[PD] PD Repertoy Project info
jamie at postlude.co.uk
Tue Mar 29 20:34:09 CEST 2005
I think some kind of effort to consolidate works that use near obsolete
technology is essential if the works are to continue being performed.
However, just from my very limited experience of updating early works,
which use (for example) Yamaha DX and TX series synths, and E-mu
samplers, I can envisage that a centralised project to do this could be
a time consuming, and possibly thankless task.
I think that a good way forward for this would be a 'prevention rather
than cure' approach. I have sometimes had to produce inaccurate
performances of works because the composer's documentation for live
electronics has been incomplete or unclear, and the composer has not
been available for contact. A possibility for resolving this could be
some kind of loose standard for documentation. The rationale behind this
is that if the techniques are sufficiently well documented, it should be
possible to reproduce them from the documentation using currently
available technology. In this sense the PDRP is still a very useful
resource, particularly from a musicological standpoint.
Perhaps the project should become the live electronics Repertory
Documentation Project. Once some kind of standard format has been
established (a bit like the How-to philposophy from the Linux
Documentation Project), it might gradually become common practice.
On Tue, 2005-03-29 at 15:15 +0200, ggkarman at musicologia.com wrote:
> Hello Arie,
> >>What is the expected future of PDRP in the short? Is the music to be
> included restricted to originally pd/fts/max.. pieces?
> > -This whole attemp was rather nastily twarted by IRCAM.
> > Miller developed some considerable tools, used
> > in their first phase of realizing score-following.
> > They revised their technology with FTM & Suivi objects
> > and more or less denied him the right to continue.
> > Also the repertory using these seem to santified by
> > IRCAM.
> I'm really sorry. I didn't know about this. I hope this question hasn't
> been inconvenient. This is really sad.
> >>i've seen several edus are teaching live electronic classics, but
> haven't found >any more patches out there.
> >-Maybe this a good reason to start the basis of a general
> > repertory
> I wish that patches, scores and other materials would be of free access to
> the rest of the world, at least for educational use. That can surely be
> handled by some kind of licence.
> > and the registration of that.
> I'm sorry but i dont understand what you mean with 'the registration'. Do
> you mean a (world-wide catalogue), like RISM or something like that?
> > Different pieces / different composers / different demands
> > demand different tools: PD, Max/MSP, SuperCollider.
> Are there any 'open' classical pieces under these other platforms?
> > The outcome of these considerations need to be that
> > a more genral description is provided by people who
> > want these resources to be applied and to be applicable
> > to their work(s).
> But as this hasn't been done very frecuently yet, will we have to wait 75
> years (or whatever the time of the rights of the music and software to
> become public domain) to get our hands on this music?
> > Miller's attempt is is something to be encouraged.
> Indeed it is.
More information about the Pd-list