Visual programming would be fun if it didn't involve the mouse.
September 25, 2010 4:26 PM Subscribe
Is there a realtime audio processing environment that is programmer-oriented? Like pure data, but text mode.
I want to play with audio. Recordings and also realtime effects. I'm trying out pure data. It's basically exactly what I'm looking for. But, it has the most obnoxious user interface ever designed by man.
Is there a text-oriented equivalent to pure data? I'm a programmer by trade, and so I find it very easy to abstract process and filtering chains as text files and functions. But, clicking and dragging tiny virtual "wires" around on the screen is really, really painful--literally, as it drives my RSI crazy.
I want to play with audio. Recordings and also realtime effects. I'm trying out pure data. It's basically exactly what I'm looking for. But, it has the most obnoxious user interface ever designed by man.
Is there a text-oriented equivalent to pure data? I'm a programmer by trade, and so I find it very easy to abstract process and filtering chains as text files and functions. But, clicking and dragging tiny virtual "wires" around on the screen is really, really painful--literally, as it drives my RSI crazy.
I will also vouch for CSound, Supercollider, Chuck, and (to a lesser degree) Max/MSP (as it's a kissing cousin to Pure Data).
posted by tip120 at 7:54 PM on September 25, 2010
posted by tip120 at 7:54 PM on September 25, 2010
Best answer: Another vote in favor of Chuck. I hear the laptop orchestras get a lot of milage out of it, and a couple of my friends are fluent in it. I've also seen pretty neat things done with CSound.
Then again, a kick in the head is more user-friendly than PD/Max, to me, so YMMV.
posted by Alterscape at 12:32 AM on September 26, 2010
Then again, a kick in the head is more user-friendly than PD/Max, to me, so YMMV.
posted by Alterscape at 12:32 AM on September 26, 2010
Response by poster: I've gone with chuck. It's missing a couple of key features (simple arithmetic nodes, includes).
But, the language itself is damn-near exactly what I'm looking for.
I've already written a ruby front-end to wrap around it that handles includes and makes experimenting with the thing much easier.
posted by Netzapper at 2:18 PM on September 29, 2010
But, the language itself is damn-near exactly what I'm looking for.
I've already written a ruby front-end to wrap around it that handles includes and makes experimenting with the thing much easier.
posted by Netzapper at 2:18 PM on September 29, 2010
This thread is closed to new comments.
My problem is that building patches with the mouse is so tedious, when I'm comfortable abstracting into code.
posted by Netzapper at 4:31 PM on September 25, 2010