[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

oh drat. not more software again....



 > is there anyone on this list who doesn't use max/msp?

To the extent that people who read here are interested
in *making* work as well as listening to it, I'm not
surprised that those pieces of software that function
as programming environments that allow you to not only
specify *how* things are done but also *how* one
might do something live with it are discussed here;
if one sees the creation of material live as being
intimately connected to the production of recorded
objects, soemthing that'd allow for both at once or
in tandem would obviously dominate [and let's remind
ourselves that Supercollider, PD, Reaktor, the wonderful
Tassman stuff, Wavewarp, the plogue stuff, may all
be used there] the discourse periodically.

There are plenty of other interesting alternatives to
using Max/MSP/Jitter (in various configurations) to do
microsoundy things [interestingly, no one's really
mentioned using the audio and control bussing of pluggo
to make large microsound-generating creatures that live
directly on the mixing board in DP/Cubase [I'd mention
ProTools, but their lack of host sync kind of makes
it less interesting to me personally]. I know
there are people out there who do that, too. Is it
uncool to mention that because it's easy? :-)]. I'm
curious as to whether you'd be complaining about their
appearance here, too.

Perhaps it'd be better to ask *why* it annoys one to
see something mentioned. If you find it tiresome to see or
read ANY discussion of how something is done or anything
BUT pointers to releases and gigs, then one great
corrective is to create some content yourself in the
hope of redirecting the flow of information; that's
one of the great things about lists like these; if you
don't like the content, you can do something positive
about it. It's my impression that things come and go
in terms of software stuff. I tend to stay quiet when
it comes up, figuring things will pass. They do. I may
share such a view, but figure it's more useful to do
something positive rather than kvetch. Your mileage
may vary.

If there's some sense that nothing useful comes from
something in wide use (which I view as only a mild
variant of the "this can't be any good because it's
popular" gambit), I'll be less sympathetic; I think
that a broader playing field [i.e. more users and
more listeners] tends, in the long run, to produce
a space for more interesting variants and approaches
to appear and flourish. In the case of software, I
think that a larger number of users who're smarter
listeners because they know *how* to do the stuff
instead of standing around being mystified encourages
performers and composers to strive to greater heights.

My counsel: patience, self-examination, and possible
positive action to redirect the discussions.

Nota Bene: I'm a Cycling '74 person. I used the software
for a very long time before I ever had my name on a
business card, and still use any number of means of
generating and organizing materials, as I have done
for many, many years. Although I have faithfully read
and contributed here for quite a long time, I make it
a point to avoid posting directly, lest my personal
inclinations be misread as spam. I probably participate
here less as a result of that relationship, since it
can be difficult to properly bracket my comments as a
person from my role/job whatever. The truth of the
matter is that I would say that I spend quite a
lot of time in my working life and in my performing
life listening to people tell me what they'd like to
do and then tell them that I DON'T think Max/MSP/Jitter
is a good idea for what they want. I think that the
world in general is best served when one engages in
the act of matching tools to technques, intention,
re$ource$, and the temperament of the user. In order
to do that, you need to actually hear what people
are interested in doing, which might only further
annoy you. So I do that offline.

So, what would you like to talk about instead?