<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 9/12/06, <b class="gmail_sendername">Spencer Salazar</b> <<a href="mailto:ssalazar@cs.princeton.edu">ssalazar@cs.princeton.edu</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
On the subject of nomenclature, is anyone else thinking about the<br>relative merits of LPF, HPF, BPF, etc. vs. LowPass, HighPass,<br>BandPass, etc.? Obviously the acronym versions are faster to type,<br>which would be important in live-coding situations. However it seems
<br>to me that spelling them out fits in more with the current ugen<br>naming scheme, might be a little easier to read, and also might be a<br>little easier to understand for people new to electronic music.<br><br>(I dont have a huge vested interest in either way--just wanted to
<br>throw out a few thoughts before things get set in stone in the next<br>release.)</blockquote><div><br><br>Hmmmmm. SawOsc and ADSR are already abreviated too as is the reverb. In my own experience "ADSR" is the word that confuses people, not LPF. It's shorthand but very common shorthand; I could well imagine some entry level magazine writing "The Megasounds RaveBlaster mc3745 adheres to the standard OSC => LPF => ADSR structure but.....".
<br><br>I think it's sufficiently common to justify the useage of shorthand, people who are *that* new to electronic music will have to look up a lot in the manual anyway and you are only that new for a very short time (either you get to know the manual or give up....). That's not meant to sound elitist but if somebody would realy get into electronic music by exploring ChucK then he'll simply need to learn a whole lot in a very short time.
<br><br>I do agree that we need a very good look at this now. How many filters do we want in the end? I was thinking that maybe these should be called LPF12, HPF12 and so on (second order so 12db/oct) and later we might also have LPF24 (24 db) and maybe even LPFMoog, LPF303 or LPFPHLin (phase linear) or whatever.
<br><br>If at some later stage there would be dozens of filters (we can dream....) then "LPF" might stick out and make people wonder what sort of lowpass filter is meant because all of the others would have a more speciffic name.
<br><br>Does that make sense? is that where we want to go?<br><br>Kas.<br></div><br></div><br>