Autechre Patch


    May 28 2008 | 4:42 am
    For anyone interested in a patch designed by the seminal electronic duo Autechre, here it is. Their patching is extremely messy, so I didn't bother trying to work my way through the tangles (and I'm not even sure I'd understand it if I did), but if anyone is able to give a brief summary (if possible) of what the patch does to make its sounds, it would be much appreciated.
    Enjoy!

    • May 28 2008 | 7:19 am
      hi
      is there a max 4.6.3 version?
      dennis Am 28.05.2008 um 06:42 schrieb Kyle Kaplan:
      > > For anyone interested in a patch designed by the seminal > electronic duo Autechre, here it is. Their patching is extremely > messy, so I didn't bother trying to work my way through the tangles > (and I'm not even sure I'd understand it if I did), but if anyone > is able to give a brief summary (if possible) of what the patch > does to make its sounds, it would be much appreciated. > > Enjoy! >
    • May 28 2008 | 11:41 am
      from what i know those patches were stolen on a usb or something this kind of "forced open source" sharing give me a taste of a weird feeling here wondering what autechre people think about these vulturish behaviors i even met people who didn't want to share those patches! which is more weirdness... I mean, yes now those patches are here and that's it, but.. i prefer to focus on the real open ones
      >For anyone interested in a patch designed by the seminal electronic >duo Autechre, here it is. Their patching is extremely messy, so I >didn't bother trying to work my way through the tangles (and I'm not >even sure I'd understand it if I did), but if anyone is able to give >a brief summary (if possible) of what the patch does to make its >sounds, it would be much appreciated. > >Enjoy! > > > > >
    • May 28 2008 | 1:57 pm
      Awesome, now I can finally sound just like Autechre. My max-list subscription has finally paid off!
    • May 28 2008 | 3:29 pm
      joachim montessuis skrev: > > from what i know those patches were stolen on a usb or something > this kind of "forced open source" sharing give me a taste of a weird > feeling here > wondering what autechre people think about these vulturish behaviors > i even met people who didn't want to share those patches! which is > more weirdness... > I mean, yes now those patches are here and that's it, but.. i prefer > to focus on the real open ones > so would I, but I don't see any, to be honest.
      I think perhaps Cycling should have a competition - submit your best patch. Then we could have a field day remixing the work of others.
      A.
    • May 28 2008 | 4:07 pm
      what's up,
      I have max 5.0.1 and I want to upgrade to 5.0.2. I can't find the link in the cycling 74 site. it's not in the incremental upgrades page. the only thing i seem to be able to do is download the entire installer for 5.0.2. (112 MB) maybe there is a page i can't seem to find. if anyone knows what's up I would appreciate the info.
      thanks, nick
    • May 28 2008 | 6:38 pm
      Hi Nick,
      Go ahead and download and install the complete Max 5.0.2 installer. It will update your current install.
      -Ben
      Nick wrote: > what's up, > > I have max 5.0.1 and I want to upgrade to 5.0.2. I can't find the link > in the cycling 74 site. it's not in the incremental upgrades page. the > only thing i seem to be able to do is download the entire installer > for 5.0.2. (112 MB) maybe there is a page i can't seem to find. if > anyone knows what's up I would appreciate the info. >
    • May 28 2008 | 7:58 pm
      Ok. thanks.
      On May 28, 2008, at 2:38 PM, Ben Bracken wrote:
      > Hi Nick, > > Go ahead and download and install the complete Max 5.0.2 > installer. It will update your current install. > > https://cycling74.com/downloads/max5 > > -Ben > > Nick wrote: >> what's up, >> >> I have max 5.0.1 and I want to upgrade to 5.0.2. I can't find the >> link in the cycling 74 site. it's not in the incremental upgrades >> page. the only thing i seem to be able to do is download the >> entire installer for 5.0.2. (112 MB) maybe there is a page i can't >> seem to find. if anyone knows what's up I would appreciate the info. >>
    • May 28 2008 | 8:13 pm
      I think there's something to be said for people having their own secret patches that sound like no one else and no else knows how to replicate. It only makes us all patch harder to keep up and create our own secret recipes for things. Having a bunch of templates for "how" to create a drum machine and such is why people start using Max in the first place. If you want a drum machine, buy one. Something I'm sure Autechre was trying to do and probably why they wouldn't want people sharing. As great as open-source/sharing is, some things should be kept secret.
    • May 28 2008 | 9:04 pm
      exactly. passing around someone else's intellectual property on a public forum without their permission is just kind of shitty imho.
      Quote: echolock@gmail.com wrote on Wed, 28 May 2008 14:13 ---------------------------------------------------- > I think there's something to be said for people having their own > secret patches that sound like no one else and no else knows how to > replicate. It only makes us all patch harder to keep up and create our > own secret recipes for things. Having a bunch of templates for "how" > to create a drum machine and such is why people start using Max in the > first place. If you want a drum machine, buy one. Something I'm sure > Autechre was trying to do and probably why they wouldn't want people > sharing. As great as open-source/sharing is, some things should be > kept secret. > ----------------------------------------------------
    • May 28 2008 | 10:16 pm
      The process of digitizing information in the form of symbols, pictures or sounds and then copying and distributing those "information packets" over the internet is something I highly encourage-AS LONG AS NO ONE MAKES PROFIT FROM THE COPIED MATERIALS. So, I highly approve of distributing this patch-as long as no person other than the original creator presents it as their own work-or until the original creator of the patch says for the distribution to stop. Its free game now in my humble 16 year old internet-user opinion.
    • May 28 2008 | 10:30 pm
      "AS LONG AS NO ONE MAKES PROFIT FROM THE COPIED MATERIALS [snip] Its free game now"
      Well, not to get all analibertarian on you, but make up your mind! Free as in game, free as in speech, or free as in beer? Yeah, it's "free" as in bird, now that the information is out there, but if there's no permission from the authors, it's not "cool" as in daddy-o.
      "The process of digitizing information in the form of symbols, pictures or sounds and then copying and distributing those "information packets" over the internet is something I highly encourage"
      Without explicitly venturing into "disgusting" territory, I'm guessing I could dream up a few scenarios that would make you want to retract that statement, and eventually agree that some things are sacred.
    • May 28 2008 | 10:33 pm
      No.
    • May 28 2008 | 10:36 pm
      I'm pretty sure this is not Autechre patch, or at least they never used it like that. This patch isn't that interesting.
    • May 28 2008 | 10:37 pm
      Everything digitized should be freely accessible to everyone, no matter what content is involved. But, that's just my opinion, persuaded by dealing with the good that comes about from unrestricted copying.
    • May 28 2008 | 10:39 pm
      Quote: pnyboer wrote on Wed, 28 May 2008 16:30 ---------------------------------------------------- > "AS LONG AS NO ONE MAKES PROFIT FROM THE COPIED MATERIALS > [snip] > Its free game now" > > Well, not to get all analibertarian on you, but make up your mind! Free as in game, free as in speech, or free as in beer?
      Peter, that's entirely too nuanced. Just put those videos of his summer camp "initiation" up on youtube and have done with it. As we all know, information "wants" to be free.
    • May 28 2008 | 10:40 pm
      On May 28, 2008, at 5:04 PM, Robert Ramirez wrote:
      > exactly. > passing around someone else's intellectual property on a public > forum without their permission is just kind of shitty imho.
      Dunno. What bums me out more is that Autechre used to be on this list but left because of a stupid argument that they should give Max credit on their album covers (of which I have a few - thanks!). So I miss the actual intellectual / artist and not the property so much. The last message had something to do with giving the pencil credit for the suicide note. O_o http://eyescratch.tk
    • May 28 2008 | 10:45 pm
      > What bums me out more is that Autechre used to be on this list > but left because of a stupid argument that they should give Max credit > on their album covers...
      While they're as right as anyone else to find the act of reducing one's creative activity to the tools used silly and occasionally offensive, I'd wager that they found the signal-to-noise intolerable.
    • May 28 2008 | 10:49 pm
      Why would anyone want to sound like someone else? That is my question. Max is there to liberate not imitate. Autechre is cool and all, but come on, use your creative juices. You should always want to go further than your influences.
      The issue of what is sacred or not has a potential to become a huge thread. Just keep in mind the age old adage "you reap what you sow".
      Now, do your own thing. -chuck
      ----- Original Message ---- From: Eli Stine Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2008 6:16:53 PM Subject: [maxmsp] Re: Autechre Patch
      The process of digitizing information in the form of symbols, pictures or sounds and then copying and distributing those "information packets" over the internet is something I highly encourage-AS LONG AS NO ONE MAKES PROFIT FROM THE COPIED MATERIALS. So, I highly approve of distributing this patch-as long as no person other than the original creator presents it as their own work-or until the original creator of the patch says for the distribution to stop. Its free game now in my humble 16 year old internet-user opinion.
    • May 28 2008 | 11:18 pm
      > Everything digitized should be freely accessible to everyone
      Give me your credit card number. Now. No? Your medical records? Hmm...oh wait...thats personal information, I guess your programming isn't?
      ...
      Back to autechre:
      So you have become the distribution channel. By distributing this work, you have decided that your values on digital distribution supersede those of the original copyright holder. You have effectively become the rights authority imposing your will on another work, as opposed to eliminating that authority, which is what I expect you thought you were doing.
      I hope you never get a real job working with digital content...that might tarnish your precious values of bit freedom.
      What does information "want"? Not a damn thing. This universe is cold and indifferent.
      There is a place for free copied works...and I support and use liberal distribution licenses with all of my personal projects, however, you have to respect the licensing decisions of others.
      bt
      On May 28, 2008, at 3:37 PM, Eli Stine wrote: > Everything digitized should be freely accessible to everyone, no > matter what content is involved. But, that's just my opinion, > persuaded by dealing with the good that comes about from > unrestricted copying.
      barry threw Media Art and Technology
      San Francisco, CA Work: 857-544-3967 Email: bthrew (at) gmail (dot) com Web: www.barrythrew.com
    • May 28 2008 | 11:21 pm
      Quote: bil3y_da_k1b wrote on Wed, 28 May 2008 17:37 ---------------------------------------------------- > Everything digitized should be freely accessible to everyone, no matter what content is involved. But, that's just my opinion, persuaded by dealing with the good that comes about from unrestricted copying. ----------------------------------------------------
      And what, pray tell, IS the good that comes about from unrestricted copying?
    • May 29 2008 | 12:06 am
      allo,
      > And what, pray tell, IS the good that comes about from unrestricted copying?
      - unrestricted learning . . . . before you die and nobody gives a shite who looked at what lines and listened to what noize from a computer screen; but, hopefully remembered you for how you helped your family and supported your friends. . ... and their unrestricted learning.
      _z
    • May 29 2008 | 1:11 am
      I did a bit of research being that first, the patch is pretty lame and second, it says "powmod 2006" in the top of patch. That being Max user "John Hidalgo-Barnes", also associated with Record-Label Records who did some "reverse engineering Autechre" patches according to some Google searching.
      This is definitely not the work of Autechre so anyone who got all excited that they had the formula for their next album can get back to reading the Max docs and Computer Music Tutorial like everyone else.
    • May 29 2008 | 3:06 am
      It's still a nice little patch and from briefly looking at it learned some stuff that I could use in later patches I work on, the same way that I use information from reading the tutorials that come with Max.
    • May 29 2008 | 7:18 am
      Nick schrieb: > what's up, > > I have max 5.0.1 and I want to upgrade to 5.0.2. I can't find the link > in the cycling 74 site. it's not in the incremental upgrades page. the > only thing i seem to be able to do is download the entire installer for > 5.0.2. (112 MB) maybe there is a page i can't seem to find. if anyone > knows what's up I would appreciate the info.
      Thats how it works, get the entire installer and install over the existing... If you have a very slow connection you might want to wait for 5.0.3...
      -- Stefan Tiedje------------x------- --_____-----------|-------------- --(_|_ ----|-----|-----()------- -- _|_)----|-----()-------------- ----------()--------www.ccmix.com
    • May 29 2008 | 3:45 pm
      Nevermind that the patch isn't even Autechre's, as someone pointed out earlier (it was posted on idmforums.com as an AE patch), everyone should just relax. If I had "THE" autechre patch, "the one" that makes all of their amazing sounding music, then of course I wouldn't throw it up on public forums. Now, a single patch, and one that doesn't even seem to have much functionality, should not bring me so much finger shaking. Works by AE are one of many factors that initially drew me to MaxMSP, so when I supposedly came across a patch of theirs it greatly excited me. I thought it would excite others the same way, so I decided to share it. I'm not trying to expose secrets or steal the intellectual property of others. I'm posting a single, dated, limited patch from MaxMSP artists whom I greatly admire. So abandon your moral authority, because I agree with you, BUT there's shades of grey in this world, and posting this isolated patch is not the same as stripping from AE their clandestine patching techniques.
      And, no, people should not use MaxMSP as just a medium to use devices conceived by others. But examining the mechanics of others' devices can bring inspiration and knowledge. Beyond that, I find that a lot of the fun in MaxMSP is figuring things out on your own, even if they've already been thought of. There's a certain moment when patching, I believe in cartoons its represented as a light bulb turning on above the head, that makes it exciting and engaging. If you're just biting other people's works, your denying yourself one of the greatest pleasures of this wonderful program.
    • May 29 2008 | 4:39 pm
    • May 29 2008 | 4:42 pm
      On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 09:45:38AM -0600, Kyle Kaplan wrote:
      > Nevermind that the patch isn't even Autechre's, as someone pointed out earlier (it was posted on idmforums.com as an AE patch), everyone should just relax. If I had "THE" autechre patch, "the one" that makes all of their amazing sounding music, then of course I wouldn't throw it up on public forums.
      Of course. It must be one hell of a patch, if it can generate amazing music regardless of the creative input of the musicians. I would kill for one of those.
    • May 29 2008 | 6:26 pm
      give me a comfy chair and i will rival mozart --uncle morty
      On Thu May 29 12:39:07 EDT 2008, Jacopo Carreras wrote:
      > He the lighting bulb is cool! > > you are right, how many different and yet similar ways of slicing > audio files/inputs, granularizing, interpolating values, saving > modalities, amplitude analyzers, pitch trackers, samplers, > synths, games, utilities are out there? And just to mention a > few!!! > And how much can you learn? > ah, it is indeed the joy of our time, isn??t it? > > Give me a Max patch and I??ll move the world, > Maybe Archimedes would say this today > instead of his lever... > > > > On May 29, 2008, at 5:45 PM, Kyle Kaplan wrote: > >> >> Nevermind that the patch isn't even Autechre's, as someone >> pointed out earlier (it was posted on idmforums.com as an AE >> patch), everyone should just relax. If I had "THE" autechre >> patch, "the one" that makes all of their amazing sounding >> music, then of course I wouldn't throw it up on public forums. >> Now, a single patch, and one that doesn't even seem to have >> much functionality, should not bring me so much finger shaking. >> Works by AE are one of many factors that initially drew me to >> MaxMSP, so when I supposedly came across a patch of theirs it >> greatly excited me. I thought it would excite others the same >> way, so I decided to share it. I'm not trying to expose secrets >> or steal the intellectual property of others. I'm posting a >> single, dated, limited patch from MaxMSP artists whom I greatly >> admire. So abandon your moral authority, because I agree with >> you, BUT there's shades of grey in this world, and posting this >> isolated patch is not the same as stripping from AE their >> clande! >> stine patching techniques. >> >> And, no, people should not use MaxMSP as just a medium to use >> devices conceived by others. But examining the mechanics of >> others' devices can bring inspiration and knowledge. Beyond >> that, I find that a lot of the fun in MaxMSP is figuring things >> out on your own, even if they've already been thought of. >> There's a certain moment when patching, I believe in cartoons >> its represented as a light bulb turning on above the head, that >> makes it exciting and engaging. If you're just biting other >> people's works, your denying yourself one of the greatest >> pleasures of this wonderful program. >> >> > > Jacopo Carreras > music weaver > www.myspace.com/jacopocarreras > www.lan-muzic.com > > > >
      Patrick Pagano,M.F.A Sound and Light Technologist Nadine McGuire Theatre & Dance Pavilion GAINESVILLE FL US 32611-5900 University Of Florida (352) 273-1483
    • May 29 2008 | 6:56 pm
      i agree that posting someone's work (which apparently wasn't the case here) against their will is not a good thing to do.
      that said, i strongly believe that public distribution of max works (or really any creative medium) definitely has its benefits. i know that a lot of people frown on the idea, thinking that people will use it to rip off other people's work and that it's cheating in a sense, but there are other things to be done with such material. true, if i simply grabbed someone's patch and used it without alteration, it would be both immoral and uninventive, but having the ability to examine the work of others (particularly those as skilled as autechre) allows one to expand on the work, to manipulate and re-shape it in ways the original author had never considered. you could combine elements from a wide variety of sources into some strange new configuration, or merge them into your own creations.
      the only real downside to sharing material so openly is that it's definitely harmful to people who are trying to make money off of their work. i can definitely understand why someone would not want to share the patches that they're using to produce some new album, or other such situations. but for a cases like synth patches that were used to make a song that was on an album you published years ago, i really don't think that there's any good reason not to release your work.
    • May 29 2008 | 7:05 pm
      ... (continuation of my last post) ... as long as we use some mechanism for properly giving credit for borrowed creations (something along the lines of the GPL), the cases where credit is stolen to whatever degree would stand out as cheap junk, and would be shunned by the community, while worthwhile uses of other peoples creations would get the proper credit for whatever they contributed.
    • May 29 2008 | 7:26 pm
      Quote: thezer0ist@gmail.com wrote on Thu, 29 May 2008 12:05 ---------------------------------------------------- > ... (continuation of my last post) ... > as long as we use some mechanism for properly giving credit for borrowed creations (something along the lines of the GPL) ----------------------------------------------------
      Rather than use the GPL, which can be a real can of worms, I think one of the use of a Creative Commons licenses would be a better fit:
      -C
    • May 29 2008 | 8:29 pm
      I bet that those Autechre guys can make some interesting noise with the pile of dried cowshit, and that they care less about some stolen Max patches... if not, then they are a mentioned pile yeah, right, stolen max patch, big deal...
    • May 29 2008 | 9:34 pm
      I think this thread has just demonstrated some of the negative results of "spreading information" in a sloppy manner. In this day and age there is no reason an artist in digital media can't release their own work on their own terms. Almost any software has a set of related information that a responsible programmer will include with it. Release implies documentation and support. I'm happy to share lots of patches with friends, but public posting of a patch means time spent explaining and supporting the patch for possibly years. Here we see something that has been falsely attributed, released without any documentation, and wasn't even necessarily a finished product. This sort of thing is a nightmare for an artist. "Hey Autechre, that patch you made doesn't work!" The idea that removing control and presentation of someone's work is liberating. Sure, I'm happy that Kafka's friend didn't burn his stories after his death, but someone releasing a soundboard recording of a band still working in the studio is forcing the artist into supporting work they were not ready to present. While interesting, this debate could have been avoided by being a little less mysterious about the origins of the patch.
    • May 29 2008 | 9:59 pm
      Quote: KillingFrenzy wrote on Thu, 29 May 2008 17:34 ---------------------------------------------------- > I think this thread has just demonstrated some of the negative results of "spreading information" in a sloppy manner. > In this day and age there is no reason an artist in digital media can't release their own work on their own terms. Almost any software has a set of related information that a responsible programmer will include with it. Release implies documentation and support. I'm happy to share lots of patches with friends, but public posting of a patch means time spent explaining and supporting the patch for possibly years. > Here we see something that has been falsely attributed, released without any documentation, and wasn't even necessarily a finished product. This sort of thing is a nightmare for an artist. "Hey Autechre, that patch you made doesn't work!" The idea that removing control and presentation of someone's work is liberating. Sure, I'm happy that Kafka's friend didn't burn his stories after his death, but someone releasing a soundboard recording of a band still working in the studio is forcing the artist into supporting work they were not ready to present. > While interesting, this debate could have been avoided by being a little less mysterious about the origins of the patch. ----------------------------------------------------
      while documentation and support are great, i'd rather have an undocumented, unsupported patch than no patch. i agree that it would be totally unreasonable to expect support for posted work (though if it is supported, that's excellent), but i think that as long as the creator makes it clear that it's undocumented and that they will not provide support, it should be fine.
    • May 29 2008 | 10:02 pm
      Quote: KillingFrenzy wrote on Thu, 29 May 2008 17:34 ---------------------------------------------------- > I think this thread has just demonstrated some of the negative results of "spreading information" in a sloppy manner. > In this day and age there is no reason an artist in digital media can't release their own work on their own terms. Almost any software has a set of related information that a responsible programmer will include with it. Release implies documentation and support. I'm happy to share lots of patches with friends, but public posting of a patch means time spent explaining and supporting the patch for possibly years. > Here we see something that has been falsely attributed, released without any documentation, and wasn't even necessarily a finished product. This sort of thing is a nightmare for an artist. "Hey Autechre, that patch you made doesn't work!" The idea that removing control and presentation of someone's work is liberating. Sure, I'm happy that Kafka's friend didn't burn his stories after his death, but someone releasing a soundboard recording of a band still working in the studio is forcing the artist into supporting work they were not ready to present. > While interesting, this debate could have been avoided by being a little less mysterious about the origins of the patch. ----------------------------------------------------
      i agree that documentation and support are key to truly great software packages, but i would rather have an undocumented, unsupported patch than no patch at all. having to provide support would make most public postings of work simply unfeasible, but i think as long as the creator makes it clear that there is no documentation and they will not provide support to anyone, it should work.
    • May 29 2008 | 10:56 pm
      another Autechre patch http://tinyurl.com/6rhh6r
      #!
      On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 1:02 AM, thezer0ist wrote:
      > > Quote: KillingFrenzy wrote on Thu, 29 May 2008 17:34 > ---------------------------------------------------- > > I think this thread has just demonstrated some of the negative results of > "spreading information" in a sloppy manner. > > In this day and age there is no reason an artist in digital media can't > release their own work on their own terms. Almost any software has a set of > related information that a responsible programmer will include with it. > Release implies documentation and support. I'm happy to share lots of > patches with friends, but public posting of a patch means time spent > explaining and supporting the patch for possibly years. > > Here we see something that has been falsely attributed, released without > any documentation, and wasn't even necessarily a finished product. This > sort of thing is a nightmare for an artist. "Hey Autechre, that patch you > made doesn't work!" The idea that removing control and presentation of > someone's work is liberating. Sure, I'm happy that Kafka's friend didn't > burn his stories after his death, but someone releasing a soundboard > recording of a band still working in the studio is forcing the artist into > supporting work they were not ready to present. > > While interesting, this debate could have been avoided by being a little > less mysterious about the origins of the patch. > ---------------------------------------------------- > > i agree that documentation and support are key to truly great software > packages, but i would rather have an undocumented, unsupported patch than no > patch at all. having to provide support would make most public postings of > work simply unfeasible, but i think as long as the creator makes it clear > that there is no documentation and they will not provide support to anyone, > it should work. > >
    • May 29 2008 | 11:22 pm
      > > I think this thread has just demonstrated some of the negative results of > "spreading information" in a sloppy manner.
      or of trying to have adult conversations with kids?!
    • May 30 2008 | 9:16 am
      thezer0ist schrieb: > true, if i simply grabbed someone's patch and used it without > alteration, it would be both immoral and uninventive
      If you'd take my Ondes Memorielles and use them unaltered, for sure this would be neither immoral nor unintentive, because its an instrument... You'd play it certainly different than I do...
      (But its a mess, and I don't think it would be too useful for anybody anless as inspiration for your own stuff...
      Stefan
      -- Stefan Tiedje------------x------- --_____-----------|-------------- --(_|_ ----|-----|-----()------- -- _|_)----|-----()-------------- ----------()--------www.ccmix.com
    • May 30 2008 | 10:39 pm
      i hope AE makes a piece out of this thread :)
      this stuff has been sitting around on line for quite some time.
      so let's move on
    • May 31 2008 | 1:05 pm
      If you are a fan of Autechre you should check out the album Huge Chrome Cylinder Box Unfolding by Venetian Snares.
      Should be right up your street!
    • May 31 2008 | 7:33 pm
      I can't resist bringing up the words of Neil Gaiman:
      "No, that's pizza," I want to tell them. "Pizza wants to be free. Concentrate on liberating pizza from evil pizzerias. Information, on the other hand, really hates being free, and is never happier than when manacled to a wall, like Kirk and Spock in some piece of late 70s bondage-oriented slash fiction."
    • Jun 01 2008 | 3:33 am
      that venetian snares album is quite good. i find most of his other works though too abrasive, too drum n bassy.
    • Jun 02 2008 | 1:07 am
      thats my favorite of all of Aarons works. I do like alot of his others though, love his remix of sesame streets pinball 12 counting track on infolepsy.
      -This comp track I did for detroit underground, pretty richard devine/autechre influenced. uses alot of custom max patches Ive made
    • Jun 02 2008 | 1:15 am
      Incidently, the reason I got into max was as follows: I met Richard Devine at a lecture he gave at Cranbrook art community in 2001. During the lecture he talked about reaktor, max, and tons of other really cool sound design apps. After the lecture I hijacked him and brought him over to my place, and he showed me an autechre max patch, I was so blown away by the generative aspect of this, and how amazingly intricate the sounds it was creating, and watching it evolve on its own.. It was a mind opening experience. The next day I bought reaktor, and a few weeks later when Jitter came out I bought max. I kindof ditched reaktor after a few months because max was so much more open and capable. To this day I love max more then just about any creative tool.
    • Jun 02 2008 | 1:16 am
      lol
    • Jun 02 2008 | 9:08 am
      Quote: Axiom-Crux wrote on Sun, 01 June 2008 19:15 ---------------------------------------------------- > he showed me an autechre max patch, I was so blown away by the generative aspect of this, and how amazingly intricate the sounds it was creating, and watching it evolve on its own.. It was a mind opening experience. ----------------------------------------------------
      Are you talking about the patch everyone is talking about here ? I tried it and I do not feel any movement... I'm surely missing something.
    • Jun 02 2008 | 9:29 am
      no, he's talking about a secret one we aren't allowed to see
    • Jun 03 2008 | 5:30 am
      No, it was a real autechre patch, their code is organized and clean and very well made, unlike this. Also the patch I saw sounded like autechre, also unlike this.
    • Jun 03 2008 | 5:45 am
      Oh, and there is a real autechre patch out there, I saw it on recordlabelrecords a while back (3.33 something). I have a ton of richie's patches, im sure there are other (real) autechre patches in the folder he gave me, though I haven't really looked much cause they are all for OS9
      I do have to say that its of somewhat questionable taste to post someone else's work in the public domain.
    • Jun 04 2008 | 1:29 pm
      I always enjoy looking inside patches , simple ones , complex ones , always something to learn from .
    • Jun 04 2008 | 1:53 pm
      > Why would anyone want to sound like someone else?
      sampling is very popular, re-mediation is popular and there is no end to re-make/remodels and redeux in music,films,television & theatre. People DO want to sound like others.
      i personally want to sound like "Richard Maxfield meets Amon Duul II" :-)
      Electronic music in the early 21st century is intimately connected to "sounding like" imho.
      I would hazard that the Autechre folks could care less who is trying to sound like them, "isn't imitation the sincerest form of flattery? Are not many musics dependant on mimesis for instruction?
      I certainly "stole" Csound patches to learn when i was knee-high to a stockhausen.
      Please post the Original patch so i may steal their aesthetic right away. Right after i get done stealing Kurt Ralske's aesthetic, i will need music to go with it, so that patch will be a great help.
      love and kisses,
      Copycat.
      Patrick Pagano,M.F.A Sound and Light Technologist Nadine McGuire Theatre & Dance Pavilion GAINESVILLE FL US 32611-5900 University Of Florida (352) 273-1483
    • Jun 04 2008 | 5:26 pm
      I cant speak for Autechre, or anyone else, but If I gave someone a patch in confidence, I'd certainly be pissed off if they posted it online without my consent.
      On the other hand, if I gave someone a patch with the knowledge they were going to build on it, study it, make it their own, I would have no problem with them posting the result, or using the original patch to help others out. I suppose what I am trying to say is for me, it comes down to context and expectation, and the pretext during the exchange.
      The reason I have little issue giving out the patches and code I do share is that I
      A) I Give away the things I expect people to be able to learn from and make their own, and sincerely hope that they do just that. And chances are, if they dont, they will not make anything interesting or grow their style and aesthetic in any way. Ive gotten a few emails of designs folks have created using my framework, which they have modified, changed, and use and have extended. That is *awesome*.
      B) Do not give away my best tricks (I keep my really nice spinning flashing torus VJ patch to myself, thank you very much).
      In all seriousness, much of my aesthetic is tied in not just with how I perform, or what content I choose to mix, but how I code, the decisions I make, how I interconnect various internal and external variables to various different visual representations. There is a fine line between giving that away, and giving away your personal style, chops and licks.
      There is no easy answer, and I try to keep a balance of things I share and things that are too 'me' to share, and I honestly get the impression many of you do the same, whether consciously or not.
      I can say in the past, Ive shared things to folks in person, and have regretted it, because I had not grown tired or felt I had fully explored what I had created..
      Meh, this is such a pointless discussion anyway.
      --
      "Right after i get done stealing Kurt Ralske's aesthetic, i will need music to go with it, so that patch will be a great help.
      love and kisses,"
      kisses indeed ;)
    • Jun 05 2008 | 5:43 am
      From the peanut gallery: this "I do not give away my best tricks" school of thought is SO max-msp. The chuck heads are so much more free love about their best tricks.
      Not that either method is necessarily any better, I just find the difference interesting. It seems to be a big artist vs. scientist thing, that being that artists are secretive (and intuitive) and scientists are open (and analytical).
      Again, there are plusses to either side. Everybody likely does a little of both, in my experience people get tired of hearing you if you share a little too much.
      _Mark
    • Jun 05 2008 | 9:04 am
    • Jun 05 2008 | 9:46 am
      Do magicians give away their magic tricks ?? until recently ; nope
      Do sound engeneers give out their favourite EQ - comp settings and other studio wizardry ?? probably no , Probably this is what got them the gig in the first place ;
      I do believe in the max builder's ethic , if someone was kind enough to share a patch , you should at least give them credit for it .
    • Jun 05 2008 | 9:50 am
    • Jun 05 2008 | 11:07 am
      On 4 Jun 2008, at 18:26, vade wrote:
      > B) Do not give away my best tricks (I keep my really nice spinning > flashing torus VJ patch to myself, thank you very much).
      I have my very own throbbing techno doughnut, so there.
      Communities seem to differ: the monome folks go for openness and sharing, where the Max world is a bit more secretive. (I don't know whether that correlates with Max itself being proprietary; I don't have enough data points. Monome is completely open-source.)
      I have a few Max secrets, but also give lots of stuff away as open source (see www.loadbang.net for a list) so basically it depends what mood I'm in.
      -- N.
      Nick Rothwell / Cassiel.com Limited www.cassiel.com www.myspace.com/cassieldotcom www.last.fm/music/cassiel www.reverbnation.com/cassiel www.linkedin.com/in/cassiel www.loadbang.net
    • Jun 05 2008 | 2:57 pm
      Problem is, if someone took a photo of you nude and mailed it around to everyone, true we would learn what your body looks like naked, but did you intend it to be passed around to those you don't know? -chuck
    • Jun 05 2008 | 4:23 pm
      i recently noticed that if you look at the left matrixcrtl in the mid patcher they wrote AE!! does anyone knows something about this patch?just to know what is about..this scares me! everytime i look at it i'm blown away..what impress me here is that from interface i can't nearly understand what it does..(i mean, i can see some step-sequencer but that's all) is it a fake?!! andthreadgoeson!
    • Jun 05 2008 | 8:50 pm
    • Jun 05 2008 | 10:09 pm
      monome makes their money off the hardware, and looks like they make a decent living at that.
      Max you can turn into applets or plugins.
      I think people do share alot of their little tricks, I think people are hesitant in giving out their full "max trackers" or "master patches" that generate their whole songs, because then your pretty much giving away rights to that song in all its variants. often max patches are geared toward creating a specific unique sound, and with such little unique left in the world, who wants to give theirs up.
    • Jun 06 2008 | 3:43 am
      I think I could have been more clear, when I meant tricks, I meant my "aesthetic/programmatic correlations" that I program, not "this is how to do/how I do, X Y and Z".
      Id rather have someone ask me how do to X, Y and Z, and have them piece it together, than have someone ask, "how do I make it look (or sound), like this". This implies curiosity, an active, and creative energy, versus a passive, reactive and non creative energy (to my mind).
      As for Max users being secretive, christ, you guys should frequent some other forums, the Max community is VERY open compared to many others. I can honestly say, if it were not for folks being as open as there are, I would not be the Max/Jitter programmer I am today.
      Anyway, enough back slapping. Go make some patches....
    • Jun 09 2008 | 12:39 pm
      sebastian schrieb: > Do sound engeneers give out their favourite EQ - comp settings and > other studio wizardry ?? probably no
      But not because they are afraid somebody would steal their favourites... because they don't have a favourite EQ - comp setting, they use their ears instead...
      Same is true for patches. It takes longer to understand a complex patch than rebuilding the same thing, but better suited to your needs. (If you are experienced - if you're not, it won't help you either... ;-)
      Stefan
      -- Stefan Tiedje------------x------- --_____-----------|-------------- --(_|_ ----|-----|-----()------- -- _|_)----|-----()-------------- ----------()--------www.ccmix.com
    • Aug 17 2008 | 6:34 am
      This conversation maybe long and dead, but the talk about tricks, giving away tricks and the such interested me.
      To start off, i myself am a Studio Engineer, also a Music Producer and in my free time an artist, plus a few other things. This is actually my job, i am on a payrole being a Studio Engineer.
      The thing with giving away tricks is like a double edged sword. You can give away tricks, but those tricks may come back to you by someone else using them, namely the person who you showed them to.
      With myself, i do give away pointers instead, not tricks. this is the same with nearly every producer/engineer in the business. Because your tricks are your tricks, it is what gives you your sound.
      I am currently working on an album for release, and do have the artist sitting with me while i produce his album. But i also have a friend (David) who sits with me and watches what i do (or at least tries to). And i talk to him and say what things i am using to get a certain sound. He has a hard time to get to start to make music, so i help him. But i do not give away the tricks that i have come to teach myself over the years of producing albums and ep's and my own material. It is not fair on myself if he starts to use my tricks that i have taught myself, it would annoy me. So i dont show people what tricks i have up my sleeve.
      As for Max patches. I feel that if you give max patches to people, you will have to expect that these people will share them out. But that is not always the case. I have given a few max patches to people but in MXF format, so it can only be run in runtime, and not be messed with, also putting my name on it as well. But myself, i live out in a country that does not even know max/msp, nor is it interested in my new breed of music. Because i dont make commercial house music.
      I believe your tricks are your tricks, whether it is your friends or a loved one. I dont share any of my best tricks, because that is what defines my music, especially the music i have been pumping out lately (myspace, have a check if you get bored).
      So the end to this story is, share if you want to share, but expect those people to then share to others. If you share, that is giving a gateway for others to find out, even if you dont want them to know.
      Also as a bit of an extra incentive. If anyone reads Sound On Sound magazine, you will notice in the album production pages, where it show how a track or album was made in todays days, you will see there Pro Tools set up, but also there outboard hardware, sometimes they sellotape a piece of white paper over there special production trick, which is hardware. either being a compressor or reverb, but it is so special in there production and sound, that they can not let them know what it is.
    • Aug 17 2008 | 10:30 am
      thinking back a little
      was'nt there an issue once that Autechre them self had hacked an application built by karlheinz Essl .
      Karlheinz was not too happy either , asking shawn Booth "at least give me some credit !!!!"
      Shawn Booth's ansewer was (if I remember right ,very aggressive towards him ending up with a big f**k you attitude)
      naughty naughty !!!!!!
    • Aug 17 2008 | 10:38 am
      i remember that post
      I remember them saying that they had not used the patch, or had said that they modelled something like it, or something like that
      I dont remember the F U, though
    • Aug 17 2008 | 11:13 am
      well Shawn never said the word F U
      but definatly quiet aggresive attitude nether the less
    • Aug 17 2008 | 1:57 pm
      karlheinze said he believed autechre had used their patch. sean said he would have credited him if he had, and "give me some credit" was sean's quote. its all in the archives
    • Aug 17 2008 | 5:52 pm
      I'm puzzled by this idea of "tricks." The point is to make music, and if Max is being used to make music, that's just a tool. The music is up to the individual maker. To keep patches as 'secrets' is more align with some kind of software product than a piece of music.
      A Max patch, in this context, is an instruction set for music making. So is a musical score, and that ranges from a Mozart Piano Concerto the "I Am Sitting In A Room," where the piece itself is also it's instructions/descriptions, or a wall drawing from Sol Lewitt. This obsession with the secrecy of a patch, rather than the music, leads to what Andrew Hugill describes as technological listening, where one listens for the means, rather than the ideas. If one is listening technologically, than the music is not interesting enough to gain the attention.
      A patch is just a patch, how a musician uses it matters. I think an ideal mark of a good patch is that it can be distributed and used by various people to make different, successful, musics.
      On Aug 17, 2008, at 2:34 AM, Lewis G. Edwards wrote:
      > > This conversation maybe long and dead, but the talk about tricks, > giving away tricks and the such interested me. > > To start off, i myself am a Studio Engineer, also a Music Producer > and in my free time an artist, plus a few other things. This is > actually my job, i am on a payrole being a Studio Engineer. > > The thing with giving away tricks is like a double edged sword. You > can give away tricks, but those tricks may come back to you by > someone else using them, namely the person who you showed them to. > > With myself, i do give away pointers instead, not tricks. this is > the same with nearly every producer/engineer in the business. > Because your tricks are your tricks, it is what gives you your sound. > > I am currently working on an album for release, and do have the > artist sitting with me while i produce his album. But i also have a > friend (David) who sits with me and watches what i do (or at least > tries to). And i talk to him and say what things i am using to get a > certain sound. > He has a hard time to get to start to make music, so i help him. > But i do not give away the tricks that i have come to teach myself > over the years of producing albums and ep's and my own material. > It is not fair on myself if he starts to use my tricks that i have > taught myself, it would annoy me. So i dont show people what tricks > i have up my sleeve. > > As for Max patches. I feel that if you give max patches to people, > you will have to expect that these people will share them out. But > that is not always the case. > I have given a few max patches to people but in MXF format, so it > can only be run in runtime, and not be messed with, also putting my > name on it as well. > But myself, i live out in a country that does not even know max/msp, > nor is it interested in my new breed of music. Because i dont make > commercial house music. > > I believe your tricks are your tricks, whether it is your friends or > a loved one. > I dont share any of my best tricks, because that is what defines my > music, especially the music i have been pumping out lately (myspace, > have a check if you get bored). > > So the end to this story is, share if you want to share, but expect > those people to then share to others. > If you share, that is giving a gateway for others to find out, even > if you dont want them to know. > > Also as a bit of an extra incentive. If anyone reads Sound On Sound > magazine, you will notice in the album production pages, where it > show how a track or album was made in todays days, you will see > there Pro Tools set up, but also there outboard hardware, sometimes > they sellotape a piece of white paper over there special production > trick, which is hardware. either being a compressor or reverb, but > it is so special in there production and sound, that they can not > let them know what it is. > > -- > ----- > LGE > Artist/Producer/Quasi Thinker > ----- > www.myspace.com/lewisgedwards > Organic Electronic Music >
    • Aug 17 2008 | 7:12 pm
    • Aug 17 2008 | 10:17 pm
      Lewis G. Edwards schrieb: > The thing with giving away tricks is like a double edged sword. You > can give away tricks, but those tricks may come back to you by > someone else using them, namely the person who you showed them to.
      I would be honoured if what I teach is used. I share my tricks and if they feed somebody else its fine and exactly what I would wish for my friends. I'd never ever would consider a student being a competitor, the distance is too big... ;-)
      > With myself, i do give away pointers instead, not tricks. this is the > same with nearly every producer/engineer in the business. Because > your tricks are your tricks, it is what gives you your sound.
      With tricks in audio, its like with tricks in wizardry, even if you know the trick, you still need to practice it. There is absolutely no danger to give away tricks. In Music its your listening skills and experience which counts. If you only have tricks, you will sound like everybody, which is exactly what is asked for in the pop world, that's probably much more the secret of your success than the tricks... ;-)
      > I believe your tricks are your tricks, whether it is your friends or > a loved one. I dont share any of my best tricks, because that is what > defines my music, especially the music i have been pumping out > lately (myspace, have a check if you get bored).
      Your music didn't bore me, its pretty original, and I can tell you that anybody who would know your tricks, would still make very different music. I don't see any danger, I'd rather expect that I know your tricks already, though your music doesn't sound too tricky... ;-)
      > So the end to this story is, share if you want to share, but expect > those people to then share to others. If you share, that is giving a > gateway for others to find out, even if you dont want them to know.
      I certainly want them to know and share to others, check out my St.ools and have fun... Then search for that Youtube video (or Myspace) and tell me what's the connection between my tricks and my music... And I bet you won't be able to make the same music even if I'd tell you all my tricks... (And why should you, you make your own music...)
      > Also as a bit of an extra incentive. If anyone reads Sound On Sound > magazine, you will notice in the album production pages, where it > show how a track or album was made in todays days, you will see there > Pro Tools set up, but also there outboard hardware, sometimes they > sellotape a piece of white paper over there special production trick, > which is hardware. either being a compressor or reverb, but it is so > special in there production and sound, that they can not let them > know what it is.
      The bigger the paranoia, the less knowledge. As if a reverb would make the music. Some of the producers just use the most expensive gear to create a distinction between them and the poor mass. As if they had no skills at all (And if its a cheap nanoverb they hide it... ;-) That expensive stuff does sound damn good for sure, but any skilled engineer will pull out great music with less effort as well... The gear is never the trick...
      Stefan
      -- Stefan Tiedje------------x------- --_____-----------|-------------- --(_|_ ----|-----|-----()------- -- _|_)----|-----()-------------- ----------()--------www.ccmix.com
    • Aug 18 2008 | 4:56 am
      Stefan:-
      Well all what I said is my personal preferance. Of the side that not that many people are interested because it is not there style of music, what i do and what i make. so fair enough.
      If i am a teacher , in which i have been a few times to help people, being a class teacher in music, a drumming teacher and also an engineer teacher. Yeah, i agree that passing on 'tricks' to them is fine. but not your best tricks that have taken a long time to figure out. I have taught my students tricks, yeah. But i won't show them 'MY' tricks. I show them the tricks that can help them faster. such as how to do Hard Side Chaining Compression to Mix with Lead Pads. Giving that all knowing sound of dance and house music. Or how to get that Rock/Metal, kick drum 'thud' sound. Those tricks i have taught for years, they're second nature to me, when i teach. But there are just some things that are mine and only mine, because for one it has taken me a long time to get the kind of sound i want. I dont want someone to know my tricks that soon, they would have to work on it themselves, like i did.
      You have to work, to get what you truelly want, not from some other guy.
      And as for my music, pleasure you like it.
    • Aug 18 2008 | 5:30 am
      I guess I'm just not getting what all the talk is about 'tricks' - whether shared or kept. I don't think one can really build a career on 'tricks' - either in the arts or in audio engineering. Ideas, concepts, techniques, these are part and parcel of being a creative person in whatever field. Tricks are more transitory and easily replicated - trendy and soon to be outdated.
      I'd recommend to anyone in creative fields to focus less on learning or guarding tricks and spend more on crafting a set of concepts and techniques that will serve you well in whatever you do. Curiosity, adventurousness, and open-mindedness being chief among them.
      Just my $0.02...
    • Aug 18 2008 | 5:49 am
      Anyhow,
      I think we should stop this talk about 'tricks'.
      For some, they share, for others, they don't.
      I think we can just keep it at that, rather than doing all this answering back to each other about sharing and blah blah blah.
      I feel this has just turned to a 'I bet mine is bigger' talk
    • Aug 18 2008 | 4:41 pm
      hi all,
      In IRCAM there was (is it still here ?) the MUSTICA project. In a few words, it was a website with scores, patches, and all others media systems for communicating from current composers to students… As there was troubles with authorizations & rights from "super artists" So this project will be aborted… think about that… And think about your ego !!!!
    • Aug 27 2008 | 4:45 pm
      Quote: smalllotus@gmail.com wrote on Mon, 18 August 2008 18:41 ---------------------------------------------------- > hi all, > > In IRCAM there was (is it still here ?) the MUSTICA project. In a few > words, it was a website with scores, patches, and all others media > systems for communicating from current composers to students… As there > was troubles with authorizations & rights from "super artists" So this > project will be aborted… think about that… And think about your ego > !!!! > > ----------------------------------------------------
      ????
    • Apr 08 2009 | 6:27 am
      hi all, People! where it is possible these patches for Max Msp to take? http://www.recordlabelrecords.org/maxmsp.html - this reference has died =(
    • Apr 08 2009 | 11:26 am
      Axiom-Crux wrote on Sun, 01 June 2008 19:07thats my favorite of all of Aarons works. I do like alot of his others though, love his remix of sesame streets pinball 12 counting track on infolepsy.
      -This comp track I did for detroit underground, pretty richard devine/autechre influenced. uses alot of custom max patches Ive made
      Nice. i'm going to check out your albums. May i ask if your also sequencing in max or externally?
      aaah..very old post, this thread had a bit of a legacy.
    • Apr 10 2009 | 3:17 am
      hehe, yeah I do alot of stuff with max+jitter, but not usually entire tracks(although I have a few times), usually I jam out on a generative rhythm machine that Ive made, and record it, and then take it into logic for polishing and embellishment.
    • Jun 16 2009 | 5:25 pm
      wow, there is a lot to examine.. thanks for posting this, good sir !
    • Jun 16 2009 | 8:32 pm
      a lota jokers out on the intertubes these days.
    • Jun 16 2009 | 8:59 pm
      Nick Inhofe wrote on Tue, 16 June 2009 14:32a lota jokers out on the intertubes these days.
      who are u referring to?
    • Jun 16 2009 | 9:11 pm
      you i imagine...
      security question: how grim is rochdale?
    • Jun 16 2009 | 9:19 pm
      Mike S wrote on Tue, 16 June 2009 15:11you i imagine...
      security question: how grim is rochdale?
      ahaha thats the most rubbish test ever depends where u go
      im not even from rochdale im from middleton
    • Jun 16 2009 | 9:42 pm
      well anyway, thanks for posting the patch and clearing things up
    • Jun 16 2009 | 11:20 pm
      Stumbled across this -
      Autechre Stone-Metal objects
    • Jun 17 2009 | 12:30 pm
      People, can there were these sites with whom? http://www.recordlabelrecords.org/maxmsp.html Share please, very much it would be desirable patches to touch these, I shall be very grateful =)
    • Jun 19 2009 | 10:26 pm
      Hi Sean, Huge fan of your work with Rob B. Impossible to express.
      Thanks for sharing this and clarifying. Hope you stopping by here means you will use coding languages again. Played Confield so much it got burned into my brain.
      Be sure to check out http://ruinwesen.com/digital
    • Jun 20 2009 | 7:21 pm
      Wow.
      Thank you for this patch. There's a lot to be learned from it. At first, I looked at the spaghetti, and thought "Well, there goes my afternoon," but the locked interface is easy enough.
      Time to Rewire and see what happens.
    • Jun 20 2009 | 9:29 pm
      it is all aqua minerale sean AQUA MINERALE who cares for the sources as long as stuff is made available
      normally this is the worst thread ever
      its all only object boxes and connections basically
      -110
      .
    • Jun 21 2009 | 1:36 am
      Yeah confield is among my very favorite albums for sure.
      Richie D, Josh Kay, Rom del Castilo (Phonecia/Schematic) and I have had long conversations about that album. Its undoubtedly one of my go to albums for MAXMSP inspiration.
      While I respected the awesome live show you guys put on in Detroit a few years back rocking only the monomachine/machinedrum and a few others, I really miss things like bine (wicked slurpy organic madness, so good) and ep7 type very maxy sounding work. I recently got a nord modular g2 and I find it is a good substitute for live performance when modular madness is desired.
      Good work Mr Booth.
      PS. any reason you ditched your very old account? I remember seeing posts back in 2000 or earlier... something of a discussion of the word Twat I think?? hahaha
    • Jun 21 2009 | 2:10 pm
      Roman Thilenius wrote on Sat, 20 June 2009 15:29it who cares for the sources as long as stuff is made available
      .
      depends when i heard lyrical king by t la rock i rem thinking 'damn this doesnt sound very good for mantronik, maybe he lost it..' then i found it wasnt mantronik but some other guy trying to do his style. that made sense.
    • Jun 21 2009 | 2:16 pm
      Axiom-Crux wrote on Sat, 20 June 2009 19:36I recently got a nord modular g2 and I find it is a good substitute for live performance when modular madness is desired.
      yeah i dig the g2, we were using it in detroit actually. still love the elektron gear like some people love 606 and 303. a great quick way to make something solid. funny all the miami crew liking the complicated stuff, the music i grew up on from miami was all skyywalker based..
    • Jun 21 2009 | 5:48 pm
      G2's one of my favorite pieces of gear to get lost in. Like Reaktor without all the formal requirements. Should've gotten the expansion when I had the chance. Runs out of power pretty quick.
      Whats up with the infamous SOS patch? Some kind of Lambdoma? I can't figure that shit out.
      Nah, makes sense that they would dig the complicated stuff. Used to skate around Miami as a kid. We'd all be listening to the radio trying to get hyped up and the DJ's would go off on Fri night. Just when you were getting into it deep the stations would start drifting between two mixes and a fuckton of noise. Imagination just filling the gaps. Kinda like Pen Expers or some of that unreleased Gescom;)
      Never heard it "pure".
      Since everyones putting in requests: DraneIIIhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coral_Castle
    • Jun 21 2009 | 6:32 pm
      So what does LOTA stand for anyways? Lord of the Autechre? Lover of the algorithm? Look out, trees ahead?
      This has actually been the push I needed to get into MSP. I had bought Max mainly for Jitter, because I've been obsessing over generative graphics lately. I've been a longtime Reaktor fan (my stuff is at http://co.native-instruments.com/index.php?id=userlibrary&type=0&ulbr=1&ftu=ea884fda7e2159f&userid=283428&sort=dt_create+desc&plview=list ), but every MSP patch I've seen has either been too simple (and easier/more flexible in Reaktor), or just a big pile of academic hoo-hah. Jitter, however, has awesome tutorial and community patches, and some of the FFT work I've seen with it has just been shocking.
      Any opinions on Supercollider? A stable version for Windows finally came out, so I've been on the fence.
    • Jun 21 2009 | 6:59 pm
      ehdyn wrote on Sun, 21 June 2009 18:48
      Whats up with the infamous SOS patch? Some kind of Lambdoma? I can't figure that shit out.
      lol you're not supposed to figure it out
      actually most of the stuff we make has little or no visual interface
    • Jun 21 2009 | 7:16 pm
      thelizard wrote on Sun, 21 June 2009 19:32 This has actually been the push I needed to get into MSP. I had bought Max mainly for Jitter, because I've been obsessing over generative graphics lately. I've been a longtime Reaktor fan (my stuff is at http://co.native-instruments.com/index.php?id=userlibrary&type=0&ulbr=1&ftu=ea884fda7e2159f&userid=283428&sort=dt_create+desc&plview=list ), but every MSP patch I've seen has either been too simple (and easier/more flexible in Reaktor), or just a big pile of academic hoo-hah.
      thats a shame you might be looking at the wrong patches
      thelizard wrote on Sun, 21 June 2009 19:32 Jitter, however, has awesome tutorial and community patches, and some of the FFT work I've seen with it has just been shocking.
      Any opinions on Supercollider? A stable version for Windows finally came out, so I've been on the fence.
      its not bad, always sounds like sc... we use a lot of sound sources and originally were using max to make sequencers so we never fully embraced sc. with max we're hearing results a lot quicker, for us that's better cos we get inspired that way.
      its probably quicker to build a "lush sounding" synth out of the box in sc but u can do the same and better sometimes in max if u figure out its strengths. max is way better for making sequencers, and hybrid seq-synth things, imo.
      never checked reaktor really, i had it a while ago but it kept seeming like msp for babies. that was probably my inability to adapt to it's higher level approach or something. also it was rubbish for making sequencers and that was pretty much all i was doing at the time.
    • Jun 21 2009 | 7:47 pm
      LOTA wrote on Sun, 21 June 2009 13:16 never checked reaktor really, i had it a while ago but it kept seeming like msp for babies. that was probably my inability to adapt to it's higher level approach or something. also it was rubbish for making sequencers and that was pretty much all i was doing at the time.
      I actually really appreciate you taking the time to reply.
      I agree on the sequencing. Reaktor's sequencing has always been a shortcoming for many users, as it has a more peculiar way of going about things with event tables. A lot of sequencers that end up in the User Library tend to either stick to the 303-style sequencing, boring 8-steppers, or piano rolls, but occasionally one will come out like Spiral, and Peter Dines just recently posted a drum machine on his blog that does Elektron-style parameter locks (and there's practically nothing I've been wanting to try more than a MachineDrum). Plus, people like Rick Scott are usually reliable when it comes to cranking out something completely different.
      I've been most excited for Max4Live, mainly to use Max sequencers for all sorts of things. I know that it is possible already using Rewire, but there are still way too many sync-bugs and timing issues to make it a viable option.
    • Jun 22 2009 | 4:47 am
      thelizard wrote on Sun, 21 June 2009 15:47 I've been most excited for Max4Live, mainly to use Max sequencers for all sorts of things. I know that it is possible already using Rewire, but there are still way too many sync-bugs and timing issues to make it a viable option.
      I have had great luck building Max-Ableton Rewired sequencers. I am not happy about having to spend $190 just for a Live 8 upgrade, before spending another $150 (or more) for Max4Live. Between simple midi communication and rewire I have had no timing problems with my Max sequencers and Live 7. So I will go ahead and claim that it is a viable option.
    • Jun 23 2009 | 12:12 am
      re: ae
      thanks for posting.