[PD] software license for pd general patch?

João Pais jmmmpais at googlemail.com
Tue Jun 29 15:58:26 CEST 2010

> what are you trying to say with this (apart from offending people's
> musical background)?

I don't find it an offense not to know the same things I do. just like  
when names of bands and performers get mentioned in this list, I don't  
know almost all of them - because it's not my "scene". the point would be,  
no one knows everything, and there's no offense in that.

>> I'm just being realistic, it's not a value judgement. If I had made a
>> nice vocoder with online streaming, that would be much more interesting
>> for this community.
> what's this nonsense about being "realistic"?

it was my estimative on the interests of the people I know from this list  
(personally or through mail). if it's nonsense or not, the reactions will  
tell. I think there are more people using vocoders - or extrapolate to  
patches that allow you to perform electronic in realtime - than writing  
music on pen and paper, performed by classical musicians. nothing wrong  
with both of them.

>  on which grounds do you build your reality?

my grounds, from what I know, see and learn. can't give a deeper reply  
than that.

> what's this nonsense about "this community"?
>  what makes you think that this community prefers phase-vocoders over
> compositional structures? the available help-patches? the fact that
> there are few orchestral pieces presented at Pd-conventions?

the posts that I read. I only know personally a couple of the people of  
this community, and those I'm sure that have other interests than mine -  
good for them -, and am 100% that they don't need the patch I'm talking  
about. the other ones I make an idea from what I read that they wrote. If  
I'm wrong, then correct me, I apreciate.

> i've been publishing software for years now, and i never tried to be
> "realistic" before publishing it. some of this software has been
> successfull (and is used by a lot of people; iirc, your click-tracker
> uses some of my objects) and other has not.

I'm sure I use your objects in 99% of my patches, they're very useful.
I don't know what the "realistic" part meant to you. In the patch I've  
made it didn't change anything at all on how the patch resulted. I was  
just saying that the people who do have the ability to go inside the patch  
and look at it (they should all of them be on this list) have other  
priorities, which is fine.

> pretty all of my code is highly domain-specific, and thus probably not
> very appealing to you (are you interested in matrix maths? in graphics?
> in click-tracks? in live-coding? in 3d-sound? in website rendering?).
> still some of these domain specific things have found there comunity.

none of these points are interesting for me at this moment, so you are  
right. only click tracks, because I did a very simple patch for the  
rehearsals of a piece of mine, and then I expanded to a "finished" tool.  
besides that it's not something that I use that often.
but I'm sure that many more people here are interested in those points.

> what i want to say is that you should not make assumptions about people
> whom you don't know at all.

being my tool to support the study/performance (maybe even compostion) of  
written complex music, even not knowing most of the people here personally  
I'm sure I'm not that wrong when I say that they don't work in this area.  
the ones I do know personally are better suited e.g. with a step sequencer.

> PS: funnily, i have been helping a bit with a click-track system for 35
> independent (click-track wise) voices, using a Pd object i never thought
> about in the context of click-track.

that sounds interesting, I would like to know more about it - in case it's  
an open project.

> PPS: for what it is worth: i cannot remember you announcing anything
> about your click-track patch in the past; even so, the webserver-logs
> show that it has been downloaded about once per week. i don't think this
> justifies as being totally unrealistic.

it might be that I didn't (would have to look deep here), but it's on my  
page for a long time, which I mention for other things abstractions that I  
put out now and then.
I've been speaking about it mostly to musicians who aren't Pd users. good  
to know that it's been around that often, I tried to put in a visit  
counter once, but couldn't get the code right (or maybe doesn't fit into  
the wiki structure).
or maybe all those downloads was me testing the link :)

More information about the Pd-list mailing list