S. Massy wrote:
> I've looked into a few synthesis languages, but, of them all, though
> csound as always seemed to me most interesting, it's also the one that's
> always seemed to me most daunting.
Really? Just tried out chuck and supercollider, and I'm back to csound.
Chuck is a really clean, nice language, but the concurrency can be
tricky to get your head around. Plus it's quite ineffective computation
wise,
Supercollider seems very confusing to me, esp being on linux. Startup
dir conventions, server/client concepts, the doc comming in strange rtf
format.
Csound admittedly has a strange, dated language at places, but that can
mostly be worked around using #include's and #define's. The strong sides
of csound is it very well documented, it's using clear conventions and
it's probl the fasted one outthere. You can do deferred time, python
stuff (didn't try it out yet) and realtime with midi, you can play
samples in almost any format even soundfonts. And somehow I don't feel
the thing is fighting me (which could be said about other linux
softsynths)...
-- peace, love & harmony Atte http://www.atte.dkReceived on Sat Dec 24 12:15:04 2005
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sat Dec 24 2005 - 12:15:05 EET