Constructive rant (I hope)
I have been using Max 4 for years now, just not really been too involved with the community. In the past 2 weeks I’ve been using the Max 5 demo. I have written up a few things I don't like about Max 5 or even Max in general. I am not a computer scientist although I throw around some terms quite copiously and I'm sorry for that. In regards, anywhere I am plain off just correct me. It’s not meant to be a flame rant at all and is just merely me expressing a few of the negative things I’ve come to find in Max.
[fonts]
Only 3 fonts on my system work on Max without any compromise. They are: Arial, Tahoma, and Microsoft Sans Serif. If I choose to set my default font to a wide font, say, like Lucida Console, Verdana, or Courier New and then restart Max, all my help files which use "Sans Serif" as their default font will be set to this default font. I thought this behavior was originally handled in the .init folder with the file "max-fontmappings.txt". Indeed, the file still exists in Max5, but seems to take less precedence, rendering it useless for "Sans Serif" help files. What the invariable result is 90% of my help files will become mangled due to the boxes object size being smaller than the width of the font + number of characters.
Proposed Solution: I for one would like to be able to use Verdana 10 again without it mangling all my max4 help files being as some of these may never be updated. My proposed solution is to make the "system font" the one that is used when Sans Serif is called. Or even a new option for what Sans Serif defaults to…
[GUI responsiveness#1]
I would really like to see a change in the way Max handles moving around objects with the mouse/arrow keys. What I theorize is happening is that, with every pixel that a selection is moved, the graph the interpreter creates is being rebuilt. I could be wrong of course, but it seems like there's more going on that just some objects being redrawn on the screen. Say if you have 1000 buttons and drag them around... why does the system become so sluggish? Is it because it needs to infer implicit right-to-left ordering while moving things around? If that were the case, I'd say that was a poor reason to let the graph rebuild so many times being as such that kind of ordering (implicit, i.e., not using trigger) isn't really, well, good programming to begin with.
Proposed Solution: If indeed my theory is correct my proposed solution would be as follows. Do not rebuild the graph until the mouse button is released. Drag whatever you want around freely at a high frame rate, then, when the final destination is selected and the mouse button let go, rebuild the graph. If using the arrow keys wait until the arrow key is released.
[GUI responsiveness#2]
I’ve noticed when making a small selection and dragging it around, the selection lags about 1/4th of a second behind the mouse cursor. Maybe this might be remedied with a better graphics card, I don’t know. I tested this on both Windows and Mac on different computers and the lag was about the same. Coming from Max 4’s instant responsiveness I find this adds to the underlying feeling I have that Max 5 is slower than Max 4 in almost every respect. (yes, the key commands help, obviously, but, I’ve had those since Max4 using the toolkit)
[scope]
First, I would really like to see something like ps and pr (private send/receive) as we have with pv (private variable). Pvar for me doesn't quite cut it and seems to have some instantiation problems. Pattr also seems a bit awkward as well in regards.
Second, sometimes I wonder why all patches have scope with each other. It seems to me like if one wanted to communicate with separate patches that using a localhost OSC model would probably be better. That would make send/receive operate only from the base patch (i.e, what you retrieve from thispatcher with the path message). This can create "state" overrides when opening an old version of a patch that uses, say, a named coll, or sends a bunch of data via sends and receives. Or if a patch shares a send/receive name it can be an issue.
Proposed solution: Change send/receive to patch wide, add local/private send/receive, and use OSC or a global send/receive object for inter patch communication.
[“seeable” interpretation]
Take this example. We have a bangbang object. The right outlet is connected to a big array of coll cut and copy operations and requires regexp and javascript and some other stuff. When it's done doing it's iterations/operations, it sends a "Right finished" message to a print object. The left outlet of bangbang is just a message saying "left finished" connected to print. Why is it that, in some cases, it's possible that the left outlet will print before the right outlet, even with vanilla objects. Of course one winds up using a delay or deferlow object on the left outlet to get the ordering which was suggested in the first place.
I don't have a solution for this because I'm not sure if it's even a problem. Maybe it's a design compromise from the get go. But, obviously, this can lead to bugs when you're counting on right-to-left being there always. Being able to see the ~flow~ is part of what makes Max useful and if you can’t always trust that, then, well… what’s the point?
[timing]
Over the years I've read so many complaints about Max and timing. Things like "I built a controller for my drum machine but Max can't send out steady beats" or "I build a sequencer and the timing is all off" or whatever. Anyone whose been around a while knows this. Max's bias towards creating interactive or algorithmic music _probably_ hasn't helped this. I had a hell of a time getting reproducible timing from the hostsync~ object. In the end, I found that turning off audio and using a “metro 1” actually improved the timing quite considerably, but still not to a point where I felt happy with it…. However, since I had to use audio, I would up making a standalone to receive the timing from a host and then OSC it into Max. Then I was delighted to find out that OSC was finicky, too.
[Warning: very opinionated] Max 5 is, I think, _partly_ an attempt to attract new customers. That's fine, but, what I think is missing is a solid determinalistic core to Max. I find it too hard to create reproducible results, especially with anything timing concerned.
Proposed Solution: I think if you Cycling wants to attract a greater following they need super solid, sample accurate timing. Some determinalistic objects might help too. Add a 21st century updated object which builds upon the ideas set forth by detonate/timeline. Not all of us are interactive/algorithmic musicians. In fact, most of the world’s “successful” music is pretty much 99.0% determinalistic (maybe Jazz accounts for 1% of albums sold, I’m just guessing). If Cycling really wanted to get new customers, they would make more of an effort to instantiate this sort of paradigm into Max. I mean, algorithmic music IS cool, but you won’t get past playing in coffee shops if that’s all you write. If trying to attract more mainstream musicians, they need to know that they can make money as well as useful tools with your program. And I don’t mean make money by selling software, I mean by being able to write hit songs with the help of Max.
In short, if Max wants to look “pop” (Apple) it should support primitives for making pop i.e. determinalistic music _without_ having to utilize a 3rd party sequencer. I for one have plenty of ideas what one could do with a “max sequencer”.
[speed]
As you may know, depending on the compiler you can get quite a lot of speed benefits. Now I’m almost 100% sure every last employee at Cycling is a hardcore devoted Mac user, and, I have my doubts about how much effort actually goes into compiling the vanilla objects for Windows.
I had a friend show me some speed results using some different C compilers along with flag settings. I am sure that Cycling would benefit us Windows users to hire someone that was “really into” this sort of thing and could make wMax as fast as possible.
If this isn’t the case then I apologize. I meant to mention it just because I think if all the externals were compiled and thoroughly tested on Windows we’d see like a 5-15% speed improvement. If this has already been done then, well, thanks.
Also, I would have liked to see some speed improvements with Jitter. I guess this probably isn’t possible with Max’s current core. I have no idea how or why or what kind of overhaul it would take. All I know is on Windows we have a freeware program called vvvv which feels infinitely faster than jitter, so I end up using that, instead. Anyone on a mac ought to check it out, it really is cool.
[closing statements]
Overall, I am pretty happy with Max 5. I am running the demo right now. I truly couldn’t use Max 5 up until version 5.03 because of the font rendering which, for me, made it unreadable. So, thank you to David for addressing that.
I like the new inspector, the debugger, JSON format, shortcut keys, layout….
Anyway, thanks!
Also, in addtion, under GUI responsiveness...
I've noticed that I can move around far fewer objects before Max starts crapping out. In Max 4, moderately large selections of objects were moved around without any sort of graphical hit. It felt smooth. Now, when I decide i want to move around the contents of a big patch, maybe move it over, things crap out and crawl down to a few frames per second. I tested this by opening the same patch in Max 4 and 5 and, 5 definitely is far behind in the number of objects that can be moved at once (and I mean non CPU intensive things, my "mouse up" suggestion would remedy more intensive stuff, I think)...
thanks!
vuxivl wrote:
> Take this example. We have a bangbang object. The right outlet is
> connected to a big array of coll cut and copy operations and requires
> regexp and javascript and some other stuff. When it's done doing it's
> iterations/operations, it sends a "Right finished" message to a print
> object. The left outlet of bangbang is just a message saying "left
> finished" connected to print. Why is it that, in some cases, it's
> possible that the left outlet will print before the right outlet, even
> with vanilla objects. Of course one winds up using a delay or deferlow
> object on the left outlet to get the ordering which was suggested in
> the first place.
because you are starting two independent processes with bangbang.
sometimes the right process might be finished first sometimes not
depending on what else is going on on yr computer. in yr case you would
have to temporarily store the "left finished" (e.g. with set $1 in a
message box) and let it bang out when the right process is finished.
oh, and timebased ordering (delay, deferlow) is almost always worse than
condition based
p
Well, it depends on how your patch is hooked up. Is the 'right finished' message directly attached to 'bangbang'? Because if it is, and if 'left finished' gets triggered first, that's something which should really never happen. If it is, you should send a patch to support. If 'right finished' is attached to the output of, say, coll or js, then your expectations about event ordering are probably wrong.
As for your previous comments about Windows getting the short shrift, Cycling has a dedicated, extremely talented Windows programmer on staff who goes to great lengths to make wMax as efficient and splendid as xMax. Rest assured that the wMax kernel and objects are as carefully compiled and as thoroughly tested as
xMax. If you have specific complaints/concerns about particular objects or patches that you can demonstrate, we'd be more than happy to know about them.
Many of your suggestions/concerns are valid, although I think that some things (ps, pr) could be easily solved with JS. I think other things (timing) are the result of incorrect settings (timing is very tight with Overdrive enabled, and especially with Scheduler in Audio Interrupt, esp. if you use audio objects for timing tasks). Some of the things you mention can't be changed, not out of lack of goodwill, but out of a need for Max 4 patches to work properly/reliably in Max 5+.
I've attached 2 js files for implementing private send and receives. They could be extended, but as an illustration...
Jeremy
Quote: pure wrote on Thu, 24 July 2008 10:04
----------------------------------------------------
> vuxivl wrote:
> > Take this example. We have a bangbang object. The right outlet is
> > connected to a big array of coll cut and copy operations and requires
> > regexp and javascript and some other stuff. When it's done doing it's
> > iterations/operations, it sends a "Right finished" message to a print
> > object. The left outlet of bangbang is just a message saying "left
> > finished" connected to print. Why is it that, in some cases, it's
> > possible that the left outlet will print before the right outlet, even
> > with vanilla objects. Of course one winds up using a delay or deferlow
> > object on the left outlet to get the ordering which was suggested in
> > the first place.
> because you are starting two independent processes with bangbang.
> sometimes the right process might be finished first sometimes not
> depending on what else is going on on yr computer. in yr case you would
> have to temporarily store the "left finished" (e.g. with set $1 in a
> message box) and let it bang out when the right process is finished.
> oh, and timebased ordering (delay, deferlow) is almost always worse than
> condition based
>
> p
>
>
> --
> http://pure.test.at
> http://www.myspace.com/pvre
> http://www.heartchamberorchestra.org
>
----------------------------------------------------
Sorry, there was a problem with the previously attached JS scripts. The attached ones are good.
Quote: vuxivil wrote on Thu, 24 July 2008 03:26
----------------------------------------------------
> [GUI responsiveness#1]
The JUCE engine, which is [one of?] the backbone[s] of cross-platform compatibility, exacts a toll. If there were an easy, or even just a straight-forward, way to speed this up, it would have happened.
> What I theorize is happening is that, with every pixel that a selection is moved, the graph the interpreter creates is being rebuilt.
I doubt it, although only the C74 developers know for sure.
> [scope]
>... sometimes I wonder why all patches have scope with each other. It seems to me like if one wanted to communicate with separate patches that using a localhost OSC model would probably be better.
Global scope was a design decision made in about 1987. Was your OSC proposal an option in 1987? (That's a rhetorical question. The rhetorical answer is "no.") I don't know if you can appreciate just how difficult it is to change a paradigm that's been in place forever if you've not been using Max for that long. For all the problems with global scope were well known back then, it does provide a simple solution for a lot of things a lot of people want to do.
What Max has offered for a few years now is the pattr system, which gives you a structured, hierarchical way to communicate between subpatches. For all it's not as simple to use as send/receive, it will probably do what you need in terms of scope.
> [“seeable” interpretation]
>
> Take this example. We have a bangbang object. The right outlet is connected to a big array of coll cut and copy operations and requires regexp and javascript and some other stuff. When it's done doing it's iterations/operations, it sends a "Right finished" message to a print object. The left outlet of bangbang is just a message saying "left finished" connected to print. Why is it that, in some cases, it's possible that the left outlet will print before the right outlet, even with vanilla objects.
If an object defers processing, this happens. There are even plain vanilla objects that defer processing (or have exceptions to R2L order), and certainly javascript or "big arrays of coll cut and copy..." can do that to you.
You're quite right that exceptions to strict right-to-left processing can mess you up badly. But part of learning Max is learning the exceptions to strict R2L.
Does the Debug->Trace not help?
> [timing]
A certain amount of the timing problems are set by the OS and hardware. I've actually written code that deals with timing, in my experience you can code till you're blue in the face and an recalcitrant OS will still stomp over your careful timing.
You may ask "how come the plain-vanilla sequencers manage to get tighter timing?" It isn't completely impossible that they've found some tricks that go beyond what Max has, but I suspect the really big issue is the overhead for message passing in Max. When your standard sequencer triggers a note on, it sends three bytes to your MIDI interface and it's done. A metro bang triggers a lot of versatile processing in Max, and that versatility also exacts a toll.
That said, tighter timing has been a recurring wish since forever, as you'll know if you've been reading the list for just a little while. If it were as easy as you imagine, it would have happened.
Also: your estimates of the marketability of algorithmic music fall seriously short of the mark. That's actually fine by me, so if you want to go on believing that, go ahead;-
But if you want to build a 'pop' sequencer with Max, no one's stopping you. It can be done. But if Max is supposed to turn into just another Cubic or LogBase, it doesn't need to be Max, does it?
> [speed]
>
>...Now I’m almost 100% sure every last employee at Cycling is a hardcore devoted Mac user, and, I have my doubts about how much effort actually goes into compiling the vanilla objects for Windows.
Not true. There is at *least* one real, hardcore, whatever-the-equivalent-of-bleed-in-seven-colors-is, Windows guy working for Cycling '74, as well as several highly "bilingual" (Windows/Mac) people. They know what they're doing on the Windows front (and the compiler optimization front). There would never have been a Windows port if there weren't "real" Windows programmers working on the project.
Again, the real processing bottle-necks, AFA-anyone-outside-C74-CT, are the cross-platform layers and the message-passing model.
>
> [timing]
>
>
You may wish to check out my samm~ external as a sample-accurate alternative to the timing systems currently provided in Max.
Eric
I don't want to be too hard on this constructive rant. However, it makes me appreciate the specific, documented, informed, and insightful suggestions and reports other Max users provide on a regular basis. Any of you ever have a job where the boss would come in and say, "Do it over, this is no good!" and, after you say, "Sure thing, we'll get right on it!" you are left wondering where you are supposed to start?
I don't want to work for that kind of boss.
David Z.
Quote: vuxivil wrote on Thu, 24 July 2008 13:26
----------------------------------------------------
> [scope]
Dunno if you've checked out Mattijs' and my oo-objects, but local private/public scoping is one of the issues we were looking to improve upon.
I think that a lot of my questions have been answered. There are some good [scope] and [timing] suggestions. I'll definitely check out samm~. The [fonts] one maybe is a little too vane to even bother with this time around, but.. whatever, it's been bugging me since I would rather patch in verdana 10 than tahoma 11 (12 is too big for me). Seems I was a little short sighted in not utilizing really basic javascript to help with scoping problems. I have a hard time investing in it when I've read so much discontent and failure from utilizing it in the javascript forum.
To Bernstein:
Thank you, and for the updates. Running your .maxpat made me think a lot about the one area I really wanted to talk about… GUI sluggishness. I noticed that the numbers getting sent to the print window were far less smooth than in Max 4…
**-----Heres a quick example. Connect a metro 10 to a counter to a print object. In Max 5 it seems like the whole system is bottlenecked based on the output of the Max window. In Max 4 the numbers run down the Max window so smooth and cleanly.----** How is it people defend Max 5 as being just as fast as Max 4 with these relatively obvious things?
To Castine:
In regrards to R2L, I have actually pretty much mastered the concept of utilizing the deferlow object where necessary. I don't rely on R2L to always occur, especially when doing big operations in a trigger sequence. Still, I think, that, while it definitely is good that speed is a priority, WYSIWYG is also important. Regardless, I think I am comfortable with the exceptions to R2L even though sometimes I'll have a bug or two related to it but tracing it down isn’t hard.
To johnpitcairn/Eric lyon: Thanks.
[GUI responsiveness]
Peter made a point about JUCE... it was pretty obvious to me from the start that JUCE was going to be a controversial pick. While I can appreciate it's graphical primitives and can speculate that Cycling thought the look and feel fit perfectly, and probably the audio libraries being useful... I, for one, cringed. It's And not because of the look AT ALL, but, because I had tried out a few JUCE apps before that. One being the JUCEdemo.exe off their site, and the other being Mackie Traktion. I mean, if the JUCE demo is sluggish feeling, then I can only imagine what it's going to do to an already do the psychology of using an already slow Max. In both, the sluggishness of the fader responses, drawing, whatever was completely too latent for me. I love fast, tactile responsiveness to things. I had an underlying suspicion that Max 5 was going to be significantly less "snappy" than 4 and it definitely is........
Draw rectangles, dragging objects (plus the amount of objects you can drag before it slugs out), locking/unlocking a patcher, double click opening patches, max initial startup, moving things around with arrow keys, sliders, JSUI....; all feels noticeably slower to me.... I've literally spent the last 3 or 4 days sitting here on a 30" monitor, split directly down the middle, with Max 4 on one side and Max 5 on the other, same patch open in both trying out various operation with interacting with the canvas and Max 4 blows it out of the water in terms of speed (not the Max is actually that fast to begin with)
My computer specs are decent enough. Q6600 processor, 7300GT video card, standard 2gigs of ram, fast harddrive.... I researched all the parts and it's only a year or so old. For the sake of comparison I tested Max 4 & 5 demos on a brand new macbook. Same results, really. Max 4 seemed so much quicker for everything...
But, I mean, I suppose that can be expected. Max 5 is still new thing. I am bendable. I don't mind the roundedness (yes that was a funny discussion). I just have gripes with the speed at this point. I just have this suspicion that Max is never going to speed up. That, as Karaokaze pointed out that Cycling is just a little company and that we all need to be patient with them. Yep, he's right. Cycling is a small company it would seem which baffles me why they go on supporting buggy mxj Java or evil things like Javascript when theres limited manpower and the Max core itself could certainly use an update. Btw, Peter brought up the date 1987. Has Max’s core really seen a revision since then or has it just been maintenance and bug fixes? Curious about that.
Some folks program in Squeak and don't give a hoot how sluggish it feels, they just like the smalltalk language and the ease of integration or whatever. Some people like programming in javascript and don't care how much memory it uses or how slow it is in comparison to another equally useful extension language.
You know, I was thinking today, as a company Cycling seems to value "speed" very little. Max itself was never really fast, and, over time, one learns it isn't really suited for building large scale applications. But how about JUCE on top of an already slow Max? Javascript as it's extension language? Did anyone do any benchmarks?
Choosing Javascript and JUCE makes me think that Cycling doesn't really understand the wants of some of their customers. I'm willing to go out on a line and bet _most_ Maxers at some point had a delusional fantasy about building a complete replacement for whatever non-programming music software they were using. If they're anything like me, they found out the hardway that Max has a limit to how far you can go with it. It's not a limitless program, and, the more things you implement into your Max program, the more compromises have to be made. When things start junking out, I start to look at the GUI objects first as a problem. I still don't even bother with Javascript because of all the mixed discontent with mandatory gratitude at having “something” there seems to be on the JS forum. Yes, folks, you have _something_ now where as before you had nothing. Yee-ha.
Which brings to another point of is Max really a programming language at all? I'd say yes, because the term is vague enough, but, vanilla Max isn't the speediest interpreter by a long shot and would die or not even be able to compete in a lot of the tests on "The great computer language shootout". I'd even guess and say it's probably one of the slowest interpreters in existence. That's fine though, Max is still useful for moderate applications, but, I think that it should compensate for it's slownesss by using the _fastest_ interface library and the _fastest_ extension language available. Instead it uses the _slowest_ for both, which makes things triple slow?
Now, I fear, the reality is that the bottlenecks I ran into while programming in Max in 2005 have become even more constrained. And despite this I've still been a very devoted Maxer, often times programming for 12-14 hours a day weeks on end. But, I've learned to not do any long term projects because I know Max is one finicky-mamasita that gets upset when you try and stack too much Thanksgiving turkey on your plate.
Let's not forget that it really is just the old max with a new coat of paint. Well, maybe a little more. I do like Max 5 and I don't think I could go back to 4 for any reason because some of the new functionality just makes life easier. I would really just like to see it sped up.
Side rant: I do collect VST plugins, and, one of my requisites, besides sound quality of course, is, that it be responsive... which pretty much eliminates things like Rob Papen, Native Instruments, Arturia. I can find a plugin that does the same as theirs and is programmed better, thank you. Why use a terribly slow Absynth when there's a super quick, responsive U-He Zebra plugin that perfectly matches the niche Absynth represents and does it without all the slow sliders and terrible GUI junkiness. I don't want the knobs lagging behind the mouse cursor, getting updated at 5fps. It makes it feel like my computer is crapping out when it really isn't... However, the fact that Native Instrument's plugins all have terribly slow interfaces doesn't stop them from being one of the most successful companies. I tell ya, the world is backwards!
Another analogy is that using Max 5 to me feels like playing a high end game with just a slightly lower than minimum requirement graphics card. Sure you can run up and down halls or what not, but when the screen gets cluttered with enemies, forget it! Max 5 clunks out with doing things like moving around lots of objects. Why this is, well, I theorized that the graph was being rebuilt on a per pixel basis and proposed that dragging should not rebuild the graph until a mouse up event has occurred.
All in all, I don't know where I truly stand. I miss how snappy Max 4 felt but I feel like I can't continue to utilize Max 4... And there were lots of problems with Max 4 that have been fixed. The GL canvas zooming now is great, the documentation and inspectors and debugger.... all good things and probably should have been available 5 years ago being as how long Max has had to evolve to this point. I just can't get my head around all that was lost. For small things I’ll still use Max, but, what Max 5 was supposed to fix only seems to have gotten worse, regardless of some of the new conveniences.
I have a couple of tests to anyone that finds my claims of GUI slowness unfounded or weird.
I already made another point in the last post that sending streams of numbers to the Max window is _very_ latent and "chunky" compared to the smoothness of the stream in Max 4.
That is test 1.
Test 2 is testing the responsiveness of dragging around lots of objects.
I find it very hard to not feel slightly defeated when trying to make a point and someone like Karaokaze comes along and says "I personally, don't care about how the GUI responds to movement of objects while editing so long as I can edit smoothly and so long as the graphics perform on-time in performance/presentation-mode (i.e. when locked), and on my G5 and my MacBook"...
I find it logical to suggest it may be my hardware but I doubt that's the case. Like I said above, I also tried this all out on an intel MacBook with a core 2 in it and on my own Windows computer and performance in the about the same. I even went so far as to take out my graphics card and throw in a different but similar offering by ATI and the results were no better or worse.
So my question to Karaokaze or anyone that thinks Max 5 is "smooth"... If you have both 4 and 5 installed on your computer and can compare either of my two proposed tests in any way shape or form remotely close to being nearly as responsive as Max 4?
______________________________
TEST#1 compare responsiveness of printing to max window in v4 and v5
______________________________
TEST#2 responsiveness of dragging around large amounts of varied objects
[attached]
Hi vuxivil,
Would it be true to say there are a significant amount of people with more skill than either you *or* I who use Max successfully every day?
I once started writing a similar critical review of the Kyma platform but could never finish it. I looked at it a few years after and was humbled by how much my perceptions of technical shortcomings had changed. I never got much work done with Kyma *even though* it's design focuses on results (IMO successfully).
The Max scheduler *is* tight when configured properly. We (DSPaudio) managed proper timing performance with Nortron (empirically) and I have built several other scheduler based sequencers with enough precision to satisfy right and left brains. Although my experiences with Windows 3.1/95/2000/Xp & Vista has always resembled an unplanned suicide; glass & blood everywhere. I've no idea how a platform that prone to diversity (chaos) could provide consistent *anything*.
JUCE seems a good choice for tons of reasons and faster computers and/or optimizations will take care of redraw speeds.
In principle a faceless Max made more sense to me, but I had better not worry about what Max looks like, listeners and users don't care.
Dear Reader there has been a mistake,
The time vector has been scrambled. Please follow the crumbs back to your time machine and return to the previous posts to understand my comments in turn. My previous post was not intended to directly follow the OP's latest.
If read in order, I appear agnry, but this is simply time playing a trick on you.
Oi, The forums are more sluggish than the print window I say.
Note to the OP, please continue, you're current line of inquiry could be as important as the barfight over font rendering I witnessed while drinking a Gin & JUCE.
++, -+, --, +-
I hate to be the sort of person who writes stuff like, "Who Cares!?", but, dude, who cares how 'responsive' the Max window is? That's like complaining that the Apple Console is really unresponsive when you're shoving data into it. It's essentially a debug window, and for scheduling/threading reasons, it queues up a certain number of events before dumping them to the window, when there's a lot going on. There's nothing mysterious about it, or insidious, or indicative of "sluggishness" in any general sense.
I used to work at Tekserve in New York, fixing laptops. Every once in a while, we'd get a customer who would come in and tell us what was wrong with computer. I mean, would tell us exactly what was broken, based on stuff they'd read on the net or a hunch or whatever. A few of these people were well-informed and technically astute and were right, but the majority were way off. I regret to say that I am having a moment of deja vu.
I believe that that you are drawing the wrong conclusions based on insufficient data and a willingness to assume that A always means B. Comparison of Max 4 + Max 5 side to side is useful for identifying "things which work differently now". WHY they work differently is a whole other discussion. I think that, if you compare Max's scheduler and DSP performance, Jitter performance and so on, you will see that (with some exceptions in both directions) Max 4 and 5 perform approximately the same.
It's no secret that JUCE is slower than QuickDraw. On the other hand, unless your work is based on realtime drawing of patch elements, it's not going to be noticable when you're running your patch.
OK, deep breath. I hope that you can come to terms with Max 5's UI for long enough to discover all of the major and minor improvements we've been able to add since Max 4. We're continuing to develop and improve Max (every day!), and hope you'll be around to enjoy the next batch of goodies.
jb
Quote: vuxivil wrote on Fri, 25 July 2008 07:53
----------------------------------------------------
> To Bernstein:
> Thank you, and for the updates. Running your .maxpat made me think a lot about the one area I really wanted to talk about… GUI sluggishness. I noticed that the numbers getting sent to the print window were far less smooth than in Max 4…
>
> **-----Heres a quick example. Connect a metro 10 to a counter to a print object. In Max 5 it seems like the whole system is bottlenecked based on the output of the Max window. In Max 4 the numbers run down the Max window so smooth and cleanly.----** How is it people defend Max 5 as being just as fast as Max 4 with these relatively obvious things?
I'm going ask for something to be explained in slightly greater detail. I hope no one freaks out. it is on topic and would be educational.
There was a back and forth in Paris which really intrigued me. Basically, if I understand correctly, you can get sample accurate max timing, if you:
A: turn on over drive,
B: turn on schedule in audio interupt
C: put deferlow before *everything* which isn't time related (Gui stuff)
Now my well researched and inadequate understanding subject leads me to believe this means that if you are running audio vectors and you have a timing intensive max process, it interrupts processing the vector and executes the string of max objects. the exception to this rule is when you have a defer your gui objects.
See? Cycling has zero value for speed. Point proven, lol.
I never meant to imply that I thought Max's core itself was slower, but because of the UI being slower, _felt_ dramatically slower to me. The total Max experience feels like working in a smaller world to me... Everything is waaaaaay less responsive in Max 5 and it kind of kills the whole experience.
In fact, your whole reply is pretty much null, Jeremy. I said...
"Let's not forget that it really is just the old max with a new coat of paint."
"That's fine though, Max is still useful for moderate applications, but, I think that it should compensate for it's slownesss by using the _fastest_ interface library and the _fastest_ extension language available. Instead it uses the _slowest_ for both, which makes things triple slow?"
and then at the end
"For small things I’ll still use Max, but, what Max 5 was supposed to fix only seems to have gotten worse, regardless of some of the new conveniences."
Max 5 fixes a ton of the interface problems that Max 4 had. I can barely even look at Max 4 anymore because Max 5 seems so much more complete to me. However, Max 5 is also incredibly slow in every respect. The Max Window is just one example. I cited..
"Draw rectangles, dragging objects (plus the amount of objects you can drag before it slugs out), locking/unlocking a patcher, double click opening patches, max initial startup, moving things around with arrow keys, sliders, JSUI...."
Are any of those core Max scheduler things Jeremy, or GUI related? No, I was never under any impression that the schedulur/interpreter itself was any faster/slower. I knew months ago that was barely getting an update.
The fact is, I am OVERLY aware that Max is just the same old, not-up-to-my-standards Max that I've spent hundreds of thousands of hours pumping time into. My gripe with the Max core is that the speed issues I've experienced with the scheduler throughout the years when trying to build obnoxiously audacious, over the top systems are no where near being realized, and, the slowness of the GUI itself makes the language _FEEL_ even smaller and less capable than it was before. Go on, accuse me of not optimizing my patches enough, I dare you ;-)
The way something responds is incredibly important. I'll give you an example/analogy.
On windows, we have MME and Directsound as possible driver options other than ASIO. Sometimes, I'll open up Cubase and it'll reset to an MME driver which has a default buffer of like 5512 samples, very slow. I know it's been reset to MME because I'll hit play and every VU meter on the mixer updates at an incredibly slow rate. Setting things back to ASIO and a 64 sample buffer sets the whole thing straight and the VU meters don't act all clunky. And yes, VU meters are just feedback, too, like the Max window.
Essentially, what you're telling me Jeremy is that I shouldn't care that my VU meters are updating every 5512 samples when I'm used to seeing them update every 64. Thanks, that's really helpful. ;-)
The Max window is just a debug window, with some text. Why then is it so difficult to make it run render it cleanly? The max objects are just flippin' stupid little ovals, so why can't I drag 50 of them around without the computer junking out? Is it really so off the mark to be asking why Max _feels_ slower due to the new GUI? No. Should I expect everyone to care? No. I made that quite clear in stating my surprise that people use Native Instrument's software when the visual feedback their interface supplied was incredibly poorly rendered.
On Jul 25, 2008, at 2:03 AM, vuxivl wrote:
> I have a couple of tests to anyone that finds my claims of GUI
> slowness unfounded or weird.
I guess I don't find them unfounded as much as I find your specific
issues mostly irrelevant, for most of my work.
The GUI may be slower, but it also offers _MANY_ more features. I
think that the benefit of anti-aliased, composited, alpha-blended
graphics to outweigh any slowness that I may encounter while patching.
On my largest patcher, it takes considerably longer to load in Max 5,
and considerably longer to lock/unlock, both of which are annoying.
That said, the plusses of Max 5 far outweigh the minuses, for me.
> TEST#1 compare responsiveness of printing to max window in v4 and v5
OK, Max 5 is a little "chunkier," as you say. How does this impact you?
> TEST#2 responsiveness of dragging around large amounts of varied
> objects
Well, above some threshold of the number of objects selected, Max 4
drags outlines instead of the whole patch. It can do this faster than
Max 5 can drag the whole antialiased, alpha-composited patch,
patchcords and all.
-C
Chris Muir
cbm@well.com
http://www.xfade.com
"... I've spent hundreds of thousands of hours pumping time into."
Hmmm - 100,000 hrs / 40 hours per week / 52 weeks per year = approx. 48 YEARS.
Maybe it just feels like hundreds of thousands of hours....
:-)
Brad
Quote: Chris Muir wrote on Fri, 25 July 2008 10:01
----------------------------------------------------
>
> On Jul 25, 2008, at 2:03 AM, vuxivl wrote:
>
> > I have a couple of tests to anyone that finds my claims of GUI
> > slowness unfounded or weird.
>
> I guess I don't find them unfounded as much as I find your specific
> issues mostly irrelevant, for most of my work.
>
> The GUI may be slower, but it also offers _MANY_ more features. I
> think that the benefit of anti-aliased, composited, alpha-blended
> graphics to outweigh any slowness that I may encounter while patching.
I've made commentary about being happy with the new features. Even stating that I would find impossible to go back to 4. Essentially what you're asking me is to not care that the GUI operates at a 1/4 the speed in light of the new features.
>
> On my largest patcher, it takes considerably longer to load in Max 5,
> and considerably longer to lock/unlock, both of which are annoying.
> That said, the plusses of Max 5 far outweigh the minuses, for me.
>
>
> > TEST#1 compare responsiveness of printing to max window in v4 and v5
>
> OK, Max 5 is a little "chunkier," as you say. How does this impact you?
It impacts me when I decide to make one giant patch and want to start moving things around. Having to keep my patches under 40 objects to keep things moving smoothly means I have to make compromises. Can't I just patch and not have to worry about whether or not Max will let me move my whole big patch around in 2 hours?
>
>
> > TEST#2 responsiveness of dragging around large amounts of varied
> > objects
>
>
> Well, above some threshold of the number of objects selected, Max 4
> drags outlines instead of the whole patch. It can do this faster than
> Max 5 can drag the whole antialiased, alpha-composited patch,
> patchcords and all.
>
Yep. And I propose the same solution for 5. It would make things easier. That and... I've bitched a theory out about how often the graph is rebuilt while dragging things around and proposed that.. while the mouse button is down, The interpreter doesn't rebuild things.
> -C
>
> Chris Muir
> cbm@well.com
> http://www.xfade.com
>
>
Btw folks, I'm a bit surprised that you think it's _okay_ that things are clunky. How is it that we have games with tens of million polygons flying around and physics engines running all super smooth at over 60 frames per second, yet, Max 5 can't drag fifty 2 dimensional _OVALS_ without completely crapping out the graphics and driving one of my CPU cores to 100%? It can't draw 2 characters on a white background every 10ms? You expect me to believe that this is asking to much of the developers?
I'm Peter Castine would have me believe that if there was _anything_ that could be done to speed it up, there would be.
So far, Ziccarelli won't join in because the wording isn't good enough, Bernstein & Muir think it's pointless to care about a slow Max window, Castine thinks everything that Max is operating the best it can given the JUCE library, and everyone else just wants me to lay off Cycling because it's a small company. Oh, and Anythony thinks my whole thread is irrelevant because I'm a "m$ windowz" dude.
Great.
I'm sure we'd all like to see Max 5 get snappier over time. I don't think anyone's disagreeing with you there. But you need to understand that building software always involves a lot of tough priority choices. You get the features and functionality down first, and worry about performance later. The performance of a running patch is always going to take priority over the GUI performance for building the patch. It's not that they don't care, it's just there's much more important things to deal with first. I think the way you are wording your rant makes people a little upset and defensive (that's what rants do).
It's fine you disagree with the choice to use JUCE, but it's an error to claim it was a mistake or that they don't care about some of their users because of that choice. As I understand it, it was becoming way too difficult for C74 to support cross-platform releases and they found a solution that let's them do a cross-platform/resolution independent GUI easily at the cost of some efficiency, which seems like a good compromise. Should they reach a larger user base with a slightly slower app that allows the company to stay profitable so we can all keep enjoying a Max that grows and evolves over time, or just keep chugging along with a stagnant product that will eventually die? As users we sometimes feel like our individual needs aren't being addressed, but keep in mind the Max user base is large (and growing) and there are a lot of people with varying needs and I'm sure C74 is doing the best they can. Software is never perfect, and we're sometimes really annoyed with its limitations, but that's life.
So you can either submit patches that demonstrate specific performance problems and be patient and trust that Max 5 will get better over time, or you can decide it's not worth and go write your own software or use Pd or something. I'd go with the former option, but that's me. Don't expect rants to solve any problems or get the response you want.
PS - speaking of varying user needs and how rants make people defensive, I personally was a little upset about the java/javascript comments you made. These features are immensely important to me and a lot of other people, and they work great if you know what you are doing. The forums are normally a place to post problems, not success stories, so if you just read the forums and don't try it for yourself then your perspective will get skewed.
I think that David was saying that you weren't specific enough, fwiw. I do happen to think that it's pointless to care about a slow Max window, but I can understand why you might disagree with my point of view. I disagree strongly with any number of your characterizations of what Max, and especially what Max 5, is -- but whatever. Your fresh paint job is my thorough overhaul. That's fine.
But please, by all means, package up a few of your example patches and send them to support. We'll take a look and see what, if anything, is to be done. We're more than happy to investigate any of this -- just use the support mechanisms available.
Just because we're a small company doesn't mean that we shouldn't be held accountable. On the other hand, our time resources are more limited than, say, those at Microsoft (although we do tend to release updates a lot quicker than they do), which means that we have to set priorities and devote energy to certain problems and aspects of the software, while letting other stuff wait a bit longer for attention.
All that said, I can use Max to make the kind of work I make with Max with efficiency and pleasing results, just as Max is today. Which isn't to pretend that we don't have plenty of work to do, but what we've got is imminently usable.
Finally, try to remember that Zicarelli, Bernstein, Muir and Castine and whoever else are just people like you and not part of some faceless corporate mass. We're mostly just trying to be helpful, despite any underlying disagreements.
jb
Quote: vuxivil wrote on Fri, 25 July 2008 19:24
----------------------------------------------------
> So far, Ziccarelli won't join in because the wording isn't good enough, Bernstein & Muir think it's pointless to care about a slow Max window, Castine thinks everything that Max is operating the best it can given the JUCE library, and everyone else just wants me to lay off Cycling because it's a small company. Oh, and Anythony thinks my whole thread is irrelevant because I'm a "m$ windowz" dude.
>
> Great.
----------------------------------------------------
Quote: vuxivil wrote on Fri, 25 July 2008 19:24
----------------------------------------------------
> I'm Peter Castine would have me believe that if there was _anything_ that could be done to speed it up, there would be.
----------------------------------------------------
[sic -- I think I've understood the intent despite the typo]
If there were a quick fix for any of the points you brought up, yes, they would have been dealt with by now. I've had the opportunity to directly discuss details of how Max works with quite a few of the development team over the years (btw, a word of thanks for the help that's been extended when I've needed it), and these guys are all smart and capable.
I understand you were trying to be constructive in your original post, but... how can I put this? The idea that someone who's not a developer and who doesn't actually know what's going on inside the code base, that someone in that position is going to have the solutions for all the problems, is not entirely realistic.
If you want good examples on how *not* to be constructive, try and follow the thread (there is one contributor in particular one can learn a lot from... arguably in a negative sense).
If you want to be constructive, is a good place to start. Caveat: it's a lot of work to put together a good bug report. But experience teaches those are the ones that get fixed.
On Jul 25, 2008, at 10:24 AM, vuxivl wrote:
> Quote: Chris Muir wrote on Fri, 25 July 2008 10:01
> ----------------------------------------------------
>>
>> On Jul 25, 2008, at 2:03 AM, vuxivl wrote:
>>
>>> I have a couple of tests to anyone that finds my claims of GUI
>>> slowness unfounded or weird.
>>
>> I guess I don't find them unfounded as much as I find your specific
>> issues mostly irrelevant, for most of my work.
>>
>> The GUI may be slower, but it also offers _MANY_ more features. I
>> think that the benefit of anti-aliased, composited, alpha-blended
>> graphics to outweigh any slowness that I may encounter while
>> patching.
>
>
> I've made commentary about being happy with the new features. Even
> stating that I would find impossible to go back to 4. Essentially
> what you're asking me is to not care that the GUI operates at a 1/4
> the speed in light of the new features.
Are you really saying that Max 5 is 75% slower than Max 4 in the areas
you are complaining about? If so, I accuse you of hyperbole which
really undermines any claim to a "constructive" rant.
The Max 5 GUI is somewhat slower than the Max 4 GUI. I don't think
that anyone is really disputing this. Where people are disagreeing
with you is on how much urgency to place on this fact.
My guess is that it will get better over time, but it just isn't
perceived as the most important thing to be working on right now.
>>> TEST#1 compare responsiveness of printing to max window in v4 and
>>> v5
>>
>> OK, Max 5 is a little "chunkier," as you say. How does this impact
>> you?
>
> It impacts me when I decide to make one giant patch and want to
> start moving things around. Having to keep my patches under 40
> objects to keep things moving smoothly means I have to make
> compromises. Can't I just patch and not have to worry about whether
> or not Max will let me move my whole big patch around in 2 hours?
I'm confused. How does the Max window update speed influence dragging?
Using hyperbole in your rant (e.g. 2 hours) is not constructive.
constructive criticism
Part of Speech: n
Definition: criticism or advice that is useful and intended to help
or improve something, often with an offer of possible solutions
>>> TEST#2 responsiveness of dragging around large amounts of varied
>>> objects
>>
>>
>> Well, above some threshold of the number of objects selected, Max 4
>> drags outlines instead of the whole patch. It can do this faster than
>> Max 5 can drag the whole antialiased, alpha-composited patch,
>> patchcords and all.
>>
>
> Yep. And I propose the same solution for 5. It would make things
> easier.
I would like to point out that proposing the outline-drag thing is one
of the few genuinely constructive comments you've made.
> I've bitched a theory out about how often the graph is rebuilt while
> dragging things around and proposed that.. while the mouse button is
> down, The interpreter doesn't rebuild things.
Your theory is devoid of any fact, though, correct? It's just based on
your assumptions?
I think it's far more likely that the weight of moving a bunch of anti-
aliased, alpha-composited objects around is just heavier than you
think. Perhaps going back to optimization of the outline-drag of Max 4
will happen someday, but realistically, how high would you put this on
a priority list?
I'd much rather see Cycling work on the Max 5 SDK, Pluggo, Jitter 2,
and the "secret" Ableton cooperation project for example.
> Btw folks, I'm a bit surprised that you think it's _okay_ that
> things are clunky.
I guess I don't think that it's "okay" that things are "clunky" so
much as I do that it's "understandable." The GUI code, the editor, and
patcher format got a grounds-up rewrite, and gained a lot of fancy
features in the process. I would certainly guess that there is more
optimization that could be done. I would further guess that
optimization in these areas are just not at the top of anyone's list,
right now.
> How is it that we have games with tens of million polygons flying
> around and physics engines running all super smooth at over 60
> frames per second, yet, Max 5 can't drag fifty 2 dimensional _OVALS_
> without completely crapping out the graphics and driving one of my
> CPU cores to 100%?
Well, the game in your example has the advantage of being able to pre-
compute some stuff that would be impractical for Max. Also, games live
or die based on their frame rate. For most people, the editing
"framerate" in Max doesn't matter as much as it seems to to you.
Also, the ovals aren't really two dimensional, they also have an alpha
"dimension" and a z-order. Call it 2.5 dimensions.
> It can't draw 2 characters on a white background every 10ms? You
> expect me to believe that this is asking to much of the developers?
Prioritizing Max window update speed is certainly asking too much, at
this time, IMO. The Max window is not dropping any characters or
anything drastic, it's just not as smooth as you like.
There are much bigger fish to fry.
> So far, Ziccarelli won't join in because the wording isn't good
> enough, Bernstein & Muir think it's pointless to care about a slow
> Max window, Castine thinks everything that Max is operating the best
> it can given the JUCE library, and everyone else just wants me to
> lay off Cycling because it's a small company. Oh, and Anythony
> thinks my whole thread is irrelevant because I'm a "m$ windowz" dude.
I think that the main reason not to engage you in this discussion is
that you are unduly dismissive, in a manner I find fairly unpleasant,
when people disagree with the level of importance you place on things,
but that's just my opinion.
> Great.
Glad you're enjoying yourself.
Over and out,
Chris
ahhh, the zsolt of lighting. that brought back some memories...
On 25 Jul 2008, at 12:24, Jeremy Bernstein wrote:
> OK, deep breath. I hope that you can come to terms with Max 5's UI
> for long enough to discover all of the major and minor improvements
> we've been able to add since Max 4.
Alternatively, you can buy this magazine and read about them:
The guy seems to know what he's talking about, although I think he
spends far too much time messing about with his monome and watching
"Waking the Dead" reruns.
-- 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
On Jul 25, 2008, at 1:26 PM, Nick Rothwell wrote:
> The guy seems to know what he's talking about, although I think he
> spends far too much time messing about with his monome and watching
> "Waking the Dead" reruns.
That guy? Wanker. He doesn't seem to think that the exact same things
that I do are important. :-)
I see a new .sig line in the making: " it's curvy and translucent, and
it's the future."
-C
Chris Muir
cbm@well.com
http://www.xfade.com
I truly am jealous that there are people that can use Max 5 and not be bothered by the speed of the GUI. It makes me wonder just what exactly, if anything, might be wrong with me.
I feel like continuing to use Max5 is a bit like circular madness. I, for the life of me, can not get comfortable with the canvas. Each time I patch, I get agitated. I feel like opening Max 4 and seeing if it's as sluggish. Then I realize I _HATE_ Max 4 immensely with all of my soul and want to get the hell away from it and go back to 5, which I find merely agitating.
Patching can sort of be like architecture. Some people are obviously less peripheral and more engineering about the whole thing. I am very much into making my patches functional as well as aesthetically pleasing. Max 5 seems to rob me of my ability as a quasi-object-architect to move things around.
Everything you've done to shift away from Max 4 has been great.
I just for the life of me can not stop obsessing my brains out about how clunky the canvas feels to me.
There is hope though. TIME. Time can fix this, as people have said. So, that being said, Obviously I'm not going to buy something I don't feel happy with. I can buy it when I find using the canvas to be satisfactory.
This isn't the first time I've had gripes about a canvas. No. When Max 5 came out and I couldn't read anything.. I decided, "hey, why not try PD"... Imagine my surprise when, with audio on, I couldn't move more than 15 objects around in PD without the whole thing crapping out. I went on to #desiredata and made people run some tests. All agreed, the PD canvas couldn't handle dragging around objects with something as simple as an oscillator running. The whole tihng just dies. I guess PD hasn't heard of a thing called overdrive.
I don't want to FIGHT with a canvas. I just wanna drag stuff around and _patch_!
There was already too much fighting the canvas for me in Max 4.
I _appreciate_ so many things about Max 5...but, above all... I'm a performance/speed freak. I love responsive, fast applications. Max's new GUI is just WAY too damn slow for me. Sorry. No amount of coercing me about Cycling's merits or the goodness of their souls will change the fact that I truly am having a hard time getting comfortable patching. And that's just how I am built by the Lord Almighty.
Max is a great application, one of the best. I'm sure in time it'll be up to my standards.
Thanks!
Please learn to read what people are actually saying. Your personal Bias will not help *us* reach a cooperative conclusion.
In this thread you've mischaracterized peoples attitudes and all I can really say is take off the sunglasses, re-read what people have written above and look at how long it took for you to stop whining and provide a constructive suggestion.
How many complaints did you make and how many suggestions did you offer?
I do think your distilled observation is important, I value snappy UI performance as much as yourself and have designed software with that in mind. I also hope JUCE and Max5 can be optimized because the patching experience has suffered a bit,
but at the end of the day the computer is a tool and I'm
focused on producing with that tool not worshipping it.
The audience listens the stage cares not
Anythony, I made tons of suggestions in my first post. Maybe not all out fixes, just suggestions. You're unfortunately wrong about me just complaining. I've offered up some ideas. As for speeding up the GUI, what sort of idea would you have me offer?
"Hey guys, uhhh, speed it up!"
Is that what you had in mind? Is that why you're lecturing me?
I've already made up my mind. Max 5 is a no go. Thanks, but, well, it's good of Cycling to fix all the stuff in Max that should have been dealt with 5 years ago. I mean, they've only had 21 years to get it this far.
But in the process of their extraordinarily late update they've created a bloated tortoise of a canvas that's taken all the joy out of speedy patching.
"
As for chaotic and insane people making suggestions.... Ive seen plenty of 'em come on the forum and they generally have great ideas! What happens _everytime_, though, is this overly righteous forum ends up cornering them with their rules and requirements. Their "algorithmic gurus" of 10+ years tote superior knowledge and understanding of the Max paradigm. The suggestions fall on deaf ears. Complaints are brushed under the carpet. It's generally the same bag. Cycling has a stranglehold on their product and they're keen on killing it. Fine. But, let's not forget that some of the greatest musicians were complete A-holes. You're all really missing out by embracing a narrow minded, dogmatic view of how people should behave in a forum. Or maybe not.
If it were my forum I'd throw out all the correctness and the respectfulness. Patching and music making in Max can be truly a manic experience, and being manic is to be insane. I would embrace insanity as a fundamental philosophical core of the Max paradigm and would encourage my forum base to do be as radical or as crazy as possible. I'd promote all the crazies to Ops and demand brain storms where people threw out as much garbage as possible. Anyone that got offended and huffy and would instantly be banned. It'd be the complete reverse of this gumdrop shop.
It's strange how I keep getting lectured about effort and the smallness of Cycling and all the hard work they've done. As an _end user_, why should I care about any of that? I really don't care if you've done hard work, Cycling. I don't give two hoots if you spent 5 years in a room heated to 110 degrees working on Max 5 18 hours a day while a big, hairy man in tight black leather whipped your backs raw. It was Cycling's choice to market Max. That was their choice when they started as a company. If I appreciate it, they'll find out by taking $299.00 out of my bank account.
Does Digidesign's userbase start crying when one of the forum users doesn't appreciate all the computer science technicalities that went into designing pro-tools? I have no idea! Probably! Most forums are like that. It's full of hounds who just wait for someone to say something "incorrect". It's funny how just about every response has nothing to do with any kind of points I brought up. I guess I must have worded them wrong, huh? Doesn't change the fact that Max 5 is objectively slower than Max 4. How much so, that's subjective. But no one seems to want to talk about that.
So, Cycling, don't be like Microsoft. Every time theres an update to Office, it gets slower and slower. I have excel 2003 and 2008 on my computer. 2003 blows 2008 out of the water in terms of speed. And that's what I love, speed! I'm not saying you won't make it a reality, but plenty of people have said that speed just isn't a priority. I for one, find that deplorable, but, it's your software, and it's my money. They'll go to bed together when the mood is right.
I'm completely 100% happy to put Max away for a year. I don't enjoy using it. It's that simple. I don't like version 4 either. In fact, after using it for many, many years, I'd say that I absolutely hated the old Max and, at this point, I acn barely stand opening it. I've developed a deep rooted disgust for the program after learning probably as much as an end user can learn about it without delving to deep into the SDK. But that's just me. There are _plenty_ of reasons why that's my case and it doesn't even denote anything negative about Max at all. It's how Max and I mesh. And I respect the priorities of others as well as my ability to not be dependant on any one tool.
I like 5 more, but, what it fixed it broke elsewhere. Seems like a poor tradeoff. Oh well. c'est la vie.
I think if you checked the forums at Digidesign, NI, Apple or any other major audio company, the one thing you wouldn't find is the director of the company reading,much less responding to the complaints of their users.
Since Max 5 has been released, users have made specific and thoughtful suggestions that have been not only replied to but *implemented* in less than a month or two. Try finding that kind of service anywhere else.
In any case, Max is a product. Nobody is hiding what it is or isn't. You have a 30 demo to try it inside and out. If you decide that it isn't for you, thats fine. Go ahead and wait for something that has all the features of Max and has a split second graphic refresh.
As for all the manic, crazy, famous artists/musicians/writers- I'm pretty sure they didn't spend their time ranting on forums, but rather used the tools they had to achieve their vision.
some unskilled loser wrote:
"[blah][blah][blah] ...If it were my forum.... [blah] [blah] [blah]..."
hehehe, hilarious how when some people have nothing smart to say, they start to hold delusions of grandeur... no one said anything about how to behave or vuxivil probably would be banned, but i guess that's all part of the delusional idiocy of being a lonely ignoramus like him with nothing better to do(as is evident by the fact that he can't seem to make anything worthy of note(Max4, Max5, OR otherwise)).
a wise person then answered:
"As for all the manic, crazy, famous artists/musicians/writers- I'm pretty sure they didn't spend their time ranting on forums, but rather used the tools they had to achieve their vision."
Exactly, that's why fuxevil or whatever his temporary name was is spending all his lonely life on here... he has no vision and nowhere else to go. Poor kid, I feel sorry for him. I suggest everyone else pay no mind to this thread and let fuxevil rant to himself as he has been doing all alone... 'scuse me.. "all along". He's finally shown how unintelligible he can be and that's all he's done here. End of rant.
[troll hypnotism too strong... can't resist...]
On Jul 25, 2008, at 8:02 PM, vuxivl wrote:
> I've already made up my mind. Max 5 is a no go. Thanks, but, well,
> it's good of Cycling to fix all the stuff in Max that should have
> been dealt with 5 years ago. I mean, they've only had 21 years to
> get it this far.
Can you understand how this sort of snarky, backhanded "compliment"
might get people sort of annoyed with you?
Your first post on this list was a rant that we were supposed to
respect without knowing anything about you? You claim that you've been
using Max for four years, yet you've exhibited some reasonably basic
misconceptions about how things work. If you've really been using Max
for four years you should understand it better by now, shouldn't you?
> But in the process of their extraordinarily late update they've
> created a bloated tortoise of a canvas that's taken all the joy out
> of speedy patching.
Dramatic much?
Presentation mode alone means that patching is much more productive,
for me. With all the various editor improvements in Max 5, I can get
more done faster, even if some aspects got a little slower. Perhaps
you haven't noticed, but not everyone is as obsessed with the speed
issue as you are. Are you a single-issue voter, too?
> As for chaotic and insane people making suggestions.... Ive seen
> plenty of 'em come on the forum and they generally have great
> ideas! What happens _everytime_, though, is this overly righteous
> forum ends up cornering them with their rules and requirements.
> Their "algorithmic gurus" of 10+ years tote superior knowledge and
> understanding of the Max paradigm. The suggestions fall on deaf
> ears. Complaints are brushed under the carpet. It's generally the
> same bag.
Got any examples of this from your couple day history on the list?
> Cycling has a stranglehold on their product and they're keen on
> killing it. Fine.
Killing it for whom? Not for me, and I'd wager not for most people on
the list.
> But, let's not forget that some of the greatest musicians were
> complete A-holes.
Some of the worst musicians are complete "A-holes", too. What's your
point?
> You're all really missing out by embracing a narrow minded, dogmatic
> view of how people should behave in a forum. Or maybe not.
In a forum, as in real life, respect has to be earned. You've earned
nothing, so far.
> If it were my forum I'd throw out all the correctness and the
> respectfulness.
Feel free to start your own forum. Creating a Yahoo group is really
easy. Maybe you could get Zola, _j, or Enola to join.
> It's funny how just about every response has nothing to do with any
> kind of points I brought up. I guess I must have worded them wrong,
> huh?
Bullshit. People started out addressing your points as if they had
merit. Your attitude and communication style are what dragged this
down into the troll-feeding-frenzy it's become.
> Doesn't change the fact that Max 5 is objectively slower than Max 4.
> How much so, that's subjective. But no one seems to want to talk
> about that.
People are willing to talk about it; what else have we been doing?
It's just that all people aren't as rabid about the issue as you are.
Let me repeat this, because you're really not hearing it: NOT EVERYONE
IS AS OBSESSED WITH LITTLE SPEED DETAILS AS YOU ARE. The program runs
fine. Many (most?) people are finding that if they learn what it has
to offer, that they're very productive with it.
I'm sure people inside Cycling, and users, both, would like Max 5 to
be faster. Most people are reasonably confident that it will get
faster, over time.
> And that's what I love, speed! I'm not saying you won't make it a
> reality, but plenty of people have said that speed just isn't a
> priority. I for one, find that deplorable, but, it's your software,
> and it's my money.
I don't know what the Max to-do list looks like and where various
optimization efforts might be prioritized, but to say that "speed just
isn't a priority" is incorrect. It is obviously not as high on the
list as you would like.
> I'm completely 100% happy to put Max away for a year.
Only a year? It may take several years to get it up to your high
standards. Why don't you check back in four or five years to see if
it's ready for you.
> I don't enjoy using it. It's that simple. I don't like version 4
> either. In fact, after using it for many, many years, I'd say that
> I absolutely hated the old Max and, at this point, I acn barely
> stand opening it. I've developed a deep rooted disgust for the
> program after learning probably as much as an end user can learn
> about it without delving to deep into the SDK.
Your degree of learning aside, I would say that given this attitude,
Max was probably never the tool for you.
> c'est la vie.
la vie
-C
Chris Muir
cbm@well.com
http://www.xfade.com
Quote: vuxivil wrote on Sat, 26 July 2008 05:02
----------------------------------------------------
> I've already made up my mind. Max 5 is a no go. Thanks, but, well, it's good of Cycling to fix all the stuff in Max that should have been dealt with 5 years ago. I mean, they've only had 21 years to get it this far.
I'm glad you managed to make up your mind while ranting so constructively, so at least this thread is not a complete waste of bandwidth.
Now please, go back to max 4 or whatever is the tool of your choice and stop waisting the developers time with what you call constructive but what is actually mostly ignorant and sometimes even insulting.
I'm still on max 4 for now. I chose to give 5 some more time to mature, and meanwhile work qith a known and stable platform. It is not about the tool you know, it's about getting things done.
Of course, this only works when you have actual skills and know what you are aiming for. Maybe focus on that for a while instead of on how fast or slow the max window prints?
Or can you provide us with an example while you need smooth max window printing to do your music/art?
Happy trolling!
regards,
kjg
PS: The meters in Cubase are peak meters, not VU meters.
Hey you gusy
Just a reminder you are on teh internet, you don't have to take things_SO_seriously.
Wow. Things get heated fast in here. My granma would've freaked out if she read this, but she's hanging out on the csoundlist at yahoo. This forum is the best resource there is on max, and sometimes I wonder how some of you guys can devote so much time helping others. Some of you are saints, it's also a bit scary to see how this discussion evolved. You should all cool down a bit, i think
This thread is a complete success. Everything I wanted to know about Max's future has been answered.
The canvas...
It was easy to infer months ago that Max 5 was just going to be slow after spending some time with JUCE. I knew speed wasn't a priority then, and, now, I know that speed isn't a priority for the future.
Why would I need a fast Max window? I don't need a fast Max window but it sure would make patching feel a lot nicer. The fact that the Max window is slow is just a reminder that _everything_ is slow. That's all.
I made my point best 2 posts ago...
"I don't want to FIGHT with a canvas. I just wanna drag stuff around and _patch_!"
Here it is again...
"I don't want to FIGHT with a canvas. I just wanna drag stuff around and _patch_!"
And one last time...
"I don't want to FIGHT with a canvas. I just wanna drag stuff around and _patch_!"
It's like dragging around mini ball and chains working in Max these days. Oi Vey!
As for this rant being constructive.. I would say that I successfully constructed a rant. I would also say some people successfully constructed a rant. How is this rant not then constructive? I guess it depends on which definition you go by.
All my hopes and questions have been answered here. Thank you. Instead of sitting around wondering whether or not the most important thing to me (at this point), a super fast canvas, is in the works, I know with relative certainty that Cycling has placed that issue at the bottom of the stack. I'll sleep better on account of this new knowledge.
Quote: Matthew Aidekman wrote on Sat, 26 July 2008 09:12
----------------------------------------------------
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_OS_X_v10.0
----------------------------------------------------
Lol, are you implying I should "get a mac?"
[deep, monk-like chanting] Get a Mac. Get a Mac. Get a Mac. Get a Mac. Get a Mac. Get a Mac. Get a Mac. Get a Mac. Get a Mac. Get a Mac. Get a Mac. Get a Mac. Get a Mac. Get a Mac. Get a Mac. Get a Mac. Get a Mac. Get a Mac. Get a Mac. Get a Mac. Get a Mac. Get a Mac. Get a Mac. Get a Mac.
I was stuck with my friends Macbook for the entire month of May. I never felt so uncool and unhip in all my days. I'd go to coffee bars and people would just stare at me, mouth wide open, a look of shock in their eyes. People would stop in the streets and point at me. I knew it was dangerous going out alone with a Mac. One would be a prime target for backlash for forward thinking hipsters and artists.
At one point a group of rather hip looking kids came up to me while I was trying to enjoy my $5 latte. The leader of the group stepped forward. He was a tall, young, olive skinned man with dark black hair. "Is that a... mac you're using?", he bluntly asked me, barely able to keep a straight face. The whole group burst into hysterical laughter laughter. "He's using a Mac!!!", one girl screamed. Soon the whole place was in a riot of laughter. Ashamed, I retreated home.
I spent the remainder of the month locked inside, curtains drawn. Too ashamed to go outside and let the world know my dirty secret, I worked in solitude until that fateful day my Windows laptop was returned to me.
Life returned to normal. My popularity returned. My Mac days were all but forgotten. Soon I found my blackberry full of telephone numbers, my weekends packed with exciting events, and girls ready to make love to me at the drop of a dime.
Life was great. Thank you Bill Gates and Steve Balmer. You guys really saved me.
So, anyways, in case you were suggesting I get a Mac, I just felt like mentioning that I have somewhat of a fear of them, based on the above.
and finally,
http://www.collegehumor.com/video:1808871
Quote: vuxivil wrote on Sat, 26 July 2008 17:35
----------------------------------------------------
> Quote: Matthew Aidekman wrote on Sat, 26 July 2008 09:12
> ----------------------------------------------------
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_OS_X_v10.0
> ----------------------------------------------------
>
> Lol, are you implying I should "get a mac?"
----------------------------------------------------
Yeah I'm pretty sure the answer is "no" on that one. My guess is Matthew is referring to David Z's assertion that the transition from Max 4 to Max 5 is analogous to Apple's transition from OS 9 to OS X. And as many of the early adopters of OS X know it was not ready for prime time in the beginning. I don't think this is the case with Max 5 but I believe the point is that we are at "the beginning" here, so your fears come off as a little "alarmist" to put it lightly. Actually you just sound like someone with a chip on their shoulder about something. Who knows what.
Complaining about bugs (i.e. software doesn't work the way it is advertised) is one thing, but why complain about design choices? They're going to make it the way they make it. If you don't like the way they make it then don't use it. Make suggestions, give advice, maybe they will take it, maybe not. But to rant about it doesn't do anything but get the old guard (of which I'm not, I'm a noob) all ruffled and pissed off at you.
And if you are afraid of Macs I hope for your sake you never cross my path. I can usually be seen with a bag holding my MBP and my iPhone on my belt and many people tell me I look like a bouncer. You might have a heart attack or go into shock if you saw me. I look like a hitman who uses Apple products to do my killing. Don't worry, I don't drink coffee.
Quote: vuxivil wrote on Sat, 26 July 2008 23:35
----------------------------------------------------
Thank you Bill Gates and Steve Balmer. You guys really saved me.
----------------------------------------------------
oh, that says a lot...
now let's take this thread to the next level, let's have a mac / pc debate? no but seriously, wouldnt that be *like* totally interesting?
can i suggest u read this: https://cycling74.com/twiki/bin/view/FAQs/MaxMSPHistory#Where_did_Max_MSP_come_from
c74 havent been developing this app for 20 yrs or so, and from a pc perspective, u should be grateful that they ported it to windows. if u had used max for longer than 4 yrs, u would know that the majority of older users on the forum will have used max on the mac os, because that's all u could run it on for a number of yrs.
seriously, i've used max for about 8 yrs and i still wouldn't consider myself a max guru. yet, u have used it for 4 yrs and you're having a go at developers telling em what's what!?
vuxivl schrieb:
I didn' do the tests for two reasons:
> TEST#1 compare responsiveness of printing to max window in v4 and v5
In Max 4 already I'd simply avoid too much printing into the Max window
because it is expensive. There are other ways of debugging, especially
in Max 5...
> TEST#2 responsiveness of dragging around large amounts of varied objects
If there is a necessity of dragging around large amounts of varied
objetcs, there might be a way of enhancing the way how you create your
UI's.
This necessity does happen from time to time for me, but it is so rare,
that I just wouldn't bother to complain or even think about it...
If its not rare for you, maybe its time to start thinking about
encapsulation...?
In other words, if something is bothering you, start thinking about what
you alone could do to change the situation. Don't tie yourself to the
techniques you have developed for an old version of your tool, you might
be finally pleased to be forced to change old habits...
(slowly crawling through a huge thread... ;-)
vuxivl schrieb:
> It impacts me when I decide to make one giant patch and want to start
> moving things around. Having to keep my patches under 40 objects to
> keep things moving smoothly means I have to make compromises.
That statement prooves my assumption above: get into encapsulation and
the use of presentation mode, no compromise necessary at all (not even
the tinest bit of compromise... ;-)
vuxivl schrieb:
> I truly am jealous that there are people that can use Max 5 and not
> be bothered by the speed of the GUI. It makes me wonder just what
> exactly, if anything, might be wrong with me.
Another proove of my perspective... ;-)
Stefan
--
Stefan Tiedje------------x-------
--_____-----------|--------------
--(_|_ ----|-----|-----()-------
-- _|_)----|-----()--------------
----------()--------www.ccmix.com
Eric L. schrieb:
What do you mean "I don't want to work for that kind of boss."?
For David the customer is the boss of course, only problem: there are so
many bosses - advantage: he can choose to which boss to listen to... ;-)
Stefan
--
Stefan Tiedje------------x-------
--_____-----------|--------------
--(_|_ ----|-----|-----()-------
-- _|_)----|-----()--------------
----------()--------www.ccmix.com
If you had actually followed and read that link, you might have understood what I was saying. In fact anyone whose even read the promotional material for max5 might have understood. But that's ok.
Few people could have predicted in 2001 that, today, someone like you would feel so threatened by a forum full of mac users. I still cant believe what the hell is going on with apple. only a chzech could put together something more surreal. Few people could have predicted... but they stuck with it.
There are many people on this forum who haven't been delighted with the max 5 transition. I think I can speak for most of them that they are not ditching max to go back to reaktor, photo booth, kidpix, manhole, reason, pd, or solidworks. They let cycling know that the graphics were slow and they were disappointed there was no fix for timing. After the dust settled, we all had a laugh about rounded corners.
it's ok. I understand. we all get pissed off at change sometimes. I embarrassed myself immensely about 4 times in a row asking dumb questions on this forum during my transition. it's ok. just stop. Go back to your other login, and continue to post like a human being. Pointing us to college humor and make another crapintosh joke won't get rid of rounded corners.
one more thing. and actually follow this one if you're going to respond to it.
Quote: Stefan Tiedje wrote on Sun, 27 July 2008 15:20
----------------------------------------------------
> That statement prooves my assumption above: get into encapsulation and
> the use of presentation mode, no compromise necessary at all (not even
> the tinest bit of compromise... ;-)
>
Yes, I have to agree. For me, I've been an encapsulator for a long time now, and it's always very handy for keeping patches tidy (as well as faking a more OO style).
But the presentation mode is actually a whole different ball o' wax. And I think it takes some getting used to... Not because it's complicated, or anything - far from it - but because it means you **don't** have to think about GUI layout while you're writing your patch's logic. No doubt, this is a __huge__ advantage, but when you've spent 10 years patching with the position of GUI objects in mind, it takes a little mental re-programming to break that habit! For now, I have to actually take a moment to remember *not* to go putting GUI elements somewhere close to where I'll ultimately want them, and simply put them where they ought to be, according to the logic of the patch. But once I'm used to it, and I stop making that extra allowance for making the GUI manageable, it will be much faster, for sure.
The one thing I wonder about, in terms of a suggestion, is whether the window's size and location should be part of the presentation? Maybe this is already possible. If so, someone please feel free to enlighten me! ;-)
cheers,
J.
On Jul 27, 2008, at 1:29 PM, jbmaxwell wrote:
> The one thing I wonder about, in terms of a suggestion, is whether
> the window's size and location should be part of the presentation?
> Maybe this is already possible. If so, someone please feel free to
> enlighten me! ;-)
It's not directly possible, but some of the benefits are easily patched:
Chris Muir
cbm@well.com
http://www.xfade.com
Yup, that's pretty sweet!
cheers,
J.
Quote: info.llx@wanadoo.fr wrote on Sun, 27 July 2008 17:09
----------------------------------------------------
> That would be nice. I would also suggest a keyboard shortcut for
> presentation mode. cmd + E has become such a reflex: I use it in other
> applications (with no success...). I'd like to switch from
> presentation mode to 'patcher' mode as easily as from Edit to 'non-
> edit' mode.
> Hope this wouldn't be so difficult to implement...
>
> Best regards,
>
> Eric L.
>
----------------------------------------------------
This is easy to implement by changing the maxinterface.json file. I made cmd + P my Presentation Mode command and even added a command for "Remove From Presentation" (opt + cmd + P).
At 1:49 PM -0700 7/27/08, Chris Muir wrote:
>On Jul 27, 2008, at 1:29 PM, jbmaxwell wrote:
>>The one thing I wonder about, in terms of a suggestion, is whether
>>the window's size and location should be part of the presentation?
>>Maybe this is already possible. If so, someone please feel free to
>>enlighten me! ;-)
>
>
>It's not directly possible, but some of the benefits are easily patched:
It's even easier - put your patcher in presentation mode, size the
window and position it as you like, then do View/Define Initial Fixed
Window Location. Save your patcher. Done.
--
Dan Nigrin
Defective Records
202 Hack / PC-1600 User / VSTi Host / OMS Convert / Jack OS X / Major
Malfunction
http://www.defectiverecords.com
http://www.jackosx.com
hmm... not quite was I was after. My thought about the window size of presentation mode *specifically* being an aspect of the presentation was that the window have two distinct sizes and locations for presentation mode and edit more. The only reason I mentioned it is because I find that if I need to edit a patcher which I *thought* was finished, I generally have to resize the window, once out of presentation mode, in order to see the edit mode's contents. I suppose it's easy enough to just go to edit mode, then zoom the window...
But it was more a question of whether the size of the window should be considered an attribute of the presentation. Personally, I think it makes sense that would.
Even if there was just an option in the Inspector for "Resize window for Presentation" with user-definable dimensions - that could work. The Presentation Mode button would then resize the window when toggling between Presentation and Edit modes.
Does JUCE allow us to hack this in somehow - like it does with key-commands?
J.
Max is better than most of the modular programs I've used. Probably the best. On Windows we have Synthedit which is a pretty cool VST building program, but, it caters to a much more specific demographic. vvvv is also cool but on a 30" monitor it can be a bit of a headache because the text is too small. I personally don't use Reaktor or anything by Native Instruments, so I can't say what that is with too much certainty, but, I do know they have a huge collection of patches.
Not beating a dead horse about the canvas. I've made up my mind. Which is why I have no qualm in changing the topic, heh. Same with JUCE, not interested in talking about it anymore. I understand everything that I need to know about how people feel about the canvas compared to myself and the results are sobering enough. It's disappointing but so what, I don't have to use Max, as people have said.
Max's open-endedness is probably never going to be disputed as one of it's finest points.
Synthedit has a ridiculous collection of vst plugins available on KVR and elsewhere. It's funny how Pluggo is probably better, yet, it only occupies an almost invisible niche on the internet. Kind of saddens me, actually, I would like to see Pluggo be in a dominant spot.
Same goes for Max versus Reaktor. I'd say it was better, but, Max gets pwned by Reaktor in terms of users, I think. Cycling isn't doing bad though (50000 posts for the forum), but, I think it holds a bias, just as Reaktor does, as to where it's most useful, which, unfortunately, is a smaller and less significant demographic than Reaktor's bias. Of course, if you know C, or if you're really really creative with Max, you can probably make it do anything, so long as it's not too big, and, so long as you're not obsessive like me about performance ;-) [whoops, wasn't supposed to talk about that]
Also, for sharing music, this forum lacks behind most forums. Synthedit and Reaktor users share their music quite consistently.
Maybe it says something about Max. You know, outside of musicians, I have yet to meet a person who actually likes algorithmic music. I like it, my synth building friends respect it. Even electronic music, maybe like Subotnick or similar, seems only accessibly to synth people. I'm sure someone is going to reprimand me and tell me they know plenty of people but I'm talking _generally_... I have played plenty of algorithmic/computer/electronic things to non-musicians over the years and the general consensus is one of confusion and not-understanding. That's why that genre of music doesn't really sell compared to whatever else. Sure, you got Aphex and Autechre and Leaf Cutter John or Jamie Lidell or that Radiohead guy, but, so what? You don't have Gwen Steffani's producer talking about how great Max is...
My personal musical heroes are all rock bands, these days. In the past it was composers of old and computer music dudes. That was a natural evolution for me, and I don't think everyone is going to shift dramatically like I did.
Lately I've been thinking about Max and pop music. Make on the radio. Hearing the influence of Max in huge concerts.
When I said "Cycling has a stranglehold on Max and are keen on killing it...", I meant that they had a bias towards a commercially unsuccessful way of making music. That bias is interactive/algorithmic music. This is seen in some of Miller's words, the Cycling music label, the Pluggo distribution, the lack of deterministic objects or musical primitives in Max. I'm sure a lot of people _HERE_ view that as a plus. But you being here comes at the price of the people who aren't here because of that bias. The fact that Max knows very little about music gives way to people creating their own ideas about music, and, that's cool. I dig that. But, it also leads to what one of Ableton's creator said about Max. Something along the lines of "Music today, or Music tomorrow?", meaning, do I work on something in Max that'll help me make music tomorrow. The forum is geared around "Music tomorrow".
Jamoma might rectify this. Jamoma maybe will give the userbase something like what Reaktor has, i.e., a "User Library" where everything is really interchangeable and immediately usable in larger contexts. I haven't tried Jamoma for like 2 years. I remember the JSUI in it really affecting the performance. I hope all that gets ported to C because I really can't stand JSUI... I will always think that Javascript is an evil thing. I can think of 2 JITs, one with a huge library, one with none, that are all about 10 times faster than Javascript right now.
Max has that "academic" air which _possibly_ turns off some musicians. Anyone that's been through school might have a hard time believing that a lot of musicians place zero value on a musical education. I believe it's true, that, based on _my_ experiences living in some of America's largest cities, the majority of musicians aren't interested in, [a] musical theory, [b] musical history. I think that Max's bias affects people on a psychological level. I'd branch out and say most musicians these days have dreams of grandeur, and, Max being so off the beaten track in terms of it's fundamental musical philosophy _implications_ turns people away from it. Hence, Cycling makes it look like Apple, a good step, I think, honestly. I don't like the look but, who cares? .... I find Max 5 to be infinitely more readable which to me is WAY more important.
IMNSHO, I would like to see a record released on the Cycling label which was purely a rock and roll album that utilized Max extensively. I think all this interactive stuff is really the wrong way to market Max.
_About Mac:
Other than Metasynth (PPC) and Logic (PPC/Intel), I can't think of a reason to move to OSX. I for one, think, that, if you compare vanilla OSX & vanilla XP, that, you'll find OSX offers a much better package of software. However, I find XP to be much more responsive than OSX, and I truly prefer explorer to OSX's file browser. I also have a suite of applications on Windows that make my life much easier.
I'm not threatened by OSX. I'm just not intimidated by Microsoft. I don't view their power as an evil thing. Their massiveness doesn't skew my ability to make personal decisions about which platform I find to be more productive. They're not a big evil corporation, but a success story of epic proportions and I think they're great.
I am also not skewed by Apple's extraneous things such as environmental friendliness, fashion, external design aesthetics, and their ability to create successful and catchy marketing campaigns. Those sort of things don't really matter to me.
Quote: jbm wrote on Sun, 27 July 2008 16:33
----------------------------------------------------
> hmm... not quite was I was after. My thought about the window size of presentation mode *specifically* being an aspect of the presentation was that the window have two distinct sizes and locations for presentation mode and edit more. The only reason I mentioned it is because I find that if I need to edit a patcher which I *thought* was finished, I generally have to resize the window, once out of presentation mode, in order to see the edit mode's contents. I suppose it's easy enough to just go to edit mode, then zoom the window...
>
> But it was more a question of whether the size of the window should be considered an attribute of the presentation. Personally, I think it makes sense that would.
> Even if there was just an option in the Inspector for "Resize window for Presentation" with user-definable dimensions - that could work. The Presentation Mode button would then resize the window when toggling between Presentation and Edit modes.
> Does JUCE allow us to hack this in somehow - like it does with key-commands?
>
> J.
----------------------------------------------------
Quote: robtherich wrote on Mon, 28 July 2008 05:02
----------------------------------------------------
cheers, Rob.
But really, it's not a question of patching together a mechanism - that I can do. I was just curious about having window resizing as a built-in function of the Presentation mode - a default behaviour of Max itself. No big deal.
J.
vuxivl schrieb:
> Also, for sharing music, this forum lacks behind most forums.
> Synthedit and Reaktor users share their music quite consistently.
This is something I miss as well, but its maybe also partially the
nature of the beast. Whenever I see/hear recordings of my own music,
there is something essential missing, because my music is so much about
improvisation, being on the spot and in the place, performing/reacting
to little events and including a bigger context, which is not
perceivable in a recording. If you haven't seen it live, its hard to
hear what's it about. I think that Reaktor musicians are much more
following the studio paradigm than the live performance paradigm. Its
like the difference between theatre and film. Watching theatre videos is
pretty boring, being in a theatre performance can be really exciting...
> Maybe it says something about Max. You know, outside of musicians, I
> have yet to meet a person who actually likes algorithmic music. I
> like it, my synth building friends respect it. Even electronic
> music, maybe like Subotnick or similar, seems only accessibly to
> synth people.
I think outside musicians, the audience doesn't think much about the way
the music is made. They like it or they don't. In the contrary, certain
technical aspects might more likely close them than open them to the
music. I am sure you will find people who like algorithmic music without
knowing that its algorithmic... The labelling of music is for most
listeners just a way to organise their own path to find music they like.
They usually miss the best music... ;-)
> I have played plenty of algorithmic/computer/electronic things to
> non-musicians over the years and the general consensus is one of
> confusion and not-understanding.
It needs a damn good DJ to lead an audience used to techno music to like
Morton Subotnik, but I think its possible... ;-)
> That's why that genre of music doesn't really sell compared to
> whatever else. Sure, you got Aphex and Autechre and Leaf Cutter John
> or Jamie Lidell or that Radiohead guy, but, so what? You don't have
> Gwen Steffani's producer talking about how great Max is...
If a product sells doesn't tell much about quality nowadays, it tells
much more about the skills of promoters.
For me the immediate reaction of an audience to a performance is my
measure for positive/negative feedback.
> Lately I've been thinking about Max and pop music. Make on the
> radio. Hearing the influence of Max in huge concerts.
The big guys rarely talk about their tools, unless they have endorsement
contracts, and if they have their opinion isn't worth anything...
> The forum is geared around "Music tomorrow".
Yes, innovation is never pop, its a contradiction. But you can influence
the pop world with innovations. The difference is the aim. Max is for
professionals in creation. If you are after big pop successes, your
going for money, not for music, music is then nothing else than
something to sell. It will fill your pockets, but not your heart...
But don't get me wrong, there is great music in the pop world, but it
will be only great if the aim is music and not financial success...
The aim is the difference, I have no choice, I have to make the music I
love, if its not for a big audience, I can't change it, it is like it
is... It just has to make sense...
> Hence, Cycling makes it look like Apple, a good step, I think,
> honestly. I don't like the look but, who cares? .... I find Max 5 to
> be infinitely more readable which to me is WAY more important.
Isn't Apple one of the biggest computer companies in the world? They
must be doing something right...
> IMNSHO, I would like to see a record released on the Cycling label
> which was purely a rock and roll album that utilized Max extensively.
> I think all this interactive stuff is really the wrong way to market
> Max.
??? does this make sense ? its like telling a carpenter to better go
into real estate business, because he would make more money. But it
wouldn't be true. (The competitors are better in that field, but not in
the field of carpeting...)
That "interactive stuff" might be a niche compared to building guitars,
but there is a need for that niche, it would be wrong to leave that
niche to less skilled people...
And to market it as a rock'n'roll tool wouldn't work either, it would
create unsatisfied customers, 'cause you can't strum Max...;-)
If someone in the rock'n'roll world would pull out great music with a
big prise of Max in it, fine, go ahead, I am sure the cycling label
would be interested...
> I find XP to be much more responsive than OSX, and I truly prefer
> explorer to OSX's file browser.
This is a valid statement, but only in the context of your personal
experience. For me each time I need to do a simple search for a file in
Windows, I am about to throw the computer out of the window... This
alone prevented me to ever consider Windows as a serious OS... But that
is my personal view, and I am sure, there are convenient ways to deal
with whatever you need to deal with, its your personal choice...
Everybody tends to stick to what she knows, its a simple question of
efficiency. To bother to learn something new, if the known works for
you, isn't worth it. Same for other tools like sequencers, DAWs, mail
clients, browsers etc... Nobody can objectively judge, unless your into
both worlds with the same experience and depth... (I am not and never
will be... ;-)
Stefan
--
Stefan Tiedje------------x-------
--_____-----------|--------------
--(_|_ ----|-----|-----()-------
-- _|_)----|-----()--------------
----------()--------www.ccmix.com
Stefen, that was a great reply. Thank you.
I would expand upon what you said about an audience liking it or not liking it into 4 sub-categories.
[1] An audience likes it and they've heard things like it
[2] An audience doesn't like it and they've heard things like it
[3] An audience likes it and they've never heard anything like it
[4] An audience doesn't like it and they've never heard anything like it
A I used custom pluggos on every song on this ablum.
sonicbids.com/thewaysideband
B johnny farking greenwood is a max addict
C you still have no clue what I'm talking about in regards to macs. It's already been told outright to you but I'll reiterate.
It has nothing to do with macs, it's a mataphor the owner of Cycling 74 made between the first release of OSX and Max5.
**ITS A METAPHOR**
hey Matt,
[a] Yeah, but, did you write the whole song in Max?
[b] Same as above, it's just Johnny and Radiohead probably doesn't use Max extensively as a means to an end
[c] So I should get a mac?
Eric L. schrieb:
> That would be nice. I would also suggest a keyboard shortcut for
> presentation mode. cmd + E has become such a reflex: I use it in other
> applications (with no success...). I'd like to switch from presentation
> mode to 'patcher' mode as easily as from Edit to 'non-edit' mode.
> Hope this wouldn't be so difficult to implement...
I agree, maybe just as a settable preference, "locking/unlocking with
the short cut switches between presentation/patching mode"...
(I wouldn't create an additional short cut, you either want it that way,
or you want it the old way...)
Stefan
--
Stefan Tiedje------------x-------
--_____-----------|--------------
--(_|_ ----|-----|-----()-------
-- _|_)----|-----()--------------
----------()--------www.ccmix.com
Quote: vuxivil wrote on Mon, 28 July 2008 22:38
----------------------------------------------------
> [c] So I should get a mac?
----------------------------------------------------
Yes. That would be a good place to start.
But more importantly:
Try to get a clue, a life, and a girlfriend.
Then please post back.
Let us know if you feel any better :)
On 28 Jul 2008, at 22:22, Stefan Tiedje wrote:
> I agree, maybe just as a settable preference, "locking/unlocking
> with the short cut switches between presentation/patching mode"...
Maybe I'm missing something here, but what's wrong with just running
two views at the same time - one in each mode?
-- 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
Quote: vuxivil wrote on Mon, 28 July 2008 14:38
----------------------------------------------------
> hey Matt,
>
> [a] Yeah, but, did you write the whole song in Max?
Why would that matter? With regards to anything?
> [b] Same as above, it's just Johnny and Radiohead probably doesn't use Max extensively as a means to an end
They use it as a means to make bloody good music. I'd say that constitutes a mighty fine means to and end.
> [c] So I should get a mac?
Sure, why not. It runs both OS X and Windows.
But most of all I think you should get a bit more focused. Right now you are trolling this thread to such a degree I suspect your father might be Use and your mother Net, and it's not really doing anyone any good.
Quote: nick rothwell / cassiel wrote on Tue, 29 July 2008 11:13
----------------------------------------------------
>
> On 28 Jul 2008, at 22:22, Stefan Tiedje wrote:
>
> > I agree, maybe just as a settable preference, "locking/unlocking
> > with the short cut switches between presentation/patching mode"...
>
> Maybe I'm missing something here, but what's wrong with just running
> two views at the same time - one in each mode?
>
> -- N.
>
What's wrong with it!!!??? What's *wrong* with it????
Well, it's too simple, of course! ;-)
I'd forgotten that was even possible in v 5... gulp.
It is a good solution, actually. But it is also slightly counterintuitive, imho - editing in one window and testing in another. And I'd still stick to my argument that, conceptually, the window size probably ought to be part of the presentation.
Thanks for pointing that out, though.
J.
"pascal.baes writes:
"ABA is not Bethoven. That is normal, because You are normal, conventional people, like 99 p100 of people. But don't sait you make experimental then please."
I respond:
Here, you have basically defined conventions people must follow in order to be considered experimental. P-leeease.... Don't talk to me about revolution. Marquis De Sade was a sissy compared to Le Comte De Lautreamont. Besides, (oh ya! I'm about to go there!), after being called a raghead, towelhead, sandn--g-r, etc. all my life, I can tell you, white skin is a privilege so ANYONE of European decent is aristocratic in my opinion(how's that for "constructive" and avoiding generalization?). It doesn't mean they are all "conventional", but they definitely have conventions for everything including experimentalism.
Also, Beethoven was crap and the world of music or otherwise would have gone on the same without him just as it would have gone on the same without Mozart, Bach, ABA, the U.S., England, Germany, Spain, OR France, OR India OR me OR you.
My parents are from India(partitioned away from Islamic people upon independence from the British), I was born in the U.S.(India is a heartless capitalistic country now just like the US), but I always route for the underdog, so I must also add, the Muslim countries of the Middle East such as Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, and(though new to the game) even Pakistan are all equally responsible for the digital technology we have today. They invented the number 0 which eradicated the uselessness of the Roman numeral system Europe was so chained to long ago. In addition, as Donald Knuth so aptly stated in the first chapter of his TAOCP series(acclaimed as one of the twelve most important scientific works of the 20th century) even the word, "Algorithm" comes from Abu 'Abd Allah Mohammed ibn Musa al-Khwarizmi who wrote one of the first studies of linear and quadratic equations after which, the word "Algebra" was also named:
You forget that even your "experimentalism" comes from foundations built by bruised and battered peoples you long to forget but never can because they have built your mediums of exploration for you and, therefore, have defined your methods of remembering and perceiving(for even your digital memory is based on them).
Of course, I am just as ignorant as you(perhaps I am more so), but we are both part of the same human virus that will tear this world apart over pride, ego, arrogance, and ignorance-induced-self-absorption.
So you need not speak to anyone about what they can or can't describe their music as. Everyone's views are relative: relative to a world of ignorance as though we were orbitting around a cold, indifferent sun.
P.S. I post this in good humor over all of us getting worked up over nothing.(Congrats to vuxivil, btw, for playing our emotions so well, it's a sign that we are all posting to an extremely free and unconventional internet-forum. I think that's proof that Cycling'74 does everything with the right attitude.)"
Vive L'Difference!
livixuv? vuxivil? All junior members?
This is starting to smell like Netochka Nezvanova all over again.
And where is that banhammer Gizmodo uses? ;)
So sorry, I like what Rabidja wrote so I repost it... eh, but now I see how stupid, writing "vive l'difference" at the end as I did, but I offer nothing different.
(adn I start this account just to flame vuxivil flaming... hopefully, they will ban both of us)
I like turtles.
I can has flame jar?
If the authors of each flame and troll on this thread had to drop 25 cents in a Paypal jar we could be well on our way to buying a heifer for a family in the developing world by now. OMGBBQ.
Rounded corners killed my dog.
On Jul 29, 2008, at 4:16 PM, Dan Winckler wrote:
> I can has flame jar?
>
> If the authors of each flame and troll on this thread had to drop 25
> cents in a Paypal jar we could be well on our way to buying a heifer
> for a family in the developing world by now. OMGBBQ.
Troll == Nazi?
Calling someone a troll almost sounds like Nazi analogies to me. It also sounds like you pitch forkers don't even know a troll is.
A troll looks to create cause and effect. That is all. He cares not about the topic, but the _consequences_ and chaos of playing that topic on people.
I for one, cared about this topic.
I did not want polite responses. I wanted people to state their stance on the topic with their very core, anger and all.
I for one do not believe that the reason why people don't find Max's super slow GUI a problem is something personal with me or my words. If I thought that way I wouldn't have posted to begin with.
Whether you find that way of obtaining "truth" skewed is up to you, but for me it's a clear indication to not hold my breath about Max 5's mentally challenged canvas/developers.
As for Nazi analogies, if you've lived in America, you hear them all the time. They've been on the rise since 2001 and probably will only get worse. You "trollophobes" are just as lazy as politicians that spout Nazi analogies...
Trollophobes are no better than the Bush Administration. Like them, they lack the facilities to express the problems they have and resort to basic fear language to stifle opposition.
Check please!
WTF?
Quote: vade
> I like turtles.
Thats nice that you like turtles but I like pie.
/ps I apologize for posting anything other than this.
this is actually a perfect oppritunity to let everyone know that they should listen to the chorus of "around corners" on this site
it's all about round corners.
Klaas-Jan Govaart schrieb:
> Quote: vuxivil wrote on Mon, 28 July 2008 22:38
> ----------------------------------------------------
>> [c] So I should get a mac?
> ----------------------------------------------------
>
> Yes. That would be a good place to start.
I'd say no, everybody has to miss something to be complete...
> But more importantly:
> Try to get a clue, a life, and a girlfriend.
But better don't miss these...
--
Stefan Tiedje------------x-------
--_____-----------|--------------
--(_|_ ----|-----|-----()-------
-- _|_)----|-----()--------------
----------()--------www.ccmix.com
a pox on concern trolls/sock puppets.
Quote: Stefan Tiedje wrote on Tue, 29 July 2008 23:48
----------------------------------------------------
> >> [c] So I should get a mac?
> > ----------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Yes. That would be a good place to start.
>
> I'd say no, everybody has to miss something to be complete...
>
> > But more importantly:
> > Try to get a clue, a life, and a girlfriend.
>
> But better don't miss these...
>
I figured at least one of these three will probably always be missing.. So might as well at least have the mac.
How about turtle pie?
Some time ago I ended up in a kind of a reptilian zoo(snakes, geckos
and friends). There was one strange and funny big nosed turtle.
My girlfriend took a picture with her phone and since it was quite
darkish, and thanks to nightshot thingie, on the picture emerged some
near-ir reflective marks:
White spot on her head are not her eyes, and other very bright marks
are not in visible spectra.
So I recommend this turtle for easy video tracking in fish tank type
of installations.
>
> I like turtles.
Nick Rothwell schrieb:
> Maybe I'm missing something here, but what's wrong with just running two
> views at the same time - one in each mode?
Nothing at all, we just have to get used to the new features and use
more than one view.
Though on a small screen you'd still have to click to bring your view to
the front...
Stefan
--
Stefan Tiedje------------x-------
--_____-----------|--------------
--(_|_ ----|-----|-----()-------
-- _|_)----|-----()--------------
----------()--------www.ccmix.com
Matthew Aidekman schrieb:
> Thats nice that you like turtles but I like pie.
And I am member of the TDC (Troll Defense Club). I am happy they are not
distinct... I miss Miss m!ndf*ck, it was so entertaining
Stefan
--
Stefan Tiedje------------x-------
--_____-----------|--------------
--(_|_ ----|-----|-----()-------
-- _|_)----|-----()--------------
----------()--------www.ccmix.com
"Whether you find that way of obtaining "truth" skewed is up to you, but for me it's a clear indication to not hold my breath about Max 5's mentally challenged canvas/developers."
Look "vuxivil", that's enough. I've been more than polite and helpful up to this point, but give it a rest. Dishing out insults behind an anonymous handle is easy. If you're unhappy with Max, please don't use it. Being nasty for the sake of being provocative is super-cute and cuddly and all, but it's unacceptable and certainly against the forum guidelines re: disruptive behavior, and is definitely, at this point, trolling.
Jeremy
In case you missed it, check out the "Define Fixed Initial Window Position" item on the View menu. Use it in conjunction with "Open in Presentation" (in patcher inspector).
Size the Presentation how you like it, and then choose the above mentioned "Define Fixed Initial Window Position" command. The next time you open the patcher that will be the size.
Then, if you switch to patching mode, and change the window size, you can easily bounce back to the original window size and position with the "Initial Window Location" command on the view menu.
Rob
Like a moth to flame...
I have always been concerned about Max/MSP speed and have large time critical patches which I cannot afford to make run at audio rate.
I stayed with Max 3.x when 4.0 came out because 4.0 (cross platform) was like 13 times slower in running my patch. After a while (about 4.1 if I recall) it was faster but still on OS 9.
I stayed on OS9 until 4.6 came out on OSX because the previous versions were slower. 4.6 ran about 4 x faster on OSX (yes using current machines) so it was only early last year I moved to OSX (believe it or not).
Sticking with 4.6 for a while. But I have never seen in my 19 years of writing Max patches the next major version release at some point run faster than the last.
I have no doubt history will repeat itself (again and again) and we can applaud the C74 crew and all who help bring it forward. There is really nothing else like Max and the dedication so many have in using and advancing it.
Keith
Keith McMillen
BEAM Foundation
http://www.beamfoundation.org/
510.502.5310