Yahoo Tuning Groups Ultimate Backup tuning C sound query

--- In tuning@y..., Alison Monteith <alison.monteith3@w...> wrote:

>
> I just bought a copy of the C Sound Book by Richard
> Boulanger which claims to offer something for beginners. Well, after
> about 6 hours of faffing around I still can't get past the first
> tutorial by rendering the etude files. I get a 'fatal error' message
> every time. I've tried some of the other orchestra and score files
and get a result but no joy with the etudes and no explanation that I
can find in the book.
>

I also only got the "Etudes" to "render" about 1/2 of the time... and
even then the program was complaining about one thing or another...

I guess it's OK for beginners as long as the beginner has LOTS of
patience and also digs futzing with computers... (and doesn't mind
losing composition time...)

________ _____ _____ ____
Joseph Pehrson

🔗Bill Alves <ALVES@ORION.AC.HMC.EDU>

Alison,

I see that Richard has already pointed you to some important places on the
web to get started with Csound. In particular, check out the tutorials. The
recommendation of BBedit comes from the fact that it is a text-only (ascii)
editor and Csound requires text files. You can use any word processor *as
long as you save the .sco and .orc files as text only*. I have used Word
and AppleWorks. There is another book on computer music through Csound that
is a step-by-step approach rather than a collection of essays like the
Boulanger Csound Book. It is _Virtual Sound_ by Riccardo Bianchini and
Alessandro Cipriani and it is available here:
http://www.cdemusic.org/store/cde_search.cfm?keywords=aciprianicds.
However, I think that you will find the Boulanger book valuable if only for
the hundreds of examples on CD-ROM. Best of luck, and let me know if you
have other questions.

Bill

> I just bought a copy of the C Sound Book by Richard
>Boulanger which claims to offer something for beginners. Well, after
>about 6 hours of faffing around I still can't get past the first
>tutorial by rendering the etude files. I get a 'fatal error' message
>every time. I've tried some of the other orchestra and score files and
>get a result but no joy with the etudes and no explanation that I can
>find in the book.
>
>Also I read in several places that I need a text editor, BBedit for Mac,
>in fact. So, not being psychic, can anyone tell me where to find one or
>do I have one already in the CD ROM package? Any help would be much
>appreciated and perhaps any contributors to the book on the list might
>like to note that the book is not very good for beginners as it doesn't
>actually get you started.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
^ Bill Alves email: alves@hmc.edu ^
^ Harvey Mudd College URL: http://www2.hmc.edu/~alves/ ^
^ 301 E. Twelfth St. (909)607-4170 (office) ^
^ Claremont CA 91711 USA (909)607-7600 (fax) ^
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

🔗JSZANTO@ADNC.COM

Bill,

I wanted to throw this out in your direction, but also people like
Alan Strange, Prent Rogers, or others whose backgrounds are in
various electronic music media might want to wonder about:

I, like Alison, picked up the Csound book, and while I was able to
get the majority of examples and tutorials to go, there is no doubt
about it: the program is a classic example of a laboratory-written
beast, with a host of configuration necessities, no interface to
speak of and a raft of presumptions-before-use.

None of that is negative, per se. But it very much reminds me of
software that is developed in-house, where the core algorithms are
worked out, and only later is the front end put in place. I took a
stab, a year ago, at the couple of Windows-based front ends (WinSound
may have been the most successful), but even those were woefully
short.

It definitely sounds like Alison is on the Mac platform, but with
coding tools these days being an almost slam-dunk for a (G)UI
wraparound of the core of Csound, I can't believe someone hasn't
stopped mucking with sounds long enough to write a nice UI. I know
that Prent Rogers has some custom tools he has written for himself,
but for those of you in 'institutions', it seems like it would be a
great project for students (maybe inter-department?) to have a simple
shell program that would:

- incorporate a basic text editor
- incorporate all the necessary file paths, for samples, compiling,
etc.
- have file lists of resources
- a simple integrated .wav player so you can sample your output

Really, if I didn't have my time swamped by all this other stuff, I'd
pull out a simple coding tool like Visual Basic or Delphi or even one
of the C/C++ toolboxes and throw it together! I'm fascinated by the
*end result* of Csound, but life is short, and my days of being a
software engineer are becoming distant memories; these days, I like
to sit down and be productive, not fart around with batch files, path
environments, and all that.

If I have missed developments in the last year that are even moving
in the direction of the above, I personally would be interested to
see them. In another month I anticipate putting together new computer
with a very fast CPU and lot of memory, and Csound would be fun to
play with again...for the first time.

Cheers,
Jon

🔗Lydia Ayers <LAYERS@CS.UST.HK>

🔗monz <MONZ@JUNO.COM>

--- In tuning@y..., JSZANTO@A... wrote:

/tuning/topicId_21447.html#21527

> I, like Alison, picked up the Csound book, and while I was able to
> get the majority of examples and tutorials to go, there is no doubt
> about it: the program is a classic example of a laboratory-written
> beast, with a host of configuration necessities, no interface to
> speak of and a raft of presumptions-before-use.
>
> ...
>
> It definitely sounds like Alison is on the Mac platform, but with
> coding tools these days being an almost slam-dunk for a (G)UI
> wraparound of the core of Csound, I can't believe someone hasn't
> stopped mucking with sounds long enough to write a nice UI. I know
> that Prent Rogers has some custom tools he has written for himself,
> but for those of you in 'institutions', it seems like it would be
> a great project for students (maybe inter-department?) to have a
> simple shell program that would:
>
> - incorporate a basic text editor
> - incorporate all the necessary file paths, for samples,
compiling, etc.
> - have file lists of resources
> - a simple integrated .wav player so you can sample your output

Ed Borasky turned me on to Michael Gogins's program "Silence".
It requires Java to run.

I installed it on my old system but that computer was too slow
for me to able to do anything with it. Haven't tried it on the
new system yet, but it looks like a very interesting GUI for
CSound.

Search the list archives - Ed mentioned it here too.
It was around a October 2000, IIRC.

-monz
http://www.monz.org
"All roads lead to n^0"

🔗Bill Alves <ALVES@ORION.AC.HMC.EDU>

Jon Szanto wishes that Csound would:
>
>- incorporate a basic text editor
>- incorporate all the necessary file paths, for samples, compiling,
>etc.
>- have file lists of resources
>- a simple integrated .wav player so you can sample your output
>
Csound at its core is a program that works in just about every environment
from DOS to BeOS. That's part of its strength. All these desiderata would
probably require platform-specific solutions and thus would not be a part
of "Csound" itself. People can write, and have written, front-ends that
take care of many of these issues, but they are all platform-specific
(click on "Front Ends" at http://www.csound.org).

There are other approaches that are frequently discussed on the Csound
list, but they all tend to involve a massive rewriting of Csound itself
(which no one has volunteered to do, though Michael Gogins' Silence comes
close), approaches that are platform-specific, or simply other computer
music programs which are often less powerful and/or commercial products.
Among the last I should probably mention Phil Burke's Jsyn, which is a
computer music program written entirely in Java (so that, in theory, it too
is platform independent). However, it is not nearly as powerful as Csound
and typically (from what I've heard) much slower.

I work with POVRAY, an animation package otherwise much like Csound, that
incorporates its own text editor. The downsides are that the editor is not
available on all versions, and it lacks much of the power of even a simple
word processor (no search function for example). Among those too few unpaid
volunteers willing to write code for free programs like these, most are
interested in investing their time in writing new interesting features
rather than reinventing a text editor.

The other problem with tightly integrating a text editor or similar add-ons
with Csound itself is that the code is not reentrant and cannot be without
massively rewriting the entire package. Technical issues like this are
discussed with mind-numbing specificity on the Csound list and I would
happily refer interested parties there.

Bill

🔗JSZANTO@ADNC.COM

Bill,

--- In tuning@y..., Bill Alves <ALVES@O...> wrote:
> Csound at its core is a program that works in just about every
> environment from DOS to BeOS. That's part of its strength.

Yes, but the implementation is one of it's barriers. Unfortunately.

> All these desiderata would probably require platform-specific
> solutions and thus would not be a part of "Csound" itself.

Yes, as I imagined, and that is all it needs. Many a time as a front-
end been written for a program that is essentially command line
driven (but you would know all that!).

> People can write, and have written, front-ends that
> take care of many of these issues, but they are all platform-
> specific (click on "Front Ends" at http://www.csound.org).

I'll take a look to see what progress has been made.

> but they all tend to involve a massive rewriting of Csound itself

Not good.

> Among the last I should probably mention Phil Burke's Jsyn, which
> is a computer music program written entirely in Java (so that, in
> theory, it too is platform independent). However, it is not nearly
> as powerful as Csound and typically (from what I've heard) much
> slower.

But it does do some real-time stuff interactively, which is nice.
I've been on the JMSL list, while it was active, and it was fun
watching Didkovsky come up with little music apps/pieces that you
could play with.

> Among those too few unpaid volunteers willing to write code for
> free programs like these, most are interested in investing their
> time in writing new interesting features rather than reinventing a
> text editor.

Understandable, which is why the tools that have 'drop-in' editors
would be a boon.

> The other problem with tightly integrating a text editor or similar
> add-ons with Csound itself is that the code is not reentrant and
> cannot be without massively rewriting the entire package.

But gee, all I want is something that prepares everything and then,
in the background, just drops it as a command line the way you'd
invoke Csound anyway, and capture the output. I use to use a command
line laser printer control program in DOS that they then wrote a
wrapper for Windows -- was very slick and easy, and all it did was
parse what you wanted and sent it off to the DOS program.

> Technical issues like this are > discussed with mind-numbing
> specificity

I'll bet!

> on the Csound list and I would happily refer interested parties
> there.

OK, I'll take a look there as well. Thanks for all the current info,
Bill.

Cheers,
Jon

🔗jpehrson@rcn.com

🔗JSZANTO@ADNC.COM

🔗Lydia Ayers <LAYERS@CS.UST.HK>

🔗JSZANTO@ADNC.COM

🔗monz <MONZ@JUNO.COM>

--- In tuning@y..., JSZANTO@A... wrote:

/tuning/topicId_21447.html#21550

> Joe,
>
> --- In tuning@y..., "monz" <MONZ@J...> wrote:
> > Ed Borasky turned me on to Michael Gogins's program "Silence".
>
> I take a look, it's probably easier to do a web search than the
> archives!
>
> > It requires Java to run.
>
> It better be cross-platform to make...
>
> > but that computer was too slow
>
> ...that statement make any sense! It's only a wrapper, and
> needn't be memory or processor intensive. But maybe Csound
> itself was the problem on your old beast...

No, Jon, the problem on the old beast was the new Java 2
Runtime Environment. It's HUGE, and the old beast just
slogged along too slowly to do anything with it, which
unfortunately included Silence.

One of these days I'll try installing Java and Silence on
the new machine and see if I can get it running.

-monz

🔗Greg Schiemer <gregs@conmusic.usyd.edu.au>

The problem people have with Csound is not a problem with
Csound per se but largely a problem of perception created
among users of the internet. The complaint about Csound
seems to be mainly about its user interface. I acknowledge
these but find they pale into insignificance when I remind
myself that this software is the aggregation of the
experience of many composers who produced the first computer
music. These like Partch were proactive in building their
own instruments except they did so using software. Moreover,
Barry Vercoe, the composer who wrote Csound, and several
other synthesis languages before that, has generously made
it available by releasing the source code in the public
domain thereby creating an enormous community of creative
enthusiasts. Many of these are composers who have since
contributed to its development in order to develop their own
creative work.

It's a bit like Harry Partch (or Kraig Grady or Ron George
or Bill Wesley) building their instruments and then giving
them away so everyone can benefit from their ideas. Imagine
if one of these guys gave you one of their instruments as a
gift -- a gift that represented their own unique commitment
to composing music -- and your only response was "it's too
complicated. I can't use it. But please fix it for me so I
too can use it". I sure know how I'd feel! (Boulez meets
Harry !#@#!) ouch!

One of the Csound community is Bill Alves who has politely
directed interested parties to the Csound list. However even
this will not make the problem go away. While generic
technology on which Csound is supposed to run is in a
constant state of flux, users must to be prepared to develop
an understanding of technical problems. Above all people
need to develop a healthy scepticism about glib assertions
that something or other is simple to install or easy to use.
This is the sort of snake oil that's freely available on the
internet. I think unrealistic expectations among novice
users (myself included) is possibly the main cause of Csound
problems. And while some help can be offered on the Csound
list, the most valuable source of help for starting Csound
is sometimes a computer literate friend who is willing to
spend a half an hour setting up user preferences. This is
the best option if you don't want to, as Jon Szanto so aptly
puts it, "fart around with batch files, path environments,
and all that". A musician needs to spend time doing
something productive.

Curiously enough the use of a generic text-editor doesn't
seem to stop users on this list from spending hours upon
hours producing email. Yet the time spent doing that might
otherwise be spent learning from the dozens upon dozens of
text examples supplied by Richard Boulanger in the Csound
book. You'll be amazed how playing with these using only
cut-and-paste in a generic text editor can be quite
satisfying. Not quite as seductive as doing email, but
satisfying nonetheless and a far more useful investment of a
musician's time. Only by doing this will Csound users
develop a basic understanding of these tools in the same way
that the skills of violin playing are learned. User
friendliness has more to do with the way McDonald's treats
its customers than the way the violin has served the world's
music.

Greg S

🔗jpehrson@rcn.com

--- In tuning@y..., "Greg Schiemer" <gregs@c...> wrote:

/tuning/topicId_21447.html#21618

> Curiously enough the use of a generic text-editor doesn't
> seem to stop users on this list from spending hours upon
> hours producing email. Yet the time spent doing that might
> otherwise be spent learning from the dozens upon dozens of
> text examples supplied by Richard Boulanger in the Csound
> book. You'll be amazed how playing with these using only
> cut-and-paste in a generic text editor can be quite
> satisfying. Not quite as seductive as doing email, but
> satisfying nonetheless and a far more useful investment of a
> musician's time.

Thanks for your opinion, Greg. However, I have to say that the time
I have spent on this list has totally revolutionized my way of
thinking about music. It's hard to believe writing pieces in CSOUND
would have the same broad implications....

________ ______ _____ _
Joseph Pehrson

🔗JSZANTO@ADNC.COM

Greg,

Ah, how I hate language. And that I have to use it! And I mangle it!!

First and foremost, thanks for your thoughtful reply. Much of what
you say makes great sense, and I think that my original post about
UIs could easily be read to mean a devaluation of Csound as a whole.
This was not my intention whatsoever.

It is not *mandatory* that anything else be supplied for Csound, as
with proper setup (I know, since I was able to make it happen) it
does exactly what it says it will. But I've watched in frustration as
others banged their heads, and I believe that it is not a "dumbing
down" of such good work to make it easier to use. You still will have
to write your code (scores and orchs), but every moment of time saved
elsewhere plows back into musical exploration.

--- In tuning@y..., "Greg Schiemer" <gregs@c...> wrote:
> The problem people have with Csound is not a problem with
> Csound per se but largely a problem of perception created
> among users of the internet. The complaint about Csound
> seems to be mainly about its user interface.

I have to disagree in that my programming experience pre-dates my use
of the net, and is part and parcel of what I observed in many schools
of thought in similar development cycles. I still think command line
tools are wonderful, and I couldn't imagine writing a front end for
perl, or awk, or grep, etc. But I think this is a bit different.

> Barry Vercoe ... has generously made
> it available by releasing the source code in the public
> domain thereby creating an enormous community of creative
> enthusiasts.

Absolutely to be commended.

> ... and your only response was "it's too
> complicated. I can't use it. But please fix it for me so I
> too can use it". I sure know how I'd feel!

Then I did a poor job of my writing, as I would never want the
authors of the core program to feel abused or belittled. Or come off
as a whiner!

That said, I keep waiting for one of those paradigm shifts, where the
all the facets of writing this kind of software is important, not
just getting the algoritms and data i/o correct, but in making the
user experience fruitful in as broad a way as possible.

> an understanding of technical problems. Above all people
> need to develop a healthy scepticism about glib assertions
> that something or other is simple to install or easy to use.
> This is the sort of snake oil that's freely available on the
> internet.

Hmmm. Easy to use, suspect, maybe. But installation should be
absolutely a no-brainer. It is simply lazy programming, or
inconsiderate at best, to make it otherwise. If you write software
*only* for yourself (which I have) it's a non-issue; if for others,
then take it into account, hopefully.

> the most valuable source of help for starting Csound
> is sometimes a computer literate friend who is willing to
> spend a half an hour setting up user preferences.

But Greg, manymanymany shareware and freeware programs are written
with a decent interface, a simple set of assumptions for the basic
file stuff, etc. It's just that no one thought this a priority in
Csound, which I do understand. It's just a shame.

> Only by doing this will Csound users
> develop a basic understanding of these tools in the same way
> that the skills of violin playing are learned.

Agreed big time.

> User friendliness has more to do with the way McDonald's treats
> its customers than the way the violin has served the world's
> music.

Well, I've been known to stretch a metaphor in my time, but I can't
buy that one, myself.

I'll end with this observation, though: Csound, with what I've heard
from the results and with what little I've worked with it, is a very
deep and rich toolset; as such, it demands and deserves dedicated
study. That usage and learning should constitute the vast bulk of
time spent with the program, and the topic of usability I am thinking
of is only a small part of the picture, and shouldn't cast more than
the tiniest shadow on an impressive collective good.

Cheers,
Jon

🔗jpehrson@rcn.com

--- In tuning@y..., JSZANTO@A... wrote:

/tuning/topicId_21447.html#21632

>
> I'll end with this observation, though: Csound, with what I've
heard from the results and with what little I've worked with it, is
a very deep and rich toolset; as such, it demands and deserves
dedicated study. That usage and learning should constitute the vast
bulk of time spent with the program, and the topic of usability I am
thinking of is only a small part of the picture, and shouldn't cast
more than the tiniest shadow on an impressive collective good.
>
> Cheers,
> Jon

Hi Jon!

The "toolset" might be "deep and rich" but, personally, I have been
disappointed by over 80% of the "compositions" I have heard in
CSOUND. Most are much too "algo" for my taste. I can count with
three fingers of my right hand the number of people, in my opinion,
who have really made "music" with it.

_______ _____ _____ ____
Joseph Pehrson

🔗jpehrson@rcn.com

--- In tuning@y..., JSZANTO@A... wrote:

/tuning/topicId_21447.html#21632

> Hmmm. Easy to use, suspect, maybe. But installation should be
> absolutely a no-brainer. It is simply lazy programming, or
> inconsiderate at best, to make it otherwise. If you write software
> *only* for yourself (which I have) it's a non-issue; if for others,
> then take it into account, hopefully.
>

As an additional point... look at the marvelous FRACTAL TUNE SMITHY
that our own Robert Walker has devised. He has a marvelous "front
end" and it is quite easy to use and yet, at the price he is asking,
it is practically shareware. Robert works hard to make sure
everything works flawlessly, and installs easily. He welcomes
feedback from all his users. Robert has taken the end user in mind
and in that sense it is, yes, "consideration..."

__________ _____ _ ____
Joseph Pehrson

🔗JSZANTO@ADNC.COM

Joe,

--- In tuning@y..., jpehrson@r... wrote:

>> --- In tuning@y..., JSZANTO@A... wrote:
>> is a very deep and rich toolset

> The "toolset" might be "deep and rich" but, personally, I have been
> disappointed by over 80% of the "compositions" I have heard in
> CSOUND. Most are much too "algo" for my taste. I can count with
> three fingers of my right hand the number of people, in my opinion,
> who have really made "music" with it.

In the light of day, that is a very subjective statement, and
completely distinct from whether or not the raw materials are worthy
of delving into. Five lines staves covered with pen-and-ink or pencil
dots and lines have yielded at least 80% crap as well, IMHO.
When "music" (as you formaatted it) fails, I hold the composer at
fault, not the tools.

Cheers,
Jon

C sound query

🔗Alison Monteith <alison.monteith3@which.net>

🔗jpehrson@rcn.com

🔗Bill Alves <ALVES@ORION.AC.HMC.EDU>

🔗JSZANTO@ADNC.COM

🔗Lydia Ayers <LAYERS@CS.UST.HK>

🔗monz <MONZ@JUNO.COM>

🔗Bill Alves <ALVES@ORION.AC.HMC.EDU>

🔗JSZANTO@ADNC.COM

🔗JSZANTO@ADNC.COM

🔗JSZANTO@ADNC.COM

🔗jpehrson@rcn.com

🔗JSZANTO@ADNC.COM

🔗Lydia Ayers <LAYERS@CS.UST.HK>

🔗JSZANTO@ADNC.COM

🔗monz <MONZ@JUNO.COM>

🔗Greg Schiemer <gregs@conmusic.usyd.edu.au>

🔗jpehrson@rcn.com

🔗JSZANTO@ADNC.COM

🔗jpehrson@rcn.com

🔗jpehrson@rcn.com

🔗JSZANTO@ADNC.COM

🔗JSZANTO@ADNC.COM