Max/MSP

[xox]

4 minutes ago, oscillik said:

My particular issue with LLMs is that way too many people speak of them and implement them in ways that indicate that the people using them think they're infallible, and always give out correct information.

I'm not saying that there aren't people who use LLMs responsibly, but there are way too many people (and companies) that do not. And that's fucked up.

Yes, ofc and i actually agree with that!  

[d-a-m-o]

https://www.perfectcircuit.com/signal/graham-wakefield-generating-sound-organizing-time-interview?utm_source=instagram&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=featured-article&utm_content=wakefield-interview

[logakght]

some stuff I just made—I really liked it: 

 

[logakght]

[logakght]

 

[logakght]

 

[logakght]

sorry for the spam, tho I'm inspired atm 

 

[ignatius]

 

[ignatius]

also mark fell chat that is interesting. 

 

[auxien]

Ned Rush is doing some Max stuff in a basic enough way that a dummy like me can even understand it. forgoing MIDI too with audio rate triggers (not sure the terminology here is correct, apologies), which i believe is how AE have mentioned their stuff is all designed in Max for their systems/sync/etc.

Edited Wednesday at 12:05 AM by auxien
forgot to include part 2

[logakght]

18 hours ago, ignatius said:

also mark fell chat that is interesting. 

 

I found his PhD thesis: https://www.are.na/block/27714244

[cern]

7 hours ago, logakght said:

I found his PhD thesis: https://www.are.na/block/27714244

 

On 4/24/2024 at 5:42 AM, ignatius said:

also mark fell chat that is interesting. 

 

 I got the book "Structure and Synthesis: The anatomy of practice" by Mark Fell, which I am reading atm. 

Pretty entertaining read and also contains exercises, highly recommend it! 

Edited Thursday at 01:04 AM by cern

[logakght]

[d-a-m-o]

On 4/24/2024 at 1:39 AM, auxien said:

Ned Rush is doing some Max stuff in a basic enough way that a dummy like me can even understand it. forgoing MIDI too with audio rate triggers (not sure the terminology here is correct, apologies), which i believe is how AE have mentioned their stuff is all designed in Max for their systems/sync/etc.

He's using Phasor~object for signal based sequencing, from what I understand this is more precise than "events based sequencing" (feel free to correct if I'm wrong). There's a lot of good videos about the topic on Philip Meyer's channel 

 

[Nil]

I've used phasor~ driven sequencers a lot, it's a marvelous, flexible clock. I find it super handy to parse any sort of list of events too. [phasor~] > [subdiv~] > [zl.lookup] is an insanely powerful combo.

A stupidly fun thing to do is to [function] [shape~] the [phasor~] before it hits [subdiv~]. IIRC, [swing~] works pretty nicely there too.

These last six months I've spent tons of time trying to figure out how [dict] and LOM work. Tedious, frustrating at times but eventually pretty useful.

cool stuff @logakght

[gnarlybog]

I don't know anything about Max, but Mark Fell is so interesting. thanks for sharing that talk.
@cern Is the book very academic and technical, or easy to read?

[cern]

2 hours ago, gnarlybog said:

I don't know anything about Max, but Mark Fell is so interesting. thanks for sharing that talk.
@cern Is the book very academic and technical, or easy to read?

I don't find it academic nor technical at all, but it depends what you mean with technical?  It is mostly just his mindset of creating music and his point of view. He breaks down things and make a good point in many cases..

For example:

Cipriani and Lyon's thoughts on Electronic music and composing: (Spoiler from the book)

Spoiler

Cipriani makes a number of points that are grounded within the Cartesian worldview. From the above transcript I extract the following five key points:

• ●  Most of the time people are subjected to the dictatorship of software.

• ●  You end up making music following the way this software is built.

• ●  It is very important to know what you are doing, and don’t just push buttons.

• ●  If you really want to be free, you have to have more knowledge about what you are doing; you have to know what you are doing, and this makes you free. Otherwise you are a slave to the software.

• ●  You need to know every kind of synthesis, how it works in theory, and then you practice it with MaxMSP.
  
  Lyon's thoughts of electronic music: 

  Lyon suggests that the distinction between experimental music and what might be termed ‘normative music’—that is, music based on accepted stylistic norms—is mirrored in our software. On the normative side of software are utility programs such as mixers, sequencers, and reverberators.
  On the experimental side are the programs that we discuss today. This software is open, extensible, and invariably used in ways unanticipated by its creators. While such software does not command a market on the scale of normative utility programs, it is arguably much more influential in the long run, as it facilitates the creation of the music which today exists only in our collective imagination. And the experiments of today will lead inevitably to the norms of tomorrow.

  
  
   

Mark Fell objects on this in a wonderful way and bringing up "Acid Tracks" by Phuture as an excellent example that goes against what Lyon suggested. 
 

Spoiler

I have a number of problems with these accounts—from Shannon and Weaver and Schramm to Cipriani and Lyon—and the relationships they construct between thoughts, actions, and technologies. As I pointed out at the start of this discussion, when I reflect on my own practice and that of my peers, I feel that these accounts do not accurately represent how work is made. Furthermore, I have a problem with the way Lyon extends this position into a distinction between the experimental and the normative, where popular practices are seen as non-innovative mechanical recapitulations of stylistic norms and experimental practices are seen as being of a higher order, the exclusive province of informed minds in open technical environments. My own practice aims to demonstrate that aesthetic growth (of the genres within which I am active) does not occur in the form of regular injections of originality from an otherwise separate musical enterprise (the experimental), but by responding to the vocabularies, stylistic norms, and practices inherent within the genre itself.

In response to the above, I want to discuss the making of ‘Acid Tracks’ by Phuture (Trax Records, 1987). This piece is considered to be the first acid house record, featuring what is now typically referred to as a ‘squidgy’ synthetic sound produced by the Roland TB-303, where the 303’s filter produces a particularly pronounced resonance, while its cut-off frequency is manually modulated to produce a characteristic sound. In tandem with this sound, the track features a characteristic musical pattern. The unit’s onboard sequencer featured a rather convoluted entry method allowing for variable note length, accent and ‘slide’ settings, as explained in the manual’s three courses: basic, intermediate and advanced. The basic course in pattern construction alone takes up twenty-four A4 pages, making it a rather challenging unit to learn. I want to argue that Phuture’s use of the TB-303 (and the resultant genre-defining recording) demonstrates an enlargement of stylistic and musical forms that cannot be understood in terms of mentally isolated idea-formation followed by transparent implementation within passive or ‘open’ technical systems. Additionally, I want to show that this case does not conform to Lyon’s view that utility-type technologies produce stylistic norms and that normative music grows only through the appropriation of the experimental. I want to suggest therefore that it establishes a number of objections to the Cartesian paradigm.

And many more pages on that topic which I find entertaining to read. 

[Wunderbar]

is it possible to make good music with a learning disability ? ( my mom never gave me vegetables when i was younger )

[logakght]

[logakght]

I liked it better without the bass 

 

[logakght]

sorry, wrong video