[PD] HRTF

[padawan12]

I'd love to hear work that comes out of a combination of
Csound and Pd I think both are great, just different.


Something I feel very strongly about though, are there
still 'licensing issues' with Csound or has it shaken off
all it's encumberances and become a totally free OS
codebase?

On Tue, 27 Mar 2007 13:23:29 -0400
"Chuckk Hubbard" <badmuthahubbard at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 3/27/07, IOhannes m zmoelnig <zmoelnig at iem.at> wrote:
> > Chuckk Hubbard wrote:
> > > Pd people continue to ignore Csound, and Csound people continue to
> > > ignore Pd, despite the great power of combining them.  I can't help
> > > feeling like this is a symptom of being more interested in some
> > > intellectual problem than in using all of the available tools to make
> > > music.  Not seeing the forest for the trees, in a way.
> >
> > this is somewhat true, but ignores the fact that Pd is well established
> > _outside_ the computer music community too.
> >
> > you cannot expect dsp-engineers developping the latest-and-greatest
> > binaural rendering system to get into csound.
> > (but they do use Pd)
> 
> Fair enough.  Csound is indeed audiocentric, as am I.  I just know
> Csound has already implemented HRTF, and exists as a PD object, which
> I thought the poster wanted.  If his interest is in pulling an
> abstraction apart to see how it works, then Csound probably isn't the
> easiest way.
> As far as computer music, it's true that I come across few people who
> are active on both lists, and occasional disparaging remarks about one
> or the other.  I guess the best thing for me to do in that case is to
> try to show some of the great things that can come from the
> combination, rather than complaining about negativity.
> 
> 
> -Chuckk
> 
> -- 
> http://www.badmuthahubbard.com
> 
> _______________________________________________
> PD-list at iem.at mailing list
> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list