[chuck-users] blind user

Rich Caloggero rjc at mit.edu
Wed Sep 1 17:40:59 EDT 2010

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


    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.



  chuck-users mailing list
  chuck-users at lists.cs.princeton.edu
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cs.princeton.edu/pipermail/chuck-users/attachments/20100901/9feb458e/attachment.html>

More information about the chuck-users mailing list