I will be extremely interested to hear your comparison of sound design and 
synthesis environments, including of course Kyma versus Csound.

I haven't had access to anything like Kyma, although I used to fool around 
with Reaktor, FL Studio and other things that have some of those goodies. 
I'm afraid I'm a real stick in the mud and always come back to Csound. I 
know it pretty well, and perhaps I'm not patient enough to get up to speed 
in other environments, and I also see that few if any environments have as 
many working unit generators.

One thing I really would like is an environment where one can write both 
compositional processes and synthesis patches in the same text-based 
language, and Kyma seems to offer that. Nowadays, you can get that in the 
open source world with Common Music/Common Lisp Music, at last even on 
Windows. Again, I haven't tried it out much, but it's promising. Of course, 
CLM doesn't have as many unit generators as Csound.

With Csound, although I know it well, the orchestra language and the 
composing languages are too far apart.

I'm hoping that with the new parser, it may be possible to do something 
about that, for example by writing everything in Lua, and having a program 
that transforms Lua ASTs into Csound ASTs, or even by just embedding all the 
Csound unit generators directly into Lua along with a DSP graph and 
scheduler.

Regards,
Mike

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "dp51" 
To: 
Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2009 5:58 PM
Subject: [Csnd] Re: New stuff at NAMM


>
> Yeah, it's definitely in the silly money category (I'll probably settle 
> for
> the paca = $3000).
>
> I figure, if it sucks (or if I can do all the same things in 
> Csound/MaxMSP)
> I can sell it at a slight loss.  I've always been curious about Kyma and
> I've never met any1 who uses it (all my friends are poor).  I can't even
> find decent youtube videos of the Kyma GUI in use.  But, soon I'll have
> enough spare cash to satisfy my curiosity once and for all.
>
> DAvis
>
>
> rory walsh wrote:
>>
>> At those prices they're likely to mirror their brothers in the wild
>> and become an endangered spieces of their own.
>>
>> Rory.
>>
>>
>> 2009/1/22 victor :
>>> At $4401, I find it a little too much to take. Esp. since next
>>> year there will probably another HW doing twice the amount
>>> of numbercrunching for 1/2 price.
>>>
>>> Victor
>>
>
> -- 
> View this message in context: 
> http://www.nabble.com/New-stuff-at-NAMM-tp21555812p21615422.html
> Sent from the Csound - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>
>
> Send bugs reports to this list.
> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe 
> csound"
> 

I never liked Reaktor, but I liked the some of the unit generators.  The
interface
is just confusing (very bad visual organization).   I've never been into
compositional
processes that use text (I know, that's weird for some1 who uses Csound).  I
like
the WYSIWIG approach.  A WYSIWIG approach that's like a traditional DAW
sequencer
interface, but with added functionality/versatility.  Stuff that makes it
very easy to 
draw/record/edit what you want to happen, play with the ugens, even extend
the
interface functionality (in a Max like way).  Think Max meets cecilia/csound
meets 
logic8. 

WRT to the paca(rana), I wonder what the ugens will sound like under my
control
and how intuitive the interface is.  I'm going to order the "Kyma X
Revealed"
book first to see if there are any showstoppers before I order the big
kahuna.  

Davis


Michael Gogins-2 wrote:
> 
> I will be extremely interested to hear your comparison of sound design and 
> synthesis environments, including of course Kyma versus Csound.
> 
> I haven't had access to anything like Kyma, although I used to fool around 
> with Reaktor, FL Studio and other things that have some of those goodies. 
> I'm afraid I'm a real stick in the mud and always come back to Csound. I 
> know it pretty well, and perhaps I'm not patient enough to get up to speed 
> in other environments, and I also see that few if any environments have as 
> many working unit generators.
> 
> One thing I really would like is an environment where one can write both 
> compositional processes and synthesis patches in the same text-based 
> language, and Kyma seems to offer that. Nowadays, you can get that in the 
> open source world with Common Music/Common Lisp Music, at last even on 
> Windows. Again, I haven't tried it out much, but it's promising. Of
> course, 
> CLM doesn't have as many unit generators as Csound.
> 
> With Csound, although I know it well, the orchestra language and the 
> composing languages are too far apart.
> 
> I'm hoping that with the new parser, it may be possible to do something 
> about that, for example by writing everything in Lua, and having a program 
> that transforms Lua ASTs into Csound ASTs, or even by just embedding all
> the 
> Csound unit generators directly into Lua along with a DSP graph and 
> scheduler.
> 
> Regards,
> Mike
> 

-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/New-stuff-at-NAMM-tp21555812p21616896.html
Sent from the Csound - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.