[LAU] Hardware synths

[Chuckk Hubbard]

On Dec 1, 2007 2:19 PM, Lars Luthman <lars.luthman at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Sat, 2007-12-01 at 14:13 +0200, Chuckk Hubbard wrote:
> > Agreed.  It is also capable of completely customizable microtuning,
> > which, despite what some of you may have heard, is not possible on any
> > hard synth.  They may say it is- but you are limited by the number of
> > keys on the hardware, which is not the case with Csound.
> > I used to harp about the difficulty of using Csound with any fluency,
> > but this is a difference of degree, not of kind: It is hard to learn,
> > but I believe someone very experienced with Csound can work as
> > efficiently as someone very experienced with simpler interfaces, doing
> > the same tasks.
>
> But if you're going to play it like an instrument you'll still need some
> sort of hardware, which will typically have a finite number of keys.
> Writing .sco files isn't all that fun.

I definitely agree with that; but there are other ways to send
frequency info than physical keys.  I made my own sequencer, others
use algorithms or other text-based score languages (e.g. Scala) that
may be a bit simpler than Csound's.
And again, writing .sco files is a skill that, if one is motivated
enough, becomes easier with practice.  A text editor like emacs can do
a lot of the work.

-Chuckk

-- 
http://www.badmuthahubbard.com