Catching up after a hard couple of days cycling...
On Fri, 2004-05-28 at 19:27, f_at_fredrikolofsson.com wrote:
> i've looked at doing livecoding from a shell (python maybe) which seems more
> practical than sc's text editor (simple things like arrow-up to edit and
> redo your last command = heavens!) but then i'm not keen on implementing the
> whole timing, threads and tasks thing myself.
Maybe we should design a general use OSC server that looks after the
timing at some point, and allows switching between languages and
livecode environments. Unless something like that already exists?
> how do you deal with this alex? do you have a library of code to copy&paste
> from?
No... I just start with a routine called:
sub bang {
}
... which gets called every 'tick'. To trigger a synth noise I do
something like
$self->play({num => 140 + $tune->[$self->{bangs} % _at_$tune],
formfreq => 9,
bwfreq => 7,
ts => 3 + rand(30)
}
);
to trigger a sample I do
$self->trigger({sample => '/slub/samples/drum/drum5.wav',
pan => 0.4,
ts => 10,
crackle => 100 + rand(50)
});
Well, most often I start with an existing sourcefile, change it a lot
and save it as something else.
> and do you have some visual representation of processes running? or
> are they more or less always in the form of ascii graphics?
With the live coding I just have the editor and that's it. The only
feedback is by the process editing its sourcecode... Changing values
directly in the source and adding comments to indicate the state of the
process.
However after my first live coding gig I'm doubting whether this is
really interesting for people to look at unless they know Perl. There
was not much reaction when I did live coding, but when I ran my ascii
art dancing man script, some people whooped.
But then there's no reason why an ascii man or woman can't dance all
over some sourcecode... Somehow I think more movement has to be exposed
anyway. Static source doesn't seem to be enough on its own.
alex
Received on Sun May 30 2004 - 20:40:22 BST