  wrote:
>> I just had a look there and it seems it's not included with the
>> standard windows build at least. I'm not near an OSX machine to check.
>> I would have thought it was included. It's a simple build, you
>> shouldn't have to bother with scons to create it. What OS are you
>> using? I've used the csoundapi~ object for a few different pieces and
>> it's great. Kudos to Victor.
>>
>> Rory.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 9 March 2011 18:20, Justin Glenn Smith  wrote:
>>> There is a build time option to create it. I don't know if it comes with the standard distro? There is also a "pd-csound" .deb for debian based systems if you install that way. I am not knowledgable about windows / osx, but I am pretty sure it must exist for those platforms too if you look around (maybe it even ships with csound and you need to copy it to the right place for pd to find?).
>>>
>>> Josh Moore wrote:
>>>> Really, where might that be? It wasn't on the csound~ site. :P
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 9:35 AM, peiman khosravi
>>>>  wrote:
>>>>> On 9 March 2011 16:40, Josh Moore  wrote:
>>>>>> Csound definitely has the most features. csound~ in max is great. I
>>>>>> wish they had a PD version, then it would be over.
>>>>>>
>>>>> But there is a pd version!!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> I like using software sequencers, and while doing the orchestras don't
>>>>>> bother me I detest writing Csound scores, which is why I never used it
>>>>>> for anything serious until a couple months ago when I discovered
>>>>>> csound~. Making it integrate and pass data WITH the audio back and
>>>>>> forth natively in Ableton is fun times.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 8:30 AM, Aaron Krister Johnson
>>>>>>  wrote:
>>>>>>> Justin,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You feel so strongly about these comparisons that you told us 3 times! ;)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> AKJ
>>> icedove kept telling me it could not contact gmail and then creashing, it didn't occur to me at all that it would send the message successfully, then tell me the server was unavailable, then crash!
>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 8:20 AM, Justin Glenn Smith 
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> peiman khosravi wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Of course I did not mean to suggest that one of these tools is more
>>>>>>>>> powerful than others. But in terms of the learning curve I still think
>>>>>>>>> that csound is the smoother one. And SC3 is the most demanding because
>>>>>>>>> of its object orientated nature.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Not at all. sc is very easy, in fact part of that ease of use is because
>>>>>>>> of the object orientation (economy of expression via layers of abstraction,
>>>>>>>> overloading of operators means '+' usally does what you think it would
>>>>>>>> regardless of data type etc.). You don't need to get oo to be able to use sc
>>>>>>>> any more than you need to get trig, hilbert spaces, or vector calculus to
>>>>>>>> use oscillators, filters, and ffts. You mention copying and pasting from the
>>>>>>>> manual to use csound without learning the language - this is much easier to
>>>>>>>> do with sc than it is in csound (though their manual is not as well
>>>>>>>> organized). I stopped using sc because the language server is a huge
>>>>>>>> resource hog and as for the synth server their ugens sound like crap and use
>>>>>>>> too much CPU doing it. And then I tried to do things that relied on
>>>>>>>> interaction between the editor environment, the language server, and the
>>>>>>>> synth server, and the asynchronous programming required for such things
>>>>>>>> leads to huge intermittent slam-head-on
>>>>>>>> -wall bugs.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> As an example, when I first started reading general books on computer
>>>>>>>>> sound synthesis I'd go to pd and think: OK it'd be really cool to try
>>>>>>>>> some FFT or some FOF. But where do you start???
>>>>>>>> You open up the built in help browser (under the menu heading "help"), and
>>>>>>>> browse to the heading that says: 3.audio.examples/ and then the subheading
>>>>>>>> I01.Fourier.analysis.pd and that opens a patch that you can immediately hear
>>>>>>>> and start experimenting with. Sadly this list is unalphebetized, as it is
>>>>>>>> more of a tutorial than a reference.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Or you right click on the canvas, select "help", and it pops up a
>>>>>>>> categorized (but yet again unalphabetized!) list of the basic units that you
>>>>>>>> can immediately copy and paste into your patch, or right click on to pull up
>>>>>>>> their docs (fft and ifft are under the heading "audio math").
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The docs are there, just different (and yes, much less usable than
>>>>>>>> csound's excellent docs).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Regarding fof vanilla pd is much smaller than csound - which is nice for a
>>>>>>>> beginner because there are fewer objects to learn or sort out, but bad for
>>>>>>>> the expert because you have to implement your own granulator, your own fof,
>>>>>>>> your own waveshaper, your own fm setup, etc. out of the basic building
>>>>>>>> blocks provided.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The real problem with pd is as soon as you start trying to do anything
>>>>>>>> interesting your patch becomes this stupid tangle of patch lines and there
>>>>>>>> is no regexp query search and replace like I would be able to use if I was
>>>>>>>> using my beloved text editor, so refactoring is incredibly tedious. I have
>>>>>>>> actually "saved time" in working on a pd patch by opening the
>>>>>>>> nearly-gibberish patch file in emacs and editing that (I put "saved time" in
>>>>>>>> quotes because of course at that point I would have been better off just
>>>>>>>> using a textual language in the first place).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And pd ugens sound as bad as sc, if not worse.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> With Csound, do a search in the manual, copy and paste the opcode
>>>>>>>>> examples and you're rocking. You don't even need to learn the language
>>>>>>>>> as such. Of course the more you use it the deeper you can get into the
>>>>>>>>> programming side of things.
>>>>>>>> Yes, I think a big strength with csound is being able to leverage the
>>>>>>>> existing and very powerful general purpose tools since the patch is just
>>>>>>>> text (so you can do everything in a standard browser, text editor, etc.).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> My ideal tool: the engine of Csound + GUI facilities like Max +
>>>>>>>>> timeline and score generation like blue + some of the elegance and
>>>>>>>>> economy of the SC3 language.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> My current tools bounded by reality: Csound/blue/jmask, Csound/max.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> P
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 9 March 2011 12:33, Dave Phillips  wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Rory Walsh wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> But there are Pd books!
>>>>>>>>>> I have one book dedicated to Pd, and it is definitely not a tutorial or
>>>>>>>>>> introduction to the system. It is a good book, just not for a beginner.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  I'm not so sure I agree with some of the posts
>>>>>>>>>>> regarding Pd. As far as I can tell all you really need to get going
>>>>>>>>>>> with Pd is a good grasp of synthesis and digital audio. It's drag and
>>>>>>>>>>> drop after that. With Csound you have to learn a programming language.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I agree with your assessment, but I think a little differently about
>>>>>>>>>> it. For
>>>>>>>>>> my purposes the Pd/GEM connection was of primary interest, so I've been
>>>>>>>>>> less
>>>>>>>>>> interested in Pd's synthesis capabilities per se.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> As for relative ease of learning: Well, I won't touch that issue again
>>>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>>>> an 8-foot pole. I have strong opinions regarding effort.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I work occasionally with Pd and SC3, and I keep coming back to Csound.
>>>>>>>>>> Probably because I know it best of the three systems, but I think it's
>>>>>>>>>> fair
>>>>>>>>>> to claim that it is also as advanced as any other system with similar
>>>>>>>>>> goals.
>>>>>>>>>> It suits my purposes.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I use both systems in teaching and in my music making. I think it's
>>>>>>>>>>> great to have two really powerful open and free software environments
>>>>>>>>>>> for creating music. [I've never used SC :( ]
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "And SC makes three." :)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> dp
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>>>>>>>>           https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>>>>>>>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body
>>>>>>>>>> "unsubscribe
>>>>>>>>>> csound"
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>>>>>>>             https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>>>>>>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe
>>>>>>>>> csound"
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>>>>>>            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>>>>>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe
>>>>>>>> csound"
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Aaron Krister Johnson
>>>>>>> http://www.akjmusic.com
>>>>>>> http://www.untwelve.org
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>>>>            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>>>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>>>            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>>             https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Michael Gogins
> Irreducible Productions
> http://www.michael-gogins.com
> Michael dot Gogins at gmail dot com
>
>
> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"
>
>


Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"

Yes, the version business might be an issue -- or not, depending on
the stability of the PD ABI.

Regards,
Mike

On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 2:50 PM, Rory Walsh  wrote:
> Sorry Mike, I was checking a Csound 5.12 install. The only thing that
> might cause an issue is conflicting versions of Pd, i.e, if the user
> is using a different version of Pd to the one you linked to when
> building. Apologies again, I should have installed the latest version
> and checked before reporting it missing!
>
>
> On 9 March 2011 19:37, Michael Gogins  wrote:
>> In Csound 5.13, if you install everything in the Windows installer you
>> get csoundapi~.dll in the Csound bin directory. I haven't tested it,
>> but it is buiilt and it does install.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Mike
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 1:53 PM, Rory Walsh  wrote:
>>> I just had a look there and it seems it's not included with the
>>> standard windows build at least. I'm not near an OSX machine to check.
>>> I would have thought it was included. It's a simple build, you
>>> shouldn't have to bother with scons to create it. What OS are you
>>> using? I've used the csoundapi~ object for a few different pieces and
>>> it's great. Kudos to Victor.
>>>
>>> Rory.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 9 March 2011 18:20, Justin Glenn Smith  wrote:
>>>> There is a build time option to create it. I don't know if it comes with the standard distro? There is also a "pd-csound" .deb for debian based systems if you install that way. I am not knowledgable about windows / osx, but I am pretty sure it must exist for those platforms too if you look around (maybe it even ships with csound and you need to copy it to the right place for pd to find?).
>>>>
>>>> Josh Moore wrote:
>>>>> Really, where might that be? It wasn't on the csound~ site. :P
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 9:35 AM, peiman khosravi
>>>>>  wrote:
>>>>>> On 9 March 2011 16:40, Josh Moore  wrote:
>>>>>>> Csound definitely has the most features. csound~ in max is great. I
>>>>>>> wish they had a PD version, then it would be over.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> But there is a pd version!!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I like using software sequencers, and while doing the orchestras don't
>>>>>>> bother me I detest writing Csound scores, which is why I never used it
>>>>>>> for anything serious until a couple months ago when I discovered
>>>>>>> csound~. Making it integrate and pass data WITH the audio back and
>>>>>>> forth natively in Ableton is fun times.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 8:30 AM, Aaron Krister Johnson
>>>>>>>  wrote:
>>>>>>>> Justin,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You feel so strongly about these comparisons that you told us 3 times! ;)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> AKJ
>>>> icedove kept telling me it could not contact gmail and then creashing, it didn't occur to me at all that it would send the message successfully, then tell me the server was unavailable, then crash!
>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 8:20 AM, Justin Glenn Smith 
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> peiman khosravi wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Of course I did not mean to suggest that one of these tools is more
>>>>>>>>>> powerful than others. But in terms of the learning curve I still think
>>>>>>>>>> that csound is the smoother one. And SC3 is the most demanding because
>>>>>>>>>> of its object orientated nature.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Not at all. sc is very easy, in fact part of that ease of use is because
>>>>>>>>> of the object orientation (economy of expression via layers of abstraction,
>>>>>>>>> overloading of operators means '+' usally does what you think it would
>>>>>>>>> regardless of data type etc.). You don't need to get oo to be able to use sc
>>>>>>>>> any more than you need to get trig, hilbert spaces, or vector calculus to
>>>>>>>>> use oscillators, filters, and ffts. You mention copying and pasting from the
>>>>>>>>> manual to use csound without learning the language - this is much easier to
>>>>>>>>> do with sc than it is in csound (though their manual is not as well
>>>>>>>>> organized). I stopped using sc because the language server is a huge
>>>>>>>>> resource hog and as for the synth server their ugens sound like crap and use
>>>>>>>>> too much CPU doing it. And then I tried to do things that relied on
>>>>>>>>> interaction between the editor environment, the language server, and the
>>>>>>>>> synth server, and the asynchronous programming required for such things
>>>>>>>>> leads to huge intermittent slam-head-on
>>>>>>>>> -wall bugs.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> As an example, when I first started reading general books on computer
>>>>>>>>>> sound synthesis I'd go to pd and think: OK it'd be really cool to try
>>>>>>>>>> some FFT or some FOF. But where do you start???
>>>>>>>>> You open up the built in help browser (under the menu heading "help"), and
>>>>>>>>> browse to the heading that says: 3.audio.examples/ and then the subheading
>>>>>>>>> I01.Fourier.analysis.pd and that opens a patch that you can immediately hear
>>>>>>>>> and start experimenting with. Sadly this list is unalphebetized, as it is
>>>>>>>>> more of a tutorial than a reference.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Or you right click on the canvas, select "help", and it pops up a
>>>>>>>>> categorized (but yet again unalphabetized!) list of the basic units that you
>>>>>>>>> can immediately copy and paste into your patch, or right click on to pull up
>>>>>>>>> their docs (fft and ifft are under the heading "audio math").
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The docs are there, just different (and yes, much less usable than
>>>>>>>>> csound's excellent docs).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Regarding fof vanilla pd is much smaller than csound - which is nice for a
>>>>>>>>> beginner because there are fewer objects to learn or sort out, but bad for
>>>>>>>>> the expert because you have to implement your own granulator, your own fof,
>>>>>>>>> your own waveshaper, your own fm setup, etc. out of the basic building
>>>>>>>>> blocks provided.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The real problem with pd is as soon as you start trying to do anything
>>>>>>>>> interesting your patch becomes this stupid tangle of patch lines and there
>>>>>>>>> is no regexp query search and replace like I would be able to use if I was
>>>>>>>>> using my beloved text editor, so refactoring is incredibly tedious. I have
>>>>>>>>> actually "saved time" in working on a pd patch by opening the
>>>>>>>>> nearly-gibberish patch file in emacs and editing that (I put "saved time" in
>>>>>>>>> quotes because of course at that point I would have been better off just
>>>>>>>>> using a textual language in the first place).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> And pd ugens sound as bad as sc, if not worse.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> With Csound, do a search in the manual, copy and paste the opcode
>>>>>>>>>> examples and you're rocking. You don't even need to learn the language
>>>>>>>>>> as such. Of course the more you use it the deeper you can get into the
>>>>>>>>>> programming side of things.
>>>>>>>>> Yes, I think a big strength with csound is being able to leverage the
>>>>>>>>> existing and very powerful general purpose tools since the patch is just
>>>>>>>>> text (so you can do everything in a standard browser, text editor, etc.).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> My ideal tool: the engine of Csound + GUI facilities like Max +
>>>>>>>>>> timeline and score generation like blue + some of the elegance and
>>>>>>>>>> economy of the SC3 language.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> My current tools bounded by reality: Csound/blue/jmask, Csound/max.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> P
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 9 March 2011 12:33, Dave Phillips  wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Rory Walsh wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> But there are Pd books!
>>>>>>>>>>> I have one book dedicated to Pd, and it is definitely not a tutorial or
>>>>>>>>>>> introduction to the system. It is a good book, just not for a beginner.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>  I'm not so sure I agree with some of the posts
>>>>>>>>>>>> regarding Pd. As far as I can tell all you really need to get going
>>>>>>>>>>>> with Pd is a good grasp of synthesis and digital audio. It's drag and
>>>>>>>>>>>> drop after that. With Csound you have to learn a programming language.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I agree with your assessment, but I think a little differently about
>>>>>>>>>>> it. For
>>>>>>>>>>> my purposes the Pd/GEM connection was of primary interest, so I've been
>>>>>>>>>>> less
>>>>>>>>>>> interested in Pd's synthesis capabilities per se.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> As for relative ease of learning: Well, I won't touch that issue again
>>>>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>>>>> an 8-foot pole. I have strong opinions regarding effort.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I work occasionally with Pd and SC3, and I keep coming back to Csound.
>>>>>>>>>>> Probably because I know it best of the three systems, but I think it's
>>>>>>>>>>> fair
>>>>>>>>>>> to claim that it is also as advanced as any other system with similar
>>>>>>>>>>> goals.
>>>>>>>>>>> It suits my purposes.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I use both systems in teaching and in my music making. I think it's
>>>>>>>>>>>> great to have two really powerful open and free software environments
>>>>>>>>>>>> for creating music. [I've never used SC :( ]
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> "And SC makes three." :)
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> dp
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>>>>>>>>>           https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>>>>>>>>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body
>>>>>>>>>>> "unsubscribe
>>>>>>>>>>> csound"
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>>>>>>>>             https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>>>>>>>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe
>>>>>>>>>> csound"
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>>>>>>>            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>>>>>>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe
>>>>>>>>> csound"
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Aaron Krister Johnson
>>>>>>>> http://www.akjmusic.com
>>>>>>>> http://www.untwelve.org
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>>>>>            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>>>>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>>>>            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>>>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>>>             https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>>            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Michael Gogins
>> Irreducible Productions
>> http://www.michael-gogins.com
>> Michael dot Gogins at gmail dot com
>>
>>
>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"
>>
>>
>
>
> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"
>
>



-- 
Michael Gogins
Irreducible Productions
http://www.michael-gogins.com
Michael dot Gogins at gmail dot com


Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"

Speaking from an OSX perspective only, csoundapi~ has been distributed  
with Csound5 since 5.00. You get two versions,
one in /Library/Frameworks/CsoundLib.framework/Resources/PD and the  
other in /Library/Frameworks/CsoundLib64.framework/Resources/PD

Victor


On 9 Mar 2011, at 18:20, Justin Glenn Smith wrote:

> There is a build time option to create it. I don't know if it comes  
> with the standard distro? There is also a "pd-csound" .deb for  
> debian based systems if you install that way. I am not knowledgable  
> about windows / osx, but I am pretty sure it must exist for those  
> platforms too if you look around (maybe it even ships with csound  
> and you need to copy it to the right place for pd to find?).
>
> Josh Moore wrote:
>> Really, where might that be? It wasn't on the csound~ site. :P
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 9:35 AM, peiman khosravi
>>  wrote:
>>> On 9 March 2011 16:40, Josh Moore  wrote:
>>>> Csound definitely has the most features. csound~ in max is great. I
>>>> wish they had a PD version, then it would be over.
>>>>
>>> But there is a pd version!!
>>>
>>>
>>>> I like using software sequencers, and while doing the orchestras  
>>>> don't
>>>> bother me I detest writing Csound scores, which is why I never  
>>>> used it
>>>> for anything serious until a couple months ago when I discovered
>>>> csound~. Making it integrate and pass data WITH the audio back and
>>>> forth natively in Ableton is fun times.
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 8:30 AM, Aaron Krister Johnson
>>>>  wrote:
>>>>> Justin,
>>>>>
>>>>> You feel so strongly about these comparisons that you told us 3  
>>>>> times! ;)
>>>>>
>>>>> AKJ
> icedove kept telling me it could not contact gmail and then  
> creashing, it didn't occur to me at all that it would send the  
> message successfully, then tell me the server was unavailable, then  
> crash!
>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 8:20 AM, Justin Glenn Smith >>>> >
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> peiman khosravi wrote:
>>>>>>> Of course I did not mean to suggest that one of these tools is  
>>>>>>> more
>>>>>>> powerful than others. But in terms of the learning curve I  
>>>>>>> still think
>>>>>>> that csound is the smoother one. And SC3 is the most demanding  
>>>>>>> because
>>>>>>> of its object orientated nature.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Not at all. sc is very easy, in fact part of that ease of use  
>>>>>> is because
>>>>>> of the object orientation (economy of expression via layers of  
>>>>>> abstraction,
>>>>>> overloading of operators means '+' usally does what you think  
>>>>>> it would
>>>>>> regardless of data type etc.). You don't need to get oo to be  
>>>>>> able to use sc
>>>>>> any more than you need to get trig, hilbert spaces, or vector  
>>>>>> calculus to
>>>>>> use oscillators, filters, and ffts. You mention copying and  
>>>>>> pasting from the
>>>>>> manual to use csound without learning the language - this is  
>>>>>> much easier to
>>>>>> do with sc than it is in csound (though their manual is not as  
>>>>>> well
>>>>>> organized). I stopped using sc because the language server is a  
>>>>>> huge
>>>>>> resource hog and as for the synth server their ugens sound like  
>>>>>> crap and use
>>>>>> too much CPU doing it. And then I tried to do things that  
>>>>>> relied on
>>>>>> interaction between the editor environment, the language  
>>>>>> server, and the
>>>>>> synth server, and the asynchronous programming required for  
>>>>>> such things
>>>>>> leads to huge intermittent slam-head-on
>>>>>> -wall bugs.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As an example, when I first started reading general books on  
>>>>>>> computer
>>>>>>> sound synthesis I'd go to pd and think: OK it'd be really cool  
>>>>>>> to try
>>>>>>> some FFT or some FOF. But where do you start???
>>>>>> You open up the built in help browser (under the menu heading  
>>>>>> "help"), and
>>>>>> browse to the heading that says: 3.audio.examples/ and then the  
>>>>>> subheading
>>>>>> I01.Fourier.analysis.pd and that opens a patch that you can  
>>>>>> immediately hear
>>>>>> and start experimenting with. Sadly this list is  
>>>>>> unalphebetized, as it is
>>>>>> more of a tutorial than a reference.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Or you right click on the canvas, select "help", and it pops up a
>>>>>> categorized (but yet again unalphabetized!) list of the basic  
>>>>>> units that you
>>>>>> can immediately copy and paste into your patch, or right click  
>>>>>> on to pull up
>>>>>> their docs (fft and ifft are under the heading "audio math").
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The docs are there, just different (and yes, much less usable  
>>>>>> than
>>>>>> csound's excellent docs).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regarding fof vanilla pd is much smaller than csound - which is  
>>>>>> nice for a
>>>>>> beginner because there are fewer objects to learn or sort out,  
>>>>>> but bad for
>>>>>> the expert because you have to implement your own granulator,  
>>>>>> your own fof,
>>>>>> your own waveshaper, your own fm setup, etc. out of the basic  
>>>>>> building
>>>>>> blocks provided.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The real problem with pd is as soon as you start trying to do  
>>>>>> anything
>>>>>> interesting your patch becomes this stupid tangle of patch  
>>>>>> lines and there
>>>>>> is no regexp query search and replace like I would be able to  
>>>>>> use if I was
>>>>>> using my beloved text editor, so refactoring is incredibly  
>>>>>> tedious. I have
>>>>>> actually "saved time" in working on a pd patch by opening the
>>>>>> nearly-gibberish patch file in emacs and editing that (I put  
>>>>>> "saved time" in
>>>>>> quotes because of course at that point I would have been better  
>>>>>> off just
>>>>>> using a textual language in the first place).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And pd ugens sound as bad as sc, if not worse.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> With Csound, do a search in the manual, copy and paste the  
>>>>>>> opcode
>>>>>>> examples and you're rocking. You don't even need to learn the  
>>>>>>> language
>>>>>>> as such. Of course the more you use it the deeper you can get  
>>>>>>> into the
>>>>>>> programming side of things.
>>>>>> Yes, I think a big strength with csound is being able to  
>>>>>> leverage the
>>>>>> existing and very powerful general purpose tools since the  
>>>>>> patch is just
>>>>>> text (so you can do everything in a standard browser, text  
>>>>>> editor, etc.).
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> My ideal tool: the engine of Csound + GUI facilities like Max +
>>>>>>> timeline and score generation like blue + some of the elegance  
>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>> economy of the SC3 language.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> My current tools bounded by reality: Csound/blue/jmask, Csound/ 
>>>>>>> max.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> P
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 9 March 2011 12:33, Dave Phillips   
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Rory Walsh wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> But there are Pd books!
>>>>>>>> I have one book dedicated to Pd, and it is definitely not a  
>>>>>>>> tutorial or
>>>>>>>> introduction to the system. It is a good book, just not for a  
>>>>>>>> beginner.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I'm not so sure I agree with some of the posts
>>>>>>>>> regarding Pd. As far as I can tell all you really need to  
>>>>>>>>> get going
>>>>>>>>> with Pd is a good grasp of synthesis and digital audio. It's  
>>>>>>>>> drag and
>>>>>>>>> drop after that. With Csound you have to learn a programming  
>>>>>>>>> language.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I agree with your assessment, but I think a little  
>>>>>>>> differently about
>>>>>>>> it. For
>>>>>>>> my purposes the Pd/GEM connection was of primary interest, so  
>>>>>>>> I've been
>>>>>>>> less
>>>>>>>> interested in Pd's synthesis capabilities per se.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> As for relative ease of learning: Well, I won't touch that  
>>>>>>>> issue again
>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>> an 8-foot pole. I have strong opinions regarding effort.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I work occasionally with Pd and SC3, and I keep coming back  
>>>>>>>> to Csound.
>>>>>>>> Probably because I know it best of the three systems, but I  
>>>>>>>> think it's
>>>>>>>> fair
>>>>>>>> to claim that it is also as advanced as any other system with  
>>>>>>>> similar
>>>>>>>> goals.
>>>>>>>> It suits my purposes.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I use both systems in teaching and in my music making. I  
>>>>>>>>> think it's
>>>>>>>>> great to have two really powerful open and free software  
>>>>>>>>> environments
>>>>>>>>> for creating music. [I've never used SC :( ]
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "And SC makes three." :)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> dp
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>>>>>>          https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>>>>>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body
>>>>>>>> "unsubscribe
>>>>>>>> csound"
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>>>>>            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>>>>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body  
>>>>>>> "unsubscribe
>>>>>>> csound"
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>>>>           https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>>>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body  
>>>>>> "unsubscribe
>>>>>> csound"
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Aaron Krister Johnson
>>>>> http://www.akjmusic.com
>>>>> http://www.untwelve.org
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>>           https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body  
>>>> "unsubscribe csound"
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>           https://sourceforge.net/tracker/? 
>>> group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body  
>>> "unsubscribe csound"
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/? 
>> group_id=81968&atid=564599
>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body  
>> "unsubscribe csound"
>>
>>
>
>
>
> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body  
> "unsubscribe csound"
>



Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"

I agree with Rory. Also, Csound the program has absorbed formerly
external plug-in opcodes created by dozens of people over the years
which are no longer plug-in but are now a part of the main
distribution; Pd also has plenty of plug-in opcodes, some of which
require very little programming to use and create interesting sounds,
but which, for whatever reason, have been maintained outside of the
main distribution, still existing only as plug-ins.
I prefer Csound, partially because of that- you sometimes have to go
searching for what you want with Pd externals. But I also prefer
typing to clicking, and I like having a synthesis framework that stays
out of my way in visual terms. But I wouldn't say that you have to
learn programming to start using Pure Data.

-Chuckk


On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 2:01 PM, Rory Walsh  wrote:
> But there are Pd books! I'm not so sure I agree with some of the posts
> regarding Pd. As far as I can tell all you really need to get going
> with Pd is a good grasp of synthesis and digital audio. It's drag and
> drop after that. With Csound you have to learn a programming language.
> I use both systems in teaching and in my music making. I think it's
> great to have two really powerful open and free software environments
> for creating music. [I've never used SC :( ]
>
>
> On 9 March 2011 11:46, peiman khosravi  wrote:
>> On 8 March 2011 19:31, Justin Glenn Smith  wrote:
>>
>>> Regarding PD and ease of use, bangs are no more inherently confusing than a trigger input to a ugen, and multiple outlets is exactly equivalent to multiple output variables on a ugen - there are reasonable conventions for all these things. The main problem for me (aside from the aforementioned learning curve for doing formulas via patching - actually not too hard if you learn a prefix language like lisp first) was the lack of a high level tool (like emacs, vi, eclipse, etc. are for text) that could do transformations to a patch algorithmically, automatically straighten messy patches, etc. etc. My most recent conclusion is that PD has a shallower learning curve in the beginning, and gets very steep very fast if you try to do anything interesting, while csound is the opposite, harder to get started and scales much better. Regarding real time and GUI csound performs much better (in terms of CPU), ease of use wise it just isn't shipped with a big button that says play and a sandb
>>> ox environment where you can add oscillators filters etc. to a patch one at a time, so the initial impression is a bit more daunting.
>>>
>>
>> Yes I totally agree with you on this. And the same goes for maxmsp. I
>> often compare csound with a powerful modular synthesiser, with each
>> opcode being a ready-to-use unit. Max, pd and sc just don't work like
>> that. To start using them one has to initially approach them as a
>> language. I started using Csound as a sound processor and only later
>> began to think of it as a deeper programming language.
>>
>> And I don't think there is another book  for maxmsp or SC that can
>> compare with the Csound book.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Peiman
>>
>>
>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"
>>
>>
>
>
> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"
>
>



-- 
http://www.badmuthahubbard.com


Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"