[PD] nusmuk_audio WAS: Max Smoother Audio than Pd?
reduzierer at yahoo.de
Sat Apr 17 00:14:24 CEST 2010
On Fri, 2010-04-16 at 19:24 +0200, colet.patrice at free.fr wrote:
> uh I missed roman inputs, fortunately there are the archives
> Are you implying there was no dance music since the 80's? How bad will
> actual 'best technologies' will be in a few years? Is that a discussion
> about certain aesthetics you're looking for or about technical
> I took dance as an example of musics that needs to answer a number of sound characteristics
> where technical possibilities are seriously implied in aesthetics.
This is certainly not untrue, but also very general. I'm not seeing
where you're heading for regarding the discussion about Pd. From the
discussions we had so far, it seems to me (probably I'm completely off,
sorry if so) that you have a particular kind of electronic club music in
mind and you find Pd an inappropriate tool for making this kind of
"highly produced" music (sorry for not having a better term here). And
probably you're right: Pd isn't the best-suited tool for generating
exactly "this" kind of music. But this is not so much a technical issue,
but I'd say more a cultural. By having the many possibilities Pd offers,
it might be not so interesting for someone to do all the hard work of
creating a Pd based environment that very closely resembles the more
traditional tools for producing "this" kind of music. If the initial
interest is to create "this" kind of music with the structure of "this"
kind of music, Pd might not be the tool of choice in the first place.
I'm not saying, that using a tool like Pd could not be interesting
anyway to resemble an existing culture/style of music. But then the
reason to do so might not be to just copying it, but rather to play with
it, trying to extend it, to transform it etc.
A djembé drummer says: "You cannot make dance music alone, you need
other drummers as well". Patko says: "Making dance music requires
advanced technologies". Roman says: "Where is the sine? I cannot dance
without an [osc~ =<20]".
> Not to say that an instrument would sound better if there is a background image or such,
> but the way we are accessing data and modulate them has a severe influence on inspiration.
> At the end the best compromise I've found is like obiwannabe's work, where the patch is the piece.
I guess I'm missing your point here. How does that relate to what you
> ----- Mail Original -----
> De: "Mathieu Bouchard" <matju at artengine.ca>
> À: "Roman Haefeli" <reduzierer at yahoo.de>
> Cc: "colet patrice" <colet.patrice at free.fr>, "pd-list" <pd-list at iem.at>
> Envoyé: Vendredi 16 Avril 2010 18h53:40 GMT +01:00 Amsterdam / Berlin / Berne / Rome / Stockholm / Vienne
> Objet: Re: [PD] nusmuk_audio WAS: Max Smoother Audio than Pd?
> On Fri, 16 Apr 2010, Roman Haefeli wrote:
> > On Fri, 2010-04-16 at 14:04 +0200, colet.patrice at free.fr wrote:
> >> show me a patch that correctly mix soundfiles.
> > That interests me. Can you elaborate a bit more what you mean by
> > "mixing"?
> Interesting, I was more concerned by the use of the word « correctly ».
> For a even a simple cross-fade, any way of smoothing the output of a
> slider is a potential matter of personal preference, and whichever way you
> pick has eventual slightly different consequences on the result.
> _ _ __ ___ _____ ________ _____________ _____________________ ...
> | Mathieu Bouchard, Montréal, Québec. téléphone: +1.514.383.3801
More information about the Pd-list