For ChucK , I've always used emacs as my editor and a terminal window for performance. I'm curious: why do people use MiniAudicle? And for our blind community, what do you wish it would do that a straight text editor and terminal window doesn't do? - Rob On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 09:39, Rich Caloggero wrote:

I am a blind user who has played around with chuck! Chuck is perfectly accessible via command shell in either linux or windows. The language is great and running programs is simple.

The GUI environment, mini audical, is another matter. I was not able to use it on Windows; have not tried on Mac or Linux.

I wonder if a rewrite in java using Swing UI classes would be feassible. This would probably give the most access, cross platform and with little extra coding. You do need to use Swing though, otherwise the code to talk with MSAA (microsoft Active Accessibility) will need to be written by hand, which is probably a big pain!

Write me off list at rjc@mit.edu -- Rich

----- Original Message ----- From: To: "chuck users" Sent: Wednesday, September 01, 2010 5:32 AM Subject: [chuck-users] blind user

Would like to know if there are any other blind users of chuck besides

...

myself and perhaps talk to them offlist so as to not spam the list needlessly.

_______________________________________________ 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

I find that using java mode does 99% of what I want with ChucK, so I put this in my .emacs file: (setq auto-mode-alist (cons '("\\.ck\\'" . java-mode) auto-mode-alist)) When you open a .ck file, you get all the keyword coloring and indentation you'd expect. I could get fancier and create some bindings that would pass an expression to a ChucK process from within a text window (I used to do that when I was doing Lisp development), but haven't found I really needed it that often. - Rob On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 11:18, Michael Heuer wrote:

Hello Robert,

Do you use a specific emacs mode for ChucK?

michael

2010/9/1 Robert Poor :

...

For ChucK , I've always used emacs as my editor and a terminal window for performance. I'm curious: why do people use MiniAudicle? And for our blind community, what do you wish it would do that a straight text editor and terminal window doesn't do? - Rob On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 09:39, Rich Caloggero wrote:

...

I am a blind user who has played around with chuck! Chuck is perfectly accessible via command shell in either linux or windows. The language is great and running programs is simple.

The GUI environment, mini audical, is another matter. I was not able to use it on Windows; have not tried on Mac or Linux.

I wonder if a rewrite in java using Swing UI classes would be feassible. This would probably give the most access, cross platform and with little extra coding. You do need to use Swing though, otherwise the code to

talk

...

with MSAA (microsoft Active Accessibility) will need to be written by hand, which is probably a big pain!

Write me off list at rjc@mit.edu -- Rich

----- Original Message ----- From: To: "chuck users" Sent: Wednesday, September 01, 2010 5:32 AM Subject: [chuck-users] blind user

...

Would like to know if there are any other blind users of chuck besides myself and perhaps talk to them offlist so as to not spam the list needlessly.

_______________________________________________ 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

_______________________________________________ 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

Interesting! What attracted me to ChucK was the fact that it is NOT graphically oriented. Sure, OSC is fun in how you can attach unit generators by interconnecting them graphically, but I find ChucK's text-based programming model is ultimately much more expressive. I like to think of ChucK as the computer musician's equivalent of grinding your own pigments: it's more work, but you produce something that is more identifiably your own. - Rob 2010/9/1 Rich Caloggero

What I wish I could do with Chuck, or any language really, is to have a system like I imagine PureData to be. From what I've heard, gui DSP languages can allow you to create software synthesizers, samplers, and other similar software, complete with gui control. You can do the DSP in chuck, but being able to create a standalone thing that can be easily tweaked or whatever via gui would require lots of reinventing of the wheel.

Perhaps I'm wrong, but I think sighted people have a whole host of sound making technology at their fingertips. If they want to program everything from the ground up, they can use chuck and OSC and write a gui to control what they build in Chuck. Seems like there are other people, like me, who do not want to program all the dsp stuff; I'd just like to have software in which I can load up my synth or effect or sampler and build weird sounds via gui in real time. Sighted people can do this with lots of programs; just look at all the synthesizers that now come with protools, or Cakewalk's Sonar. Some of these have been made somewhat accessible via screen reader specific scripts, but I've not seen anything even remotely accessible off the shelf.

Sorry for rambling, but it seems all the pieces are there. Just need someone a lot smarter than me to put them together... -- Rich

----- Original Message ----- *From:* Robert Poor *To:* ChucK Users Mailing List *Sent:* Wednesday, September 01, 2010 2:15 PM *Subject:* Re: [chuck-users] blind user

For ChucK , I've always used emacs as my editor and a terminal window for performance. I'm curious: why do people use MiniAudicle? And for our blind community, what do you wish it would do that a straight text editor and terminal window doesn't do?

- Rob

On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 09:39, Rich Caloggero wrote:

...

I am a blind user who has played around with chuck! Chuck is perfectly accessible via command shell in either linux or windows. The language is great and running programs is simple.

The GUI environment, mini audical, is another matter. I was not able to use it on Windows; have not tried on Mac or Linux.

I wonder if a rewrite in java using Swing UI classes would be feassible. This would probably give the most access, cross platform and with little extra coding. You do need to use Swing though, otherwise the code to talk with MSAA (microsoft Active Accessibility) will need to be written by hand, which is probably a big pain!

Write me off list at rjc@mit.edu -- Rich

----- Original Message ----- From: To: "chuck users" Sent: Wednesday, September 01, 2010 5:32 AM Subject: [chuck-users] blind user

Would like to know if there are any other blind users of chuck besides

...

myself and perhaps talk to them offlist so as to not spam the list needlessly.

_______________________________________________ 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

------------------------------

_______________________________________________ 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

FYI: I'm one who never took a signals course in college. I have some basic idea of complex numbers, but really have no clue why they should relate to sound / audio signals at all. So, digital filtering is difficult for me to understand. I know conceptually how it works (i.e. analog equalizer), but not sure how to work with filters etc digitally i.e. from chuck. I can understand the basics of chuck and how the timing model works, and the unit generators are just objects, so I know how to use those. For me, chuck is low-level - about expressing synthesis algorithms or some new weird effect. A sound designer, in my opinion, would use pre-built synthesizers, effects processors, etc to make a sound; individual synthesizers or effects processors would look like black boxes. Want a new synthesizer - just plug it in! think the easiest way to architect this would be: - build a way of binding chuck classes / objects to gui - define exactly what can be exposed and thus manipulated via the gui (efrrably in code) When writing the chuck classes corresponding to each synthesis engine, effects processor, etc, mark each field to be gui-enabled. Some magic would happen to bind each of the classes marked fields to a live gui object like a textbox or listbox etc . could add new low-level components (written in chuck or any language really) to the pallet of objects. The real key is how to do it and keep it accessible! I'm not aware of any sound design / processing environment which is accessible. I'm sure all of this has been done before... In fact, now that I think of it, there are plugin standards like VST, etc which must do some of this stuff, but not sure exactly how they work. When I use VST plugins in cakewalk (which has been made quite accessible to those using the jaws screen reader on windows), the accessibility of each plugin itself is completely independant of the accessibility of the host (i.e. cakewalk). -- Rich ----- Original Message ----- From: Kassen To: ChucK Users Mailing List Sent: Wednesday, September 01, 2010 4:33 PM Subject: Re: [chuck-users] blind user Rob; What attracted me to ChucK was the fact that it is NOT graphically oriented. Me too. I often think graphical displays in music programs are distracting form focussing on the sound itself, even. All of that aside; we could go make jabs at MAX and the like or even go into how many modern plugins have interfaces where no amount of vision will help you figure out how you are supposed to use them. What really interests me though is that something like ChucK could/should be a great tool for people who can't see or can't see that well to make electronic music. I suspect a lot of advances in interface design could be made there, not just with support for screen-readers, but also things like interface and error sonification that could help everyone, not just the blind. I think it's a good thing that there's renewed interest in this. Yours, Kas. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ chuck-users mailing list chuck-users@lists.cs.princeton.edu https://lists.cs.princeton.edu/mailman/listinfo/chuck-users

think the easiest way to architect this would be: - build a way of binding chuck classes / objects to gui - define exactly what can be exposed and thus manipulated via the gui (efrrably in code)

I don't have much of a comp sci background, but I think that the model of one class (for example, SynthControl) being the gui for another (SynthSounds) is a standard model. The issue with chuck is just that the gui only exists on OSX, and even then it's just a couple of buttons and sliders, so there's not much of an impetus for all the linux users (who, let's admit, are probably the hardcore open source devs among us) to work on extending the gui. I can't quite tell if you like PD / Max or not--if you do, have you looked into Brad Garton's chuck~ object for OSX? It's here: http://music.columbia.edu/~brad/chuck~/ I sporadically worked on making this into a dylib for use with an Objective-C based GUI, but I lost interest shortly after I got it working, because I don't know much about programming and couldn't figure out how to expose chuck's variables to the outside world. Anyway, on a philosophical note, I think chuck is elegant. I like the way that the text-based, algorithmic focus reduces the "tactile" nature of Max and causes me to think in structural terms. Ironically, Max now seems like it's capitalizing more on the post-Buchla sentiment, and ChucK is coming from the post-Bell Labs ideal. But that's another discussion. -Andrew

Yeah, that's tough to say. I should say that aka.objects (http://www.iamas.ac.jp/~aka/max/) has one called aka.speech though, that speaks text. This could conceivably work with ChucK code, but it might be a bit of a drag. I'm curious, though, and I hope this isn't insensitive--how do you control Max or PD in an auditory way? Both of those programs seem like their main focus (pun intended) is on visualization of algorithms. -Andrew On Sep 2, 2010, at 2:31 PM, Rich Caloggero wrote:

*>I can't quite tell if you like PD / Max or not--if you do, have you looked into Brad Garton's chuck~ object for OSX? It's here: http://music.columbia.edu/~brad/chuck~/

Its something I should try again. The question is: will it work with a screen reader such as the built-in Apple screen reader? Guess I need to try it... -- Rich

----- Original Message ----- From: "Andrew C. Smith" To: "ChucK Users Mailing List" Sent: Thursday, September 02, 2010 10:45 AM Subject: Re: [chuck-users] blind user

...

...

think the easiest way to architect this would be: - build a way of binding chuck classes / objects to gui - define exactly what can be exposed and thus manipulated via the gui (efrrably in code)

I don't have much of a comp sci background, but I think that the model of one class (for example, SynthControl) being the gui for another (SynthSounds) is a standard model. The issue with chuck is just that the gui only exists on OSX, and even then it's just a couple of buttons and sliders, so there's not much of an impetus for all the linux users (who, let's admit, are probably the hardcore open source devs among us) to work on extending the gui.

I can't quite tell if you like PD / Max or not--if you do, have you looked into Brad Garton's chuck~ object for OSX? It's here: http://music.columbia.edu/~brad/chuck~/

I sporadically worked on making this into a dylib for use with an Objective-C based GUI, but I lost interest shortly after I got it working, because I don't know much about programming and couldn't figure out how to expose chuck's variables to the outside world.

Anyway, on a philosophical note, I think chuck is elegant. I like the way that the text-based, algorithmic focus reduces the "tactile" nature of Max and causes me to think in structural terms. Ironically, Max now seems like it's capitalizing more on the post-Buchla sentiment, and ChucK is coming from the post-Bell Labs ideal. But that's another discussion.

-Andrew _______________________________________________ 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