On 11 September 2010 15:48, Hans Aberg <haberg-1@telia.com> wrote:
On 11 Sep 2010, at 01:13, Tambet wrote:
also... what do you mean by 'natural sounds' ?
Natural sound would be the one, which does not sound like if it was obviously generated by some digital device.
If ChucK could load dynamic libraries, then no recompilation of ChucK would be needed, but I do not think ChucK can do that.
Yes, but I have yet to go several steps for that.
My current tests of ChucK:
- http://picosong.com/qbV/ - this is using STK and some UGens to get some ambient sound. It's mixed with Audacity.
-
http://picosong.com/qAa/ - this uses several oscillators and Math.sin(...) to create something like mix of cat marriage and air alarm. Despite of it's utter ugliness it's even somewhat addictive somehow :) But there should be some health-care warning on it.
Maybe I'm missing the point, but it sound like what you want to do is
composing music, rather than experimenting with sounds. If you want
instruments that sounds realistic, maybe you should search for some good
VSTi and soundfonts, and pilot all this from a sequencer.
that way, you could quickly sketch a drumbeat, a melody, and improvise
from there ...
Yes, I actually am going to use ChucK to compose. I want to create songs. As I have done a lot of software development, I was looking for programming language, which is not too much one-purposed (like creating scores, synthesizing sound, programming this or that aspect of some readily-available synth or generating midi), but would do all those things in both realtime and preprocessed modes. ChucK clearly is that and other languages I looked into clearly are not. Csound was somewhat interesting, but too complex and not so coherent - it rather seems like a bunch of random functions to create things in C. Faust attracted me with mathematical purity.
I like to have all programming power at my hands whenever I need it when I'm doing something with computer - like doing 3D with PovRAY and writing text with LaTeX. Thus, natural way to compose is ChucK.
Anyway, I also want to create effects to existing voices and instruments, where ChucK is rather irreplaceable (one would need something very similar to replace it for good).
2010/9/11 Kassen
<signal.automatique@gmail.com>
Hans;
If ChucK could load dynamic libraries, then no recompilation of ChucK would be needed, but I do not think ChucK can do that.
It's one of the oldest wishlist items though, and support for this in some form is planned.
Kas.
That's just what I was thinking today.
2010/9/11 Tambet <qtvali@gmail.com>
> To explain my situation:
>
> <snip>
>
> To explain, what I miss and lack:
> * Drums.
>
> <snip>
I agree. We could really use a decent percussion-synth UGen or two.
*Nothing makes synthesis as appealing to new students like percussion synthesis.
*Some livecoding organisations and people frown on loading external material like samples
*Everyone likes Roland X0X-style sounds, secretly or not. It's -in my experience- a rare computer-music researcher who won't admit to a fondness for solid house tracks after a beer or two (research yet unpublished, performed by the author in the hallways of STEIM and various other organisations. Waiting for grants for more beer to continue this research).
Yours,
Kas.
This is true.
I would like those UGens. Rhythym