[PD] no pd??

hans w. koch kochhw at netcologne.de
Wed Jan 4 00:53:03 CET 2012

actually, i think millers take on this is still the best idea and since there is also a sc~ external for max, max could be used as a mere canvas :-)
but one still would have to come up with some impressive music ;-)
(whatever that might mean)

how about inventing a composer named "donatién collidus" and reach out to the supercolliders for a collaborative effort?
i´d happily provide assistance with my maxlicense in wrapping it all up.


Am 04.01.2012 um 00:24 schrieb pd-list-request at iem.at:

> Message: 2
> Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2012 15:24:06 -0800 (PST)
> From: Jonathan Wilkes <jancsika at yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: [PD] no pd??
> To: Richie Cyngler <glitchpop at gmail.com>, Mathieu Bouchard
> 	<matju at artengine.ca>
> Cc: servando barreiro <servandisco at yahoo.es>, Miller Puckette
> 	<msp at ucsd.edu>,	"pd-list at iem.at" <pd-list at iem.at>
> Message-ID:
> 	<1325633046.97311.YahooMailNeo at web39404.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
> Exactly.? You'd essentially write the same patch twice-- once completely in Max, and if it gets accepted then with Pd and wrap it in a [pd~] object.
> OR:
> In fact you could just work with the subset of objects that are exactly the same between the two environments:
> [cos~]
> [phasor~]
> [biquad~]
> and so on.
> Then just make sure you don't have whitespace inside [expr] or [expr~], and you could really just write the whole thing once in Pd, submit it as a Max patch, and perform it as a Pd patch.
> That would be the most effective way to show the idiocy of the way the call was written.
> -Jonathan

More information about the Pd-list mailing list