hey, cheers for the comment, I'm mostly looking for ways to experiment and learn more about the tools I already use (Logic, Live, NI VSTis, etc.). It is partly to do with the need to somehow think of ways of bringing new ideas into a live show and having fun while at it... the other part is that creating your own synths/effects carries a rather cool tag with it still at least to my ears :) oh and also I'm currently experimenting with odd time signatures (in hip-hop) and polyrythms, so ChucK is great for that :) and finally thanks a lot to everyone who has made a recommendation... btw, what would be the absolute essential one of these readings if you had to choose? thanks, Vassili. babiakb@bellsouth.net wrote:

people might disagree with me, but i don't think most of what you said will help you. for example, the csound book would help on all the above areas in depth, but i don't think you chuck music would be better. i think roads computer music tutorial is the only thing anyone needs to start in computer music. it's a great book.

also, chuck is not really the most musical tool in it's current incarnation. it's a lot like csound or supercollider. it;s more for experimental synthesis, understanding sound, etc. if you are just trying to make good new electronic music of any genre, ableton is the simplest path from brain to speaker, whether glitch, electro, classical, indie pop, trance, you name it. the stars of music either use cubase/ableton/protools, or hardware. mostly hardware. for example, everyone says autechre uses maxmsp, but they don't on envane and the previous album, they use max to control their hardware, and the max interface was self-designed. albeton now does the same thing right out of the box.

chuck for me is like supercollider, to make experimental sounds, learn about sound synthesis and algorithmic music. all these topics are covered beautifully in roads' book. to just make a good tune, grab a damn guitar. you don't chuck sine oscillators to dacs and then construct an lpf out of biquads to make music easily ;) all that would be like two clicks in fl studio or ableton, and sound the damn same. you do this to hold sound in your hands and learn.

probably going to get flamed for this pov, but that's my 2c.

...

From: Vassili Slessarenko Date: 2006/09/12 Tue AM 07:48:42 EDT To: ChucK Users Mailing List Subject: [chuck-users] Reading materials.

Hey you all,

Just a question I have meant to ask for a long time. I'm looking for good literature (be it e-book or paperback) on Audio DSP, Algorithmic Composition, and perhaps Object Oriented programming. Not being a CS student I am just trying to get into the whole world of Chuck/PD/Reaktor, I do have basic programming skills, but largely feel they are not enough, especially without the understanding of how audio signals work.

I have found one book very useful. It is by Miller Puckette - "Theory and Techniques of Electronic Music". It is quite heavy reading though and not much is sinking in I find....

I am particularly interested in how-to use programming techniques to transform algorithms into sound and a reference on what are the basic building blocks of common audio effects or how to create them. For example right now I am trying to replicate a hardware delay I own into a software model so that I can extend the delay time beyond that of the hardware one (for some crazy looping fun), but also I want to set up all sorts of EQ filters on both input and output of the signal and can't quite get my head around doing it in Reaktor even.

So this question is mostly for Perry and Ge I guess as they are teaching chuck and such to uni students, but I welcome any responses :)

Could someone just give me a list of essential readings (and maybe some of the extended, just in case I want to see things in more detail) to be able to work with ChucK/PD/Reaktor?

Thanks a lot in advance,

Vassili.

_______________________________________________ chuck-users mailing list chuck-users@lists.cs.princeton.edu https://lists.cs.princeton.edu/mailman/listinfo/chuck-users

_______________________________________________ chuck-users mailing list chuck-users@lists.cs.princeton.edu https://lists.cs.princeton.edu/mailman/listinfo/chuck-users

On 9/12/06, babiakb@bellsouth.net wrote:

people might disagree with me, but i don't think most of what you said will help you. for example, the csound book would help on all the above areas in depth, but i don't think you chuck music would be better. i think roads computer music tutorial is the only thing anyone needs to start in computer music. it's a great book.

I like the Csound handbook. It has a lot of ideas that can be applied in many places; not just csound. I realy like how everything is "illustrated" in code. Not only can you try what would happens aftermodification, the code is often also another way of non-ambiguously re-wording what was said which -at least to me- helps understanding. I own both and while Roads gives a very solid intro into many things, the Csound book takes the time to also go into less obvious areas, many of the chapters are basically a introduction into somebody's pet field, illustrated by code. I like that but it's not for everybody. also, chuck is not really the most musical tool in it's current incarnation. Well, that's a good topic for debate. I experience it as quite musical myself. it's a lot like csound or supercollider. it;s more for experimental

synthesis, understanding sound, etc.

Realy? I thought it was for making one's own sequencer. I heard some people use it for livecoding and some of those crazy Princeton people aparently wrote a fun looking 3d game in it. I've been thinking about making a coo-coo clock in it as well, if only I could steal the time from the dos prompt.... In case of dire emergency I suppose you could use it as a teaching tool as well ;¬) if you are just trying to make good new electronic music of any genre,

ableton is the simplest path from brain to speaker, whether glitch, electro, classical, indie pop, trance, you name it. the stars of music either use cubase/ableton/protools, or hardware. mostly hardware. for example, everyone says autechre uses maxmsp, but they don't on envane and the previous album, they use max to control their hardware, and the max interface was self-designed. albeton now does the same thing right out of the box.

Well, that's a nice topic that I'd love to debate. In fact I was using Ableton since version2 and I started getting unhappy with it. Not enough direct interaction, too hard torwrite pieces on stage, etc. So; I tried trackers and hardware and in the end decided I didn't like any of them but did like bits of all of them so I sat down and just started writing. This "brain to speaker" thing is a big deal to me. Ableton does lots of things out of the box, and they are great things but I found that they weren't always my things and so not the sort of box (if I can abuse the analogy) that I wanted to be in. for sure; now I'm in a smaller box (because my own sequencer is quite primitive insome ways) and right now I have a problem with note-off messages that cause hanging notes in a way I can't trace yet but it's *my* box and I feel way more comfortable in it. This also isn't some obscure "experimental" genre that couldn't be done otherwise, I just wanted to do acid in away I felt ok with. chuck for me is like supercollider, to make experimental sounds, learn about

sound synthesis and algorithmic music.

Wonderfull! I heard it can do that as well. In fact I think it can do all of the above things at the same time, sample accurately. all these topics are covered beautifully in roads' book. Indeed they are. It's a great book though I also have to add I was once forced to check it in at a wardrobe because it could be used as a weapon (true story). to just make a good tune, grab a damn guitar. That's cool too, I like it but I realy couldn't make people pay to hear me play it. Probably I couldn't even pay them for that. you don't chuck sine oscillators to dacs and then construct an lpf out of

biquads to make music easily ;) all that would be like two clicks in fl studio or ableton, and sound the damn same. you do this to hold sound in your hands and learn.

Ableton has no biquads though and I wanted to get away from relying on the mouse and the schreen during performance. I admit that you can go a long way with two clicks; for a DAW it's a good program, I like it for some things and happily paid for it up to version 4 (5 didn't bring that much extra for me), it was a good investment. probably going to get flamed for this pov, but that's my 2c. No, not flamed, you are right... For your case. For my case I am right, the good bit is that we can now write different programs depending on our different needs. That's what I like about ChucK; aside from the occasional explosion it's quite easy to make your own tools. I don't want to make music in ChucK (yet) I want to make music with my own instruments which I make in ChucK. ChucK might have a fairly long brain-speaker path for many people and many sounds but my own instruments, once finished and hooked up to the right interface have a very, very short path indeed. For me.... But I don't have to appoligise for that; they are mine, other people can stick their own stickers on their own keyboard :¬). I hope that adresses your post and I hope it wasn't seen as flaming; ableton is great for working with weird samples and ChucK is great for making those so you're quite well off. No need to read the Csound book if you don't want to either. Yours, Kas.

On Tue, 12 Sep 2006, babiakb@bellsouth.net wrote:

if you are just trying to make good new electronic music of any genre, ableton is the simplest path from brain to speaker, whether glitch, electro, classical, indie pop, trance, you name it.

As I count more and more birthdays, I've learned that simple declarative sentences about a wide range of human behaviour just don't work. Ableton drives me crazy, but you have to bear in mind that I'm an old guy who uses stuff like rtcmix (and of course some chuck) for most of my musical work. And I'm definitely not one of those "stars of music". Oh well. :-) I did just put a bunch of music on-line from this summer, however. If you're so inclined, check out: http://music.columbia.edu/~brad/music/ The "summer2006" and "mando::summer" series use a lot of chuck/chuck~ and RTcmix/rtcmix~ (as well as plugins constructed using them) for the sound synthesis and processing. brad http://music.columbia.edu/~brad