misc

Well turns out i might change that soon haha, i've started strongly considering the switch to ableton. I could get a pretty sweet deal with the student discount on suite. Just wanted to hear some opinions from max for live users on whether it'll be worth it. Is it just a matter of m4l making it more accessible to use max with a daw, or is it gonna open up a whole new set of possibilities? John Ehrlichman mentioned some interesting stuff above. Also i'm a bit baffled about the m4l crossgrade option on abletons website. Is that for if you already own max? Cause if so i could just get the standard ableton version and the m4l crossgrade, and save a bit of money, as opposed to the suite bundle. Is suite worth it? Seems like it mainly just comes with a ton of sound packs and i never use them. The additional synths look cool as well though. Pls help i'm torn.

I know you just want a track atm, but if you're willing to put in the time definitely work through his discography chronologically. Guys got such an interesting progression. I prefer the newer stuff, but this is the first track i heard of his...

sshh lets just try and forget about that one

That face melting into another face was pretty cool. Hate how far in advance this has been announced though.

the interesting thing about max4live is that it opens up whole new ways of getting Max to interact with a DAW that i never even thought of until it existed. For example there are Max4live objects that can actually create midi parts/clips and drop them into your session timeline. This is something that before Max4live could not be done, even if you got Max to interact with Live. Also imagine in Logic if you had a channel strip of effects and you wanted to randomize every single knob on every single plugin with the click of one button. Before with just MAx + Logic you'd have to do it all over Midi or OSC and assign shit. In Max4live things are integrated in such a way where there is already a max4lve patch called 'randomize channel' which fully randomizes an entire channel of effects with no assigning necessary. Stuff like this makes max4live a total game changer even if you've already been using maxmsp for years Looks like i'm using the wrong daw :/

Anyone else use logic with max? Looks like it's much better suited for ableton, but i've used logic forever now and doubt i'll change that any time soon. Up to this point i've just been sending audio into logic using soundflower, recording and then arranging the parts there. Haven't explored any further than that but there must be more interesting ways to use the two together?

Nice one, will definitely check them out. Thanks!

This is the biggest weakness with the max tutorials is that they give you the basics on how the lower stuff works and how to build the more common modules but don't actually explain why it works so you can't build upon that learning experience to create new things. It's kind of like "discovery math" that is taught in schools. In Max and PD, after I did the easier tutorials, I started by just ripping out stuff from the examples and making "Frakensteins", severing parts from different modules and stitiching the chunks together different to make something different. This is completely kosher and about 90% of Max users probably do this regularly. Then I'd be changing the order that things would flow or patching things from one chunk of code of a module to an entirely different module. It's kind of like hacking hardware. Then after about 30 versions the thing looks entirely different. I was not able to make anything from nothing until I learned algebra I and II, precalculus and physics in relation to DSP theory. Music in the object oriented languages is applied physics and to make anything really interesting and new you will have to have an understanding in those areas, in terms of both equations and techniques. Unfortunately that will mean you will have to go through a long learning period but the payoff is spectacular if you truly love doing it. Also nthing love for Cool Edit Pro/Adobe Audition 1.5. Still using it 15 years+ and is the software I would choose if I were only allowed to use one program. Cheers for the insight. Wrt the "frankensteins" i guess that's what i have been doing. To be honest i think i just need to spend as much time with the program as possible, as with learning anything really. Conveniently enough, i'm actually a physics student, so probably in a decent position to gain some understanding in applying the topics you mentioned in max. But thats the problem really i'm not sure where i would apply more complex mathematics/physics. You got any reading/video suggestions for implementing those topics in max?

Following a few little max discussions i've seen around here, i thought this thread could use a little revive. I've been plugging away at max for about a year now, and having done all the built in tutorials and many of the online ones (baz, delicious and a few others), as well as just spending as much time in the program as possible, I feel like i'm definitely competent with it. Problem is, while i think i've hit the point where i can dissect a lot of patches and understand what's going on and also learn from them, when it comes to making my own patches from scratch, they tend to just fall flat, maybe make a couple of cool noises, but in no way utilise the power of max. So any tips on pushing past this boundary and making more diverse, interesting patches?

Yeah i don't get why people do this. Whoever made those tracks is really fucking good. Why throw that away by claiming it's someone else?

This just popped up on my youtube. It's old but i've not seen it before, so thought i'd post anyway.

You know when i first saw that "the making of fleure" topic you made, i thought for a split second it was gonna be ae doing one of these videos and got really excited, but then i remembered they probably wouldn't ever do that and sure enough it wasn't that at all. Still an interesting topic though haha Watching them coding max patches wouldnt be very accessible. I was more thinking a video where they dissected a track and talked through what was actually going on. I think that would be fascinating.

You know when i first saw that "the making of fleure" topic you made, i thought for a split second it was gonna be ae doing one of these videos and got really excited, but then i remembered they probably wouldn't ever do that and sure enough it wasn't that at all. Still an interesting topic though haha

oh damn this came out of nowhere, very excited

yeah totally, this one's pretty hilarious though

Have you listened to the LP he did with Gil Scott-Heron? Far more interesting tracks on that one, would definitely give it a go if you haven't already

I remember watching through some of those Beat This episodes a while back and some of the are just painfully bad. Like if you want some reassurance that the music you're making is in any way good just watch this every now and then...

I don't totally agree with this in general but in the context of this LP i kinda do For me at least, the best tracks were the ones we'd already heard, and a lot of the others were just really boring, like nothing happened. He would state an idea and then that would be the whole track, no progression or anything, everything just felt super uninspired. Big disappointment for me

this looks so slick, cheers to everyone involved

If they managed to do both with one configuration, that would be an immensely daunting logic problem. So I wouldn't be surprised. It would be cool to see a breakdown/explanation of your observation, because it is definitely an equilibrating Conway pattern. ok so maybe this has already been said or is really obvious but i just thought, do you think this could be where the title Confield came from? Because the area over which the cells move is called the field, so it's a Conway field....a Confield This is a nifty hypothesis. and i'm pretty sure i remember them saying somewhere that a lot of confield was generative, with them setting up parameters and then letting the sound evolve from a starting point, which is basically conways game of life hope i'm not misquoting there but i'm pretty sure it was something along those lines

If they managed to do both with one configuration, that would be an immensely daunting logic problem. So I wouldn't be surprised. It would be cool to see a breakdown/explanation of your observation, because it is definitely an equilibrating Conway pattern. ok so maybe this has already been said or is really obvious but i just thought, do you think this could be where the title Confield came from? Because the area over which the cells move is called the field, so it's a Conway field....a Confield

yes pls

being a younger (sort of) aphex listener, i must say its fuckin top banana to be able to witness these releases as they actually happen, and get caught up in all the excitement with you fellas. these are good times last few [slo] tracks getting me all sentimental

jammin' so hard to 7 lsb [slo] this is all so great