Forums > MaxMSP

THE MOST COMPLEX MAX PATCH IN THE WORLD!

July 8, 2006 | 1:11 pm

Hi,

Sorry to make partially irrelevant posts but can anyone direct me to THE MOST COMPLEX MAX PATCH IN THE WORLD. It is probably hidden on some kids computer for no one to see.

I am just interested in seeing how far people have taken this software in terms of connecting mechanical,audio,video devices etc etc.

Is there any other software that goes beyond the capabilities of Max/MSP? Perhaps bridging apon military grade…..

Cheers dudes.


July 8, 2006 | 4:01 pm

http://www.electrotap.com/jade/

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

and a lot more, but these are good examples of serious work – only your computational power ets the limit.


pluggo
hipno
upmix
bla bla


July 9, 2006 | 2:06 am

Quote: Sensory Fiend wrote on Sat, 08 July 2006 07:11
—————————————————-
> Hi,
>
> Sorry to make partially irrelevant posts but can anyone direct me to THE MOST COMPLEX MAX PATCH IN THE WORLD. It is probably hidden on some kids computer for no one to see.

> Cheers dudes.
—————————————————-

the MAX app itself for sure is complex.
(i am not so sure about radial or pluggo)


July 9, 2006 | 7:08 am

definetly my XXXXXXXX.pat .. … its MINE!


July 9, 2006 | 11:50 am

This is sort of like the Obfuscated C competition: just when you
think it can’t get any worse, it does.

> definetly my XXXXXXXX.pat .. … its MINE!

Or like American politics: after Nixon I didn’t think it could ever
get as bad as that again.

– P.

short main[] = {
277, 04735, -4129, 25, 0, 477, 1019, 0xbef, 0, 12800,
-113, 21119, 0x52d7, -1006, -7151, 0, 0x4bc, 020004,
14880, 10541, 2056, 04010, 4548, 3044, -6716, 0×9,
4407, 6, 5568, 1, -30460, 0, 0×9, 5570, 512, -30419,
0x7e82, 0760, 6, 0, 4, 02400, 15, 0, 4, 1280, 4, 0,
4, 0, 0, 0, 0×8, 0, 4, 0, ‘,’, 0, 12, 0, 4, 0, ‘#’,
0, 020, 0, 4, 0, 30, 0, 026, 0, 0×6176, 120, 25712,
‘p’, 072163, ‘r’, 29303, 29801, ‘e’
};

————– http://www.bek.no/~pcastine/Litter/ ————-
Peter Castine +–> Litter Power & Litter Bundle for Jitter

iCE: Sequencing, Recording & |home | chez nous|
Interface Building for |bei uns | i nostri|
Max/MSP Extremely cool http://www.castine.de

http://www.dspaudio.com/


July 9, 2006 | 5:18 pm

I may have a contender…

I currently support a very large/complex Max/MSP patch for the BEAM
Foundation. It’s purpose is to enable an orgranic collaborative
ensemble computer music by coupling extended instruments via an
intelligent network. We have an electronic music trio that plays live
utilizing this patch.

It’s code base is 125kB, with no audio buffers. It has been years in
development. There are over 1200 modulation destinations and about 120
sources.

You can have a look at the musicians display here:
http://www.beamfoundation.org/macias_closeup.pdf.
Learn more about the patch here:
http://www.beamfoundation.org/ComposersWorkshop.ppt.
And look at the overview video here:

http://www.beamfoundation.org/media/triometrikEPK.mp4

Enjoy.


barry threw :: sound | (if you would see the stars clearly,
http://www.barrythrew.com | look hard at the surrounding darkness)
bthrew(at)gmail(dot)com | -Ooka Makoto
857-544-3967 |


July 9, 2006 | 5:25 pm

On 9 Jul 2006, at 19:18, Barry Threw wrote:

> I may have a contender…

Neat.

One patcher I’ve been working on is so massive, it has curved the
very nature of spacetime.

http://reactivesoundsystem.com/read.htm
and then select page "04" at the bottom – sorry, it’s a Flash thing…

nick rothwell — composition, systems, performance — http://
http://www.cassiel.com


July 10, 2006 | 11:41 pm

Interesting!
What do you think of the result? Does it work as well as announced?

What about using those sprites for Stevie?
Would it be feasible that the matrix is some kind of transparent window that
could be moved on top of other windows without hiding them?
Or is it extreme in cpu usage?


July 10, 2006 | 11:42 pm

Sorry, shouldn’t have been sent to the list…


July 11, 2006 | 4:10 pm

To me it appears that patches that -look- complex are often pretty useless. I work on pretty big patches but all real improvements always come in the form of simplifications. I believe that any patcher with more than 20 objects needs more encapsulation.

Often I am not true to my belief however, because the main thing about our engineering process is that we want to get all kinds of experiments done in a quick and dirty way, just to see if they deserve more attention. Btw this is -the- reason why I choose Max instead of C++ with a nice set of libraries.

Mattijs


July 11, 2006 | 8:36 pm

Mattijs Kneppers wrote:
> To me it appears that patches that -look- complex are often pretty
> useless. I work on pretty big patches but all real improvements
> always come in the form of simplifications. I believe that any
> patcher with more than 20 objects needs more encapsulation.

I use the appearance of complexity as my first clue that I’m doing
something wrong. My ideas aren’t that complicated, so why should my
patches be complicated?

It’s not that the monster patches I’ve made have been useless – they’ve
just been more difficult to maintain, and experience has shown them to
be needlessly complex in almost all cases. Encapsulation and
segmentation make simplification easier to see, and that process
encourages a positive feedback cycle.


Viewing 11 posts - 1 through 11 (of 11 total)