S. Massy wrote:
> That's it; you, guys, convinced me to have another go at csound.
Make sure to ask again, either here, on the csound list or to me offlist
if you need some pointers. I could throw a bunch of links at you, but
figure it's better you say what you need when you need it. I might not
be able to answer your question if you're trying to do things I've never
done, but for getting-starting-stuff, I could do ok. Besides that the
csound list if very friendly, knowing and frequented.
Yeah, it's syntax makes any java/C programmer feel at home. At this
point csound differs a bit. But familiar syntax will only take you so
far. Mostly I feel csound is more to the point and straight-ahead. That
said complex concepts seldom could be implemented in un-complex code.
Chuck is mostly concerned with on-the-fly (or live) programming, which
is cleanly supported in chuck but tricky/impossible to do in csound. But
if (and you hinted at that yourself) you're more interrested in making a
midi-controllable setup for realtime usage, I find csound easier to work
> So far, the only
Speaking of om: Om is extremely nice, fast to work with, and uses gui in
a way that really makes sense. The fact that om uses ladspa plugins for
almost everything means that the speed of om is the speed of the
plugins. So although this actually has nothing to do with om, csound is
able to squeeze more out of my cpu. When om and (mostly) ladspa matures
this will for sure be a killer combo. Different from csound, but never
the less a killer combo.
peace, love & harmony