Sarah Angliss

Has anyone written down any thoughts on the practical longevity of a piece that uses Max? Also, on how controls of a partly Max-based piece might be notated on a musical score?

For the last few years, I've been happily performing live, using my own Max patches as part of the sound - a setup that doesn't require me to explain the operation of patches to anyone else. And when things need updating (e.g. because an external has become obsolete) I can scratch around and find my own workaround. However I'm now at the early stages of a new project where I'm composing a traditionally notated score for acoustic instruments and vocalists (a chamber opera), one where acoustic sounds from these performers will be augmented in realtime using Max. It's not something I want to fully automate - Max-based effects will be changed dynamically in response to the live tempo of the performers and so on. The final score needs to include lines, squiggles, ramps whatever I need to instruct performers how to use it, without me always being there. I could make up my own notation scheme or look at, say, well-known composers' schemes from the late 20th-century, but I'm wondering if someone has been developing a scheme already, something particular to Max.

Also, I've been asked by commissioners about the longevity of Max - i.e. how likely it is that, say, someone five years down the line could open up the patches I'm making, run them on a laptop and work out what to do with them. This is a big deal as the people I'm working with are taking a leap of faith moving from purely acoustic sounds to Max-augmented music. The musicians I'm working with are still able to play score that were notated 400 years ago (albeit with some mysteries over interpretation) so Max has a lot to live up to! I could supply Max plus a system diagram - in case Max becomes obsolete down the line - but is that going too far? I have a feeling Ableton is the biggest bugbear here as so much of it is happening under the hood, with no way to work out what makes it tick. Yet, I know Ableton and M4L is really performance-friendly. Anyway, it's an interesting one to ponder, if anyone is optimistic about their music getting played in the future. I realised my oldest public patch isn't that old, it's from 2005 - it's in a butterfly house somewhere. I think it's still working!

I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on this.

Also, I've been asked by commissioners about the longevity of Max - i.e. how likely it is that, say, someone five years down the line could open up the patches I'm making, run them on a laptop and work out what to do with them. This is a big deal as the people I'm working with are taking a leap of faith moving from purely acoustic sounds to Max-augmented music. The musicians I'm working with are still able to play score that were notated 400 years ago (albeit with some mysteries over interpretation) so Max has a lot to live up to!  I could supply Max plus a system diagram - in case Max becomes obsolete down the line - but is that going too far? I have a feeling Ableton is the biggest bugbear here as so much of it is happening under the hood, with no way to work out what makes it tick.  Yet, I know Ableton and M4L is really performance-friendly. Anyway, it's an interesting one to ponder, if anyone is optimistic about their music getting played in the future. I realised my oldest public patch isn't that old, it's from 2005 - it's in a butterfly house somewhere. I think it's still working!

longevity-of-max-patches-and-notation-of-controls

There is probably no simple answer or definite thought about this topic.

And longevity of technology and materials, engines, software ...

In quite few occasions I have helped musicians to restore max standalones from the past,

in order to be able to perform a piece of music,

some even dated from 1990, because the composers were not able to do that themself,

or were not able to do any programming at all.

That was just about possible, extracting patches, resources etc from old application,

translating that to new max versions etc.

Once it turned out that all it was about was few automated volume controls,

generated using whatever spaceshuttle random cosmic chaos theory algorhytm...

In this early days of computer music there was a lot of enthusiasm towards this kind of stuff.

But If one makes a good documentation about what a patch does,

then it should be possible to recreate it in the future, using Max

On the other hand, if Max is used as "composing aid" becoming DJ and spitting

random music out, then one should be worried about that...

There is probably no simple answer or definite thought about this topic.
And longevity of technology and materials, engines, software ...
It is moving forward really fast.
In quite few occasions I have helped musicians to restore max standalones from the past,
in order to be able to perform a piece of music,
some even dated from 1990, because the composers were not able to do that themself,
or were not able to do any programming at all.
That was just about possible, extracting patches, resources etc from old application,
translating that to new max versions etc.
Once it turned out that all it was about was few automated volume controls,
generated using whatever spaceshuttle random cosmic chaos theory algorhytm...
In practise going few db up and down.
In this early days of computer music there was a lot of enthusiasm towards this kind of stuff.
But If one makes a good documentation about what a patch does,
then it should be possible to recreate it in the future, using Max
or whatever kind of software.
On the other hand, if Max is used as "composing aid" becoming DJ and spitting
random music out, then one should be worried about that...


One approach to longevity and portability that seems little discussed also is usefully considered with respect to giving your work to other musicians: DOCUMENT AND COMMENT THE HECK OUT OF EVERYTHING. Corollary: when the first (or first acceptable) performance is over and the applause dies, put on your serious composer mask and ask the performer what you could have done to make the piece more performable, and listen to what they have to say.

This sounds stupid simple (apart from swallowing one's pride when critiqued about crappy user interface design or something like that), but it's amazing to discover out in the real world that there are people who just don't do that.

As a colleague of mine says, commenting your patch is a way to write love notes to yourself in the future - it may mean writing love notes to the kind soul who tries to update your work, too.

That interview with your "player as user" is one of the simplest and most straightforward ways to make sure that you won't spend your life as a composer whose pieces are played by N instrumentalists only once, with that N being a rotating list. :-)

For additional defense against hit points (and, occasionally, a free roll of the 20-sided die), building an interface that works well for serious rehearsal time [return/rerun pesky measure X, panic button, etc] in addition to the performance itself goes *such* a long way toward garnering goodwill and accruing virtue that it's amazing.

95% of the max patches made 20 years ago with version 2 work perfectly in max 7.3.

and where it does not work, one can use up to windows 10 or OSX 10.8.9 to run the patch in a max v4 runtime.

i think (and hope) that the future will look similar.

but of course, if your patch contains 165 [random] objects the notation of the score will require you to reinvent the wheel, and that all by yourself.

95% of the max patches made 20 years ago with version 2 work perfectly in max 7.3. 

btw, there are millions of traditionally noted scores around, but if you cant read notes... or if you cant afford to hire an orchestra... IMHO computer tech still leads when it comes to memorizing and preserving stuff...

Longevity of Max patches and notation of controls