Slashdot Mirror

No programming though, she's a music teacher. If it isn't midi, she's clueless about computers.

Introduce her to Max/MSP sometime. You two might find a new, shared passion.

I do a lot of odds and ends in Max/MSP and Reaktor for work. Normally I do the more robust stuff in C, ObjC and Ruby.

They're "dataflow" languages, you have boxes that transform data, and you wire them together in the order you want the transformation to happen. Everything's graphical. It's designed to be easy enough that someone with no computer background could use it– a composer or synth programmer will learn it for a few days and then off they go.

I've noticed some things:

• Code sharing almost never happens. You can't email a snippet of your "patch" (a program) as text, you can't post it in a text box at stackoverflow, it's almost impossible to communicate with other people about what you're working on without emailing the binary document. When you send someone a patch to look at, you're doing a lot of "look to the left of this," and "look for the red box."
• Code reuse can be difficult because boxes generally aren't typed in any way, so interfaces are difficult to verify and document.
• ... This leads the dev environments to only be as good as their templates and default libraries. People prefer Reaktor to Max not because it's easier for developing, but because it comes with a bunch of really useful default synths and sampler instruments, which people will tweak slightly.
• It's very difficult to talk about the algorithm itself, you have to spend all your time orienting yourself. If the program you're building is a simple pipeline, it's easy to see what's happening, but if you have loops and divergences it becomes very hard to understand what's going on in the abstract.
• Data types are a hack. You end up having to have different color wires that carry different things, type-tagging of binary data is routine, and you often have to do conversions because the environment runs different data connections at different levels of service. Trial and error is usually required to see if a box responds to a message in the way you want; I can write correct C without having to run the code, I would never try that in Reaktor.
• Execution order is a hack. If you connect one output to two inputs, which input will process the output first? There's conventions: In Max: the rightmost box will act first, and your graph is traversed depth-first right-to-left (this rule introduces ambiguity when dataflow is fed back). There are also boxes/modules that can make execution order explicit in various ways. (Note that in most cases we don't care about execution order, and the implicit multithreading is quite nice.)
• Doing N of anything is a pain. In Max, It's easy to build a sampler that can play one sample. It's easy to build one that can play two. It's basically impossible to build a sampler that can play N, without using the textual scripting language (ha!) to dynamically rewrite your patch based on creation arguments.

If I have something thats useful, I'll often conceptualize stuff in Max and then rewrite it in C with CoreAudio, because I know the Max code is basically a dead end for its usefulness.

Check out Max/MSP/Jitter.

As you describe, the interface is VPL - connecting boxes / nodes to access the GPU is one of the (many) things the program is capable of. Depending on what you're trying to, you may also find Gen useful for generating GLSL shaders within the Max environment (although you can use other shaders as well).

I'm currently neck-deep in a few Jitter projects using custom shaders, etc., and while it's great for rapid prototyping, getting good frame-rates and production stable code out is a whole black art unto itself. Fortunately, the support and forum community are very strong.

Check out Max/MSP/Jitter.

As you describe, the interface is VPL - connecting boxes / nodes to access the GPU is one of the (many) things the program is capable of. Depending on what you're trying to, you may also find Gen useful for generating GLSL shaders within the Max environment (although you can use other shaders as well).

I'm currently neck-deep in a few Jitter projects using custom shaders, etc., and while it's great for rapid prototyping, getting good frame-rates and production stable code out is a whole black art unto itself. Fortunately, the support and forum community are very strong.

... in the creative coding community.

Patchers like Max and Pure Data allow for realtime graphical programming and live coding environments such as Fluxus exist for realtime graphics and sound. Max was originally written by Miller Puckette in the mid 80s for realtime control of DSP for computer music at IRCAM and Pure Data, started in the mid 90's, is his open source take on addressing some of it's design issues. Fluxus originates from around 2000 as is a live 3d engine for performance using a Lisp varient as the on screen scripting language.

Yet another case of artists/scientists providing a working solution to a particular problem not apparent to other disciplines. Too bad Bret dosen't cite these examples. Perhaps he dosen't know of them?

Bret's argument that realtime feedback is important to creative flow is spot on. I don't think he's calling for the use of this approach as a panacea. Naturally it won't work in all cases but anything that helps with problem solving is welcome in my book. It's not a replacement for deep understanding but really allows you more creative freedom which, as other posted have noted, is useful in creative graphics/sound programming.

It's commonly done with multimedia programming languages for audiovisual generation. See tools like puredata, Max/Msp, or vvvv

Repeat after me: people who don't want to learn programming will make lousy programmers.

Fine then: the statement above is garden-variety developer egocentric stupidity. TFS' statement is right, these folks want to get their work done, but the specific tools are irrelevant. The qualities of those tools for the task are the only things that matter.

It's insulting and stupid to propose that those looking to program and leverage an *Arduino* for their personal projects are somehow slackers uninterested in learning. Maybe they're just interested in learning what they want to, not what you want them to. I've walked the path of deep knowledge of programming, CS, etc. I've put my thousands and thousands of hours in. It's a good one for those who enjoy it, but it's not the end-all, be-all for all people.

Lots of people "want to learn", but at the same time they don't have that "ten thousand hours to mastery" to invest in a new domain (here, programming/CS). There's a spectrum here: on one end, the deep knowledge of an experienced programmer. On the other, those who want and need to access the power of programming but don't want to be burdened with oceans of complexity and specialized domain knowledge. I'll apply an existing term, "end-user programming", for this.

The most successful end-user programming environment by far is the spreadsheet. It provides simple, tabular model and some fairly rich programming capabilities within its scope. Another great example is the Max/MSP/Jitter environment for real-time audio/video signal processing -- very popular in the computer music and visuals world. Labview-based systems (which includes the Lego Mindstorms stuff) are another great example. Each of these environments is rich enough to allow programming, learning, and exploration. And all provide environments that are tailored to specific problem domains.

There's a place in the middle, often called by programmers "tools for the task", where a programmer doesn't have to bend over backwards to address certain hairy problem domains. Libraries, frameworks, and programming languages can all meet these needs in their various ways -- even to the extreme that it transforms what some people consider the nature of "programming".

I've been looking for the reverse of this for some time:
The ability to stream itunes to another computer as if it were an airport express.

If you're using a Mac, you could send the output of iTunes through Soundflower to a streaming server, and connect to it from other machines.

i think vision recognition and hand tracking have the most potential for musical control. try hooking up HandVu or CamSpace to Max/MSP for example.

http://www.cycling74.com/products/soundflower works pretty well for recording mac output.

the mac mini kinda sucks though. they're priced WAY to high for what they are, they should be... $300. i'm VERY happy with my macbook though.

Max/MSP is a (2D) graphical language for sound synthesis. PureData (PD) is the FOSS equivalent. I find graphical programming can be tedious and often counter-intuitive, but it's worth a look.

Anyway, I disagree that software engineering tools are particularly bad. With a modern IDE, you can see all the class and instance methods of any public API class very easily (you even get some documentation in a tooltip). And a well-designed OO library should need fairly little documentation - most of the functions should be self-explanatory. Refactoring tools have become very powerful. And thorough testing should catch the most serious errors. Last but not least, languages themselves are higher level and easier to understand. Where's the bad?

I do believe they're using Max/MSP for the programming.

You can also use SoundFlower to redirect the output of Skype into the recorder of your choice.

PS, Andrew:

Here's John Wainwright's page on MaxScript 101. MaxScript has a lot of really cool ideas built into the language that make it easy to script 3D graphics construction and animation (like treating transformations, time, etc as nested scopes that you can temporarily enter and exit, and directly supporting animation).

I dont't mean to confuse anyone by talking about two different pieces of software called "Max" (and not "Macs"), but here goes:

You should take a look at what Cycling 74 has done with their venerable visual programming language MAX/MSP (which supports a huge ecology of of binary plug-ins as well as visually scripted extensions), and Jitter, their 3d/video/image processing extension. Jitter supports writing extensions in JavaScript, and has full access to OpenGL from JavaScript as well as the visual programming language. You can even emit and consume JavaScript data structures on the wires flowing between Max data processing icons! But MAX is proprietary, and incredibly complex and arcane, due to its age. That can also be said for 3D Studio Max, as well.

I'm excited about applying ideas from successful or well designed proprietary systems to future versions of OpenLaszlo, targeting 3D runtimes instead of Flash. One reason I'm sure Flash is doomed is because it doesn't already support 3D, and if Adobe/Macromedia ever gets around to adding it, rest assured it will be a horrible kludge. I want to develop and run OpenLaszlo applications in a well designed full 3D real time environment, and use it to implement visual programming languages like Max, and user interface builders like HyperNeWS. OpenLaszlo's independence from Flash makes that possible.

-Don

PS, Andrew:

Here's John Wainwright's page on MaxScript 101. MaxScript has a lot of really cool ideas built into the language that make it easy to script 3D graphics construction and animation (like treating transformations, time, etc as nested scopes that you can temporarily enter and exit, and directly supporting animation).

I dont't mean to confuse anyone by talking about two different pieces of software called "Max" (and not "Macs"), but here goes:

You should take a look at what Cycling 74 has done with their venerable visual programming language MAX/MSP (which supports a huge ecology of of binary plug-ins as well as visually scripted extensions), and Jitter, their 3d/video/image processing extension. Jitter supports writing extensions in JavaScript, and has full access to OpenGL from JavaScript as well as the visual programming language. You can even emit and consume JavaScript data structures on the wires flowing between Max data processing icons! But MAX is proprietary, and incredibly complex and arcane, due to its age. That can also be said for 3D Studio Max, as well.

I'm excited about applying ideas from successful or well designed proprietary systems to future versions of OpenLaszlo, targeting 3D runtimes instead of Flash. One reason I'm sure Flash is doomed is because it doesn't already support 3D, and if Adobe/Macromedia ever gets around to adding it, rest assured it will be a horrible kludge. I want to develop and run OpenLaszlo applications in a well designed full 3D real time environment, and use it to implement visual programming languages like Max, and user interface builders like HyperNeWS. OpenLaszlo's independence from Flash makes that possible.

-Don

PS, Andrew:

Here's John Wainwright's page on MaxScript 101. MaxScript has a lot of really cool ideas built into the language that make it easy to script 3D graphics construction and animation (like treating transformations, time, etc as nested scopes that you can temporarily enter and exit, and directly supporting animation).

I dont't mean to confuse anyone by talking about two different pieces of software called "Max" (and not "Macs"), but here goes:

You should take a look at what Cycling 74 has done with their venerable visual programming language MAX/MSP (which supports a huge ecology of of binary plug-ins as well as visually scripted extensions), and Jitter, their 3d/video/image processing extension. Jitter supports writing extensions in JavaScript, and has full access to OpenGL from JavaScript as well as the visual programming language. You can even emit and consume JavaScript data structures on the wires flowing between Max data processing icons! But MAX is proprietary, and incredibly complex and arcane, due to its age. That can also be said for 3D Studio Max, as well.

I'm excited about applying ideas from successful or well designed proprietary systems to future versions of OpenLaszlo, targeting 3D runtimes instead of Flash. One reason I'm sure Flash is doomed is because it doesn't already support 3D, and if Adobe/Macromedia ever gets around to adding it, rest assured it will be a horrible kludge. I want to develop and run OpenLaszlo applications in a well designed full 3D real time environment, and use it to implement visual programming languages like Max, and user interface builders like HyperNeWS. OpenLaszlo's independence from Flash makes that possible.

-Don

You're close, but I'll offer a bit more.

Max/MSP is essentially a graphical programming environment, built primarily to coordinate interaction between a live performer and a computer. It was originally written for composers and musicians, but has since proven general enough in functionality to be used for dance, video, and other genres.

It *can* function strictly as a sequencer or a synthesis environment, but using it that way is somewhat unusual, as its forte is interactive performance. Check out http://www.cycling74.com/ for more info.

http://www.cycling74.com/products/lemur

it isnt vapourware!

Why is this one special?
I've owned a multiple input touchscreen for some months now called the Lemur.
http://www.cycling74.com/products/lemur

The Lemur *is* special, as not only do you get multiple inputs, you also get them fast enough to perform with, and loads of presets for music apps.

• here;
• here.

(I worked on the audio masking algorithms for prototypes of this system. It's pretty much all written in Max/MSP. Here's a shot of the prototype rigs.)

Basically, the Keyboard People are fucked.

Strike that. They are FUCKED.

Why? As one poster noted above: Software.

Software synthesis already outstrips most anything you can do in a keyboard, and at a much lower cost.

Exhibit A:

REASON

I remember back i nthe ancient 1980s, when a cheezy ass sampler (by todays standards) cost $2000+. In Reason, which costs about $400, you can fill an entire virtual rack with samplers far in excess of what availed then. you want 11 samplers stacked? If you had $25,000 - SURE. In Reason, when you're done, you simply open up a new blank Rack, and fill it with more/other goodies from the drop down menu. Back then, you'd have to sell all those samplers...

It comes with drum machines, samplers, processors, mixers, synthesizers of several different stripes, and on and on.

Second Exhibit: ABLETON LIVE

This, in combination with Reason, offers truly terrifying amounts of musical development and creativity. Recently, Live was upgraded to include MIDI, and a basic drum machine, so now it is even more deadly as a combo with Reason. Live is a Loop based compositional system, but with its new MIDI capabilities, it is now a much more powerful beast. It costs about $350, IIRC.

Exhibit Three: Max/MSP

This, in combination with Live and Reason, makes ANYTHING coming out of Korg pretty much superfluous. With Live and Reason, you have composition systems and tonnes of "Gear". With Max/MSP you make your own gear, and it can be just as weird as you want it to be. Max/MSP isn't a synth, it's a software development environment that resembles an evil cross between Visual Basic and tinkertoys. It's available on Mac and (finally) Windows, and it totally fuckin' rocks. If you wondered how freeks like Autechre makes all that jiggety noise, look no further than:
Max/MSP.

so, lets run some totals:

My guess is the Oasys will likely come in around at a $2500 price point.

I often shop at Musicians Friend so my prices are from there as of today, Jan 20th. They aren't the best, or the worst. It's just a data point.

Reason: on sale: $199
Ableton Live: $399
Max/MSP with Jitter (video libraries): $799
Edirol PCRA-30 keyboard with Audio In: $299

And a computer I found at PC MALL - an IBM Thinkpad:

Intel P4, 2.8GHz processor, 256MB RAM, 40GB Hard Drive, CD-RW/DVD Combo drive,15" XGA Display, XP-Pro, etc.

Which has PLENTY of power for audio. and it's on sale for $1,198.

So, throw in another hundred bucks for a kbd stand and what not and the total is around:

$2900

Which is probably a bit more than the OASYS will sell for. Since Max/MSP is for Advanced User GEEKS, and Jitter is even geekier, cut the $799 out and you have an entire electronic music studio that KICKS ASS for about $2200.

...for a system that will totally thrash the OASYS up and down the street. Cheerfully.

Now: will your system CRASH? Yes. Will the OASYS? Probably not. If you're worried about that, then get a Powerbook or a Linux Book or whatever-the-fuck-book that flips your crank. They don't Blue Screen as much as Windoze box, but there are other issues involved. All in all, unless you're planning to spend a lot of time on stage, you're better off with the compter based system.

In a few years you will have run through most of what the OASYS does. In a few years... I *shudder* to think what Reason and Live will be like...

Basically Hardware Synth manufactueres are doomed. The only ones who will survive are the ones making the uber-geek analogue gear, and they will basically be little more than boutique operations for purists.

RS

Compare: Jesusonic screenshot.
Max/MSP screenshot.

I think you can see which one is much more powerful.

Compare: Jesusonic screenshot.
Max/MSP screenshot.

I think you can see which one is much more powerful.

From my opinion as a student of computer arts/digital arts, the first thing you have to ask yourself is how to include the computer in your artistic work.
I can recommend the Book "Composing Interactive Music" from Todd Winkler, as I found it not only interesting for re-thinking how to use Computers in artistic installations, but also how to completely rethink computer interaction.
Winkler proposes a framework of 5 stages which i think can also be adoped for any digital works, not only music.
The book is inteded for composers working with max/msp, a visual programming language where object boxes can be "patched" together; this style of working shows fast results, as this kind of software is working "realtime", meaning you get constant ouptput of the things you are doing or the parameters you are changing.
I am working with this kind of "patchable software interfaces" for more than five years now; and this is also teached on the University of Applied Arts in Vienna/Austria, where I am studying.
If it comes to interaction (sound-visual, sound-dancers, graphics-interface, whatever) in the field of artistic work, these tools such as
PD Pure Data (windows/mac/linux) - Audio/Video/3D (GEM,Framestein) -opensource-
Cycling74 max/msp (windows/mac) - Audio/Video/3D (also see Nato and Jitter) -free 30days demo-
Native Instruments Reaktor (windows/mac) -commercial, but has education pricing-
vvvv (win) -free-
are used from lots of the people around.
there are hell lots more, you might want to take a look at the audiovisualizers.com tool shack, or pawfal.org for example.

For some visual examples and also works, you might want to take a look at
http://www.harvestworks.org/maxreel/
http://puredata.info/community/ (mostly audio)
talking chair (vvvv+hardware)
http://www.realtimearts.net/

or you might also want to take a look at the department of digital art in the university of applied arts/vienna.
currently we are a group of people trying to bring opensource and arts together. there are also workshops and lots of projects going on: http://5uper.net

for sure there are also "standard" programs teached, which are good for working with business and advertising companies -- but if we are speaking about digital arts, that's going beyond the standard approach of software use. at least for me.

From my opinion as a student of computer arts/digital arts, the first thing you have to ask yourself is how to include the computer in your artistic work.
I can recommend the Book "Composing Interactive Music" from Todd Winkler, as I found it not only interesting for re-thinking how to use Computers in artistic installations, but also how to completely rethink computer interaction.
Winkler proposes a framework of 5 stages which i think can also be adoped for any digital works, not only music.
The book is inteded for composers working with max/msp, a visual programming language where object boxes can be "patched" together; this style of working shows fast results, as this kind of software is working "realtime", meaning you get constant ouptput of the things you are doing or the parameters you are changing.
I am working with this kind of "patchable software interfaces" for more than five years now; and this is also teached on the University of Applied Arts in Vienna/Austria, where I am studying.
If it comes to interaction (sound-visual, sound-dancers, graphics-interface, whatever) in the field of artistic work, these tools such as
PD Pure Data (windows/mac/linux) - Audio/Video/3D (GEM,Framestein) -opensource-
Cycling74 max/msp (windows/mac) - Audio/Video/3D (also see Nato and Jitter) -free 30days demo-
Native Instruments Reaktor (windows/mac) -commercial, but has education pricing-
vvvv (win) -free-
are used from lots of the people around.
there are hell lots more, you might want to take a look at the audiovisualizers.com tool shack, or pawfal.org for example.

For some visual examples and also works, you might want to take a look at
http://www.harvestworks.org/maxreel/
http://puredata.info/community/ (mostly audio)
talking chair (vvvv+hardware)
http://www.realtimearts.net/

or you might also want to take a look at the department of digital art in the university of applied arts/vienna.
currently we are a group of people trying to bring opensource and arts together. there are also workshops and lots of projects going on: http://5uper.net

for sure there are also "standard" programs teached, which are good for working with business and advertising companies -- but if we are speaking about digital arts, that's going beyond the standard approach of software use. at least for me.

...using Max/MSP and any touch-sensitive peripheral device.

Max/MSP is a graphical programming environment for music, audio, and multimedia, and it's been around for 15 years. It is extremely extensible and can handle and manipulate almost any kind of input you could think of in real time.

If it can make music by tracking a mouse with a video camera, then it can do what LEMUR purports to do.

See, that just proves how cool it is. :-)

Max/MSP is a very cool graphic data flow programming language for... well, anything really, but focused on MIDI and DSP. There is also an add-on program called Jitter that specializes in video manipulation.
Max originally came from IRCAM in the 1990s. It is currently shepherded by Cycling74

what you requested, real time text overlay, would be especially easy.

if you're into effects and whatnot as well maybe try out Auvi as an addition to Jitter. good luck!

Basically what you want to do is some time compression. You can do that by means of granulation or a FFT. Most audio applications already have time compression/expansion plugins built in to them. Sound Forge, Pro Tools Free, Live and Cool Edit are some of the commercial programs that come to mind. You could also build a stand alone program fairly easily with Csound, Max/MSP or Pure Data. These are audio programming/scripting languages. Csound and Pure Data are free. You just need to know a little about digital audio to make a program with any of those languages.

Since you're working at a university you should try to find a student at an electronic studio (studies in electronic music) and perhaps take a look at MAX/MSP made by cycling74. That's a graphical programming 'language' for realtime electronic music (and visuals). Ask the student about this program - it is extremely easy and intuitive to do this kind of stuff in this language.

Now all we need is some sort of software-based audio out driver for OS X (like Cycling 74's Soundflower) which allows you to reroute OS X audio output to the Airport Express. This would be *ideal*, as then it'd be possible to stream audio from practically anything to your stereo. Digitally!

you may want to look at Jack and Soundflower too.

Yep, it's been done, and well.

Max/MSP by Cycling74. It's mostly for creating audio and video applications used in live performance. It was Mac-only for years, but they just released a Windows version. Not sure if everything works cross-platform or not.

Then there's the open-source version, JMax

Max/MSP is still around, just ported to Windows and Mac OS X.

From the good people over at cycling74
It's $250 US, but well worth it, IMHO.

Has anyone actually written a third-party app to access QuickTime?

This is probably not what you are looking for, but cycling 74's Max/MSP has had a number of built-in and external interfaces to quicktime available for years. Nato.0+55 was for years the drug of choice for artists wishing to control quicktime with musical or other input in a live performance context, but it has recently been supplanted by c74's own Jitter, an industrial-strength matrix math library which includes quicktime media and openGL control as part of the package. Both packages take full advantage of pretty much every feature of quicktime, include compositing, matrix transformations, and so on.

Has anyone actually written a third-party app to access QuickTime?

This is probably not what you are looking for, but cycling 74's Max/MSP has had a number of built-in and external interfaces to quicktime available for years. Nato.0+55 was for years the drug of choice for artists wishing to control quicktime with musical or other input in a live performance context, but it has recently been supplanted by c74's own Jitter, an industrial-strength matrix math library which includes quicktime media and openGL control as part of the package. Both packages take full advantage of pretty much every feature of quicktime, include compositing, matrix transformations, and so on.

I fail to see how is EASIER than any other OS. A basic install of any operating system on any decent set of hardware is going to be equally easy to use. I use two Apple iBook's for music, not because I think the hardware is superior, but because my software isn't available for Windows yet. Most people that use Apple computers don't use them for what they are best at (multimedia, audio, video, etc) so they've basically spent anywhere from $500-$1500 more than a better equipped PC for absolutely no reason, they aren't benefitting from "ease of use," they aren't benefitting from the power.

And getting people to switch from their Mac to Windows? Why even spend money on that effort? Windows machines may have been more difficult to use 15 years ago, but they've caught up... anyone who still thinks they are more difficult to use hasn't tried one.

In my experience as the "computer guy" in my circle of friends I find that 95% of their problems come from using crappy software (and stuff that installs spyware) or using crappy hardware (e-machines).

If you can't figure out the "start" button good luck trying to interface with OSX... (how is clicking start -> programs -> microsoft word harder than clicking Macintosh HD then searching around for your software? hm...)

I see no reason why Emagic/Apple's toolkit could't do some thing like that.

I see no reason why Emagic/Apple's toolkit could't do some thing like that.

The whole point of the Theremin is that you only need to use your bare hands, since the tone is a function of the distance between you and the pitch rod. I think a Powerglove would just complicate things. However, this could be a real boon for MIDI artists on a serious budget(PD/Jmax). There is a rich history of glove interfaces to other Midi instruments. The MAX programming environment has a 'glove' object that interfaces with the new defunct Gold Brick interface. Plus, for the ultimate in coolness, there's Laetitia Sonami's Lady's Glove , which rocks my world. Check out the video .

Get Pro Tools free from Digidesign. Musicians like Beck, Bjork and Aerosmith use it. Of course, they use the version that's tens of thousands of dollars. Basically, the difference is the more money you spend, the more hardware (and thereby processing power) you get.

The best way to learn is to just start doing it. If you have a sound card and Pro Tools free, you should be able to just start laying down tracks with the mic that came with your computer. Experiment with EQ settings. It's all about training your ear to recognise what sounds good and what doesn't. After you've recorded an album's worth of material, you'll find you're able to make much better sounding songs, though you won't be sure how you got there.

If you don't have a sound card, get one that has at least a stereo input and output. Before you get it, make sure it's supported by whatever software program you're using. If you don't have a firewire port, think about getting one. Firewire is useful in so many ways.

If you want to get some higher fidelity, you'll need to get a decent mic. Pick up a Shure SM57 if you're recording mostly instruments or 58 if it's mostly vocals ($80-100). These mics are workhorses of the industry and will remain useful even after you become a famous rock star. You might be able to find a XLR -> 1/8" adapter to plug the mic into the back of the computer, but I recommend either buying a cheap mixer and going mic -> mixer -> soundcard, or getting Digidesign's mBox ($450), a firewire-based audio input system. The good thing about the mBox is you get a more robust version of the software along with it.

Pro Tools isn't the only way to go, though I think it's the only way that's free. Kruder & Dorfmeister use Cubase, and Thievery Corporation use Cakewalk. I've heard lots of great things about Cubase, but the Cakewalk seems to be more amateurish. Thievery has a crapload of hardware, and I think Cakewalk is just a small part of their studio.

If you're broke, you can always pirate plug-in's from p2p networks, but audio programmers are generally non-rich really cool people, so if you ever wind up making decent money off of your music, you should buy the software you use frequently.

If you're into programming, check out MAX/MSP. Autechre uses it.

Also, check out Propellerheads Software:
Reason- Berklee is using this to teach recording concepts.
Rebirth- 303, 808, 909. Kicks ass.

For a reference, my stuff was recorded using Pro Tools with the Audiomedia III sound card (it's pretty old), a Neumann TLM103 mic and a Roland xp-60 synth, both going into a mackie 1202 mixer. I'm completely self-taught.

Heh, think of MP3 defects as an unintended remix. It's mostly noise anyway, so what's the problem with changing it around. There have been artists who distributed their (vinyl) records without sleeves, in the hopes that the inevitable scratches and so forth would add a little "character".

I believe some of these glitchy folks have already played with encoding something over and over again until it becomes unrecognizable. MP3 decay does have a unique and recognizable effect on sounds (kinda like how JPG artifacts are recognizable).

Of course the artists could just distribute PROGRAMS instead of audio files. I've seen a lot of that lately. For instance this CD by Kim Cascone that comes with some of the software used to generate the CD. I played with that shit for hours!

• http://www.kvr-vst.com - My favorite VST (softsynth and effect plugin) news and discussion site.
• http://www.em411.com - Another computer music news site.
• http://www.computermusic.co.uk/ - Lovely Computer Music magazine
• http://www.steinberg.net - Steinberg, makers of "Cubase" ... a software sequencer, music work environment and more.
• http://www.emagic.de - Makers of "Logic". A lot like Cubase. Sequencer holy warrior fanatics will track me down and rip me apart for mentioning Cubase first.
• http://www.cycling74.com/ - Makers of sound programming thingies Max/MSP and Pluggo. Pretty complicated, but reportedly worthwhile.
• http://microsound.org/ - Home of arguably the most snobbiest "experimental music" and computer music mailing list on the net. Plenty of interesting stuff here too. Prepare to listen to various 30 minute plus "masterpieces" of quiet shuffling sounds, only.
• http://www.nativeinstruments.de/index.php?home_us - (English Link) Stylish softsynth and plugin rockstar company. They make some incredible products. Geeks will have hard-ons for Reaktor.
• http://www.refx.net - Maker of interesting VST plugins, notably "QuadraSID" which is a sound plugin based on the Commodore 64's famous, classic "SID" chip.

If you're talking about all in one solutions, I would think that highly-programmable software such as pure data, being free and fairly (?) open would top the list, along with less open, but also powerful, packages like MAX/MSP. And if you're talking about Reason, I would think that all-in-one (cheap) packages such asOrion would deserve a mention.

I don't really use (beyo0nd experimentation) any of that software, though - sticking to my own buggy stuff and my hardware synths - so I'm no expert - but next time I update my own (very limited and crash-prone) software synth, it will certainly be a DirectX instrument and maybe a pure data object.

Of course, the argument is centuries out of date. The examples are decades old. Let's make it more relevant! Art and Technology has been around for a long, long time. Incidentally Art Technology Group (ATG), which among other things created Dynamo which is now a huge application server product, is from the MIT Media Lab.

For example,
1965: Sony introduces the first monochrome half-inch tape Video Rover portapak-used almost immediately by New York video artist Nam June Paik.

And the contemporary media art scene is not about using photoshop. Even if you just count using digital technology, this has been around for years and it is vibrant. One well-known artist (Ingo Gunther) has used satellite transponders in his work, and one project (Kanal X) involved setting up a pirate TV station in Leipzig the transmitter of which was a sculpture. Ars Electronica has been going on for 20 years. DEAF has been held since 1986. ZKM has been open since '97 though many of its exhibitors have been active for far longer. The Getty has a collection of art and technology works from 1966 to 1993. Japan has one of the best media art infrastructures (hurt by the economy to be sure) which draw artists from Japan and overseas to places like the ICC, the International Academy of Media Arts and Sciences (IAMAS), and other spaces. Often the artists are in fact visiting professors who teach technology students (especially programmers) in universities.

Not only have artists always sought to make use of the latest media, but media artists often have to develop the cutting edge themselves in order to get their message across. This is true now that we use supercomputers like the Silicon Graphics Reality Engine, as it was when bromides and daguerrotypes took advantage of advances in industrial chemistry. Art drives science and vice-versa. I don't think you can point to any time when art and technology were not closely related.

While I don't usually have so much trouble with Mr. Katz' work, this time I'd have to say that sweeping generalizations without any enlightening examples must be hurtful to slashdotters' potential enjoyment and participation in some of the most exciting art in the world. Where's the beef? Many cutting edge artists work with very talented programmers and need their help badly. In particular, people who have a flair for networking, opengl, and hardware setup/troubleshooting (oh don't forget circuitry and wireless!) are really needed. Linux is extremely relevant now that machines have gotten so powerful, and the preemptive kernel sounds great for art! Artists who are interested in technology might like to check out MAX which is a great MIDI music and device controller.

It would be useful to point this out with substantial explanation of what this means for this site's users. Art gives context and meaning to budding researchers. And talented artists often come up with the new concepts that drive innovation. A public artwork can drive personal study and honing of one's technological skills like nothing else.

I think the reason it seems new now is that we've got so darn many computers now but little funding for artists (in the U.S.). There are also some very talented young artists who are taking advantage of the latest technology. More about them on Slashdot might be fun! How about a new icon and a media art section? Here are some neat online exhibits at the NYC MOMA.

The iBook is nice (look: computers meet Tupperware!) but it doesn't do CardBus. I have a Magma PCI card cage attached to my Pismo, which means that I can gig with the Pismo running something like MOTU Performer or Max/MSP, and use a PCI-based synth/effects processor like the OasysPCI. It makes a really powerful rig.

jMax is a graphical programming environment for interactive real-time audio applications. It is based on Max, an ancient realtime enviroment still alive on the Mac. jMax consists of a C(++) realtime server that does all the work on and a graphical Java client where you can easily drag and drop your enviroments a la Logic audio. jMax is not suited for your average harddisk recording project but it's an object oriented enviroment for creating realtime midi/audio/video/whatever artwork. The project's page isn't that informative but do check out the mailinglist, that's where the action is...
Note that the project is still under development fully GPL'ed and has an anonymous CVS-server that will get you the latest sources for your favourite platform (Irix, Linux (x86+PPC) OS-X...

Go check it out!

That's a pretty good idea. There is a programming environment kind of like this on the Mac platform that is used mainly for audio programming, called Max. You plop down some boxes, set some values, add user-interfaces, and wire it all up with patch cords (pipes). There are Win32 (Pd) and Linux (Pd or jMax).

Perhaps these can be extended to unix commands.

Also, there's a fantastic DSP addon to Max called MSP, which manipulates waveforms and ADSR info the same way Max manipulates MIDI information. This is the multimedia development environment of the future. Share the joy!

wug