23 Sep
2011
23 Sep
'11
5:31 p.m.
On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 09:21:45AM +0000, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 10:07:22PM -0400, S. Massy
wrote:
Thanks. I was just curious, since PD is the only one of
the major
synthesis engines I haven't played with (because of its graphical
nature). And I do catch your drift about SC. In fact, it seems to be a
common sin of all those languages, as they seem to evolve out of need
(functionality) rather than design (semantics): it can be good or bad,
but usually is confusing to the newcomer, whatever else it is.
Cheers,
S.M.
Just idle curiosity, but why do you guys
recommend PD over SC or csound?
I had the idea they were more or less equally suited.
For someone who knows them well, yes.
But in the other case, if you have to learn one of them
from scratch just to solve a particular problem, I'm pretty
sure that Pd is the easier way to go. And that is *not* just
because it has a graphical user interface.
Take SC. I love the way the synthesis engine works and can
be controlled using OSC. But, even as a programmer, that is
someone used to writing formal instructions and descriptions
in a text based format, I have to *fight* the SC language all
the time. IMHO it's a mess, and it seems to be designed to
allow spectacular one-liners rather than for clarity and
consistency. I'm using it now only to write synthdefs, for
all the rest I use Python.