I will attempt to precise the architecture I'm thinking of to ensure we'll really be talking about the same thing.

Layer 1.

The music production environment GUI. Featuring the usual stuff: multi-track classical/midi partition editor, instruments bank, pre/post processing effects chaining, etc. Most importantly, controls should be displayed and respond in a uniform way, there also should be a high level script-language/gui application for designing the interface of new instruments/effects/etc.

Layer 2 (i.e.: Pure Data)

A Self like programming language, highest level as possible, for quickly designing and prototyping new instruments/effects, to be incorporated into level 1.

Layer 3.

An application framework for extending the capabilities of layer 1 and 2.

Now what I find appealing in this model, is that every significant level of the music creation process would be sufficiently organized to be tempered with while remaining on the level one is addressing (i.e.: Although the possibility remains, a musician interested only in composing melodies and stuff, won't have to cope with the low-end technical details of the instruments he's using; the instrument designer won't have to care about the underlying programming framework, etc, etc.)

Now to address some of you comments:

"it's difficult to integrate PD into other music production environments"

• I don't see the need to integrate PD in other music production environment, as to me, PD shouldn't be a mere plugin but the foundation of a music production env.

"to make complete works in pd alone requires fairly significant knowledge and effort."

• As stated above, PD shouldn't be the place for making a complete musical work, but rather for designing one's instruments.

"pd's gui is incredibly primitive" and
" i would love to build a basic multitrack DAW in pd, but the gui would be maxed out way too quickly."

True, and this is why the layer 1 is really needed.

Now, I certainly don't consider the instrument engineering part of music as to be a waste of time; although it would be a waste of time if those instruments couldn't be used by anyone except their makers - and the same goes for any program. I know these suggestions I'm rambling about are probably not new nor would they probably cause any revolution in linux audio, I only hope it could stand as a direction the ones interested in developing PD a little further might seriously consider.

Cheers to Moog and Scott.

Hi guys

Thanks again for you help in other parts of the forum, i now have GEM working perfectly

I just thought I'd see if any of you would like to be involved in some of the projects I am trying to get up and running.

Firstly, for those who play and instrument and read music, I have a score made up of short musical fragments, that i would like people at home to record and send in to me, after which I'll layer and loop them up to create the finished result:

http://www.23fragments.tk/

There is also another one, which doesn't require you to read music...it's a text score which gives you instructions on the rough shape of the sound I would like you to create - and again the parts that get sent ot me will get layered up into an "orchestra".

http://www.theascent.tk/

Hope some of you feel like getting involved - and thanks for your time!

Dave

i ran into this video i little while ago while browsing youtube for pd stuff. i'd love to see the patch if you could send it to me. bbakersmith@gmail.com.

in regards to [alpha], it allows pd to recognize and take into account the alpha layer of objects. for example, if you have a .tiff image with an embedded alpha layer then when you load it the particles that are supposed to be transparent will appear transparent. if the [alpha] object isn't in the render chain then pd will ignore the alpha layer of all objects or images.

thus, if you want to use any other alpha related pd objects you need throw [alpha] into the chain in order to see their effects.

(that's my understanding, correct me if i'm wrong people)

Hi people, I'd like to learn how to layer canvases (So I can make coloured backgrounds with objects on top) and also how to put UI objects into boxes which on the first layer don't appear to be hooked up to anything... So I can make a nice and tidy interface.

Here's a very simple patch that we can make one to.

I created it to help me with my trumpet playing. I practice reproducing what I hear (from pd) as accurately as possible on the mouthpiece thus improving pitching and tonality.

Anyway, I'd like the time till next note, number of notes played, volume, and on/off switch to look lovely, while the grub runs in the background.

http://www.pdpatchrepo.info/hurleur/mouthpiece_intontation.pd

So I am new to PD and am taking a class. I currently have an assignment due in a few days and I am trying to finish it. I have to design a patch with multiple subpatches that will do to things.

Layer 2 On this layer the sound will play at a normal speed/pitch and it will play every 10 seconds. Gradually, the periodicity of the repetition will start increasing and it will take 2 minutes to end up playing every 5 seconds. After that minute the processes will start again, over and over. In other words, there will be an accelerando in the repetition of the unmodified sound. 2 points Layer 3 On this layer the sound will play over and over but the speed/pitch will change randomly so sometimes the sound will play faster (up to a tenth of a second) and sometimes the sound will play slower (up to 10 seconds). When the file plays faster it will naturally play at a higher pitch, and when it plays slower it will play at a lower pitch. On each repetition the sound should play sometimes forward and sometimes backwards.

Any suggestions on how to do this would be I would like to recieve because I am really confused

Is it possible to change the layer or order a canvas appears in the PD environment?
In graphic software this might be referred to as 'send to back', 'send to front' etc, or the idea of layers.

I want to use different coloured canvases to section off different areas of the patch that do different things, so its easier to see.

I've written most of the patch already, but if I create a new canvas, it appears infront of objects and behind connectors, which is very strange.

I can only get objects to appear ontop of the canvas if I insert them after the canvas has been drawn. This, of course, would mean I would have to re-insert ALL the objects, and theres lots.

I have considered separating different parts of the patch into subpatches, but a) I have a large screen and like to see the big picture and I will be exhibiting the patch in operation so it would be nice for poeple to see the whole thing. Indeed, I have used subpatches for small elements of the overall patch, but not just to organise how it looks.

Apologies if this has been asked before, I searched and couldnt find anything.

HI,

I hv a couple layers of gem objects, how do i change the 2nd layer to front?

http://www.pdpatchrepo.info/hurleur/gem.pd

First of all, let me real "thank you" for all your words! I appreciate.

@obiwannabe said:

> What protocol should be used to communicate with PC??
> MIDI isn't slow?

MIDI is not just a protocol, it is an entire communication system from the physical layer right up to the data layer including baud rate and connector specs. MIDI as a protocol could be run much faster over USB2 or ethernet, but a sensible modern extension to MIDI would encapsulate it inside OSC or something like that and send it over a session aware layer. MIDI has had 20 years and now it's probably best to just bypass it and go straight for OSC over ethernet. That would also bypass all those "driver" issues for Windows users too.

Okok, I understand. I will look at OSC

However, I am looking for a cheap and simple way to communicate with Pure Data, without the need to write any special driver for Pure Data and OS.

@obiwannabe said:

> I plain to use Linux!!

An excellent choice if I may say so sir! Perhaps it's time to look at Linux SBCs with built in network and USB. You can get tiny ones that are no bigger than a matchbox and single chip FPGAs that you can write your software into. Check out http://linuxdevices.com/

Eheh - I plain to use Linux on PC, with Pure Data, so the communications protocol should at least work very well on Linux.

About hardware, I am already using a microcontroler(not an FPGA, I have no knowledge for that but I would like) with C programing but with a RTOS, Real Time Operation System, in this case, the FreeRTOS, with a license alike GPL

I must say that for now, this microcontroler with C and with FreeRTOS is more than enough

@obiwannabe said:

> I am having problems in getting an turntable to electrify with this
> electronics hardware

You will not drive a turntable motor from USB. The current demands will kill the source. You need an external PSU. 12v at about 1 amp is probably plenty.

No, I didn't explained myself well

The problem is to get a cheap turn table!! For cheap and simple project, It will not have any motor... Its more just a circle that we can turn right or left, more quick or not...

@obiwannabe said:

> Should this project be commercial?? I would pay to someone that made for myself
> the turntable in wood, plastic or metal. Where can I find such shop?

In your garage. ...demonstrates ingenuity in using the optical sensor, but you need to very clearly define the exact function and software it is designed to work with and why.
... Choose the biggest group like Reaktor users and build it for them.

I want to build especially this project for Pure Data, because Pure Data is Free Software and I think is great, fair and the way I think.

I would like that this project grow with Pure Data community help, for Pure Data people, so, I would like that It be simple and cheap.

The optical sensor was chosen because is really cheap, easy find on local shops and have good detection of movement.

I just talked about commercial project, because It would be simple, more accessible to Pure Data community If anyone could buy already assembled or at least the parts to assembly.

What I have difficult now is to get an kind of turntable in wood, just a simple base in wood with a circle that turns left and right...

Thank you for your wisdow

> What protocol should be used to communicate with PC??
> MIDI isn't slow?

MIDI is not just a protocol, it is an entire communication system from the physical layer right up to the data layer including baud rate and connector specs. MIDI as a protocol could be run much faster over USB2 or ethernet, but a sensible modern extension to MIDI would encapsulate it inside OSC or something like that and send it over a session aware layer. MIDI has had 20 years and now it's probably best to just bypass it and go straight for OSC over ethernet. That would also bypass all those "driver" issues for Windows users too.

> I plain to use Linux!!

An excellent choice if I may say so sir! Perhaps it's time to look at Linux SBCs with built in network and USB. You can get tiny ones that are no bigger than a matchbox and single chip FPGAs that you can write your software into. Check out http://linuxdevices.com/

> I am having problems in getting an turntable to electrify with this
> electronics hardware

You will not drive a turntable motor from USB. The current demands will kill the source. You need an external PSU. 12v at about 1 amp is probably plenty.

> Should this project be commercial?? I would pay to someone that made for myself
> the turntable in wood, plastic or metal. Where can I find such shop?

In your garage. There's no reason not to start a small commercial enterprise making these things but you need to do a bit of defining exactly what the function is, who will buy it and in what parts of the world. My honest advice at this stage is that you don't yet have a saleable product. Needs more development. It's a great project and demonstrates ingenuity in using the optical sensor, but you need to very clearly define the exact function and software it is designed to work with and why. In a funny way you have to think in reverse. Start with the constraints. The target customer is the overall most important consideration. Choose the biggest group like Reaktor users and build it for them. The housing is probably the single most important design factor. Guess how many units you might sell and design around that. A thousand is a reasonable prospect from a website shop, over a year or two. You need to work out the labor costs for manufacture, how long will it take you to build each one? Maybe you can do a deal with a manufacturer to buy and retrofit existing turntables for a first low volume project. Or change the design to be a turntable accessory because many people already have an old turntable in their junk room.

Before getting anything manufactured you need a serious prototype, something you can show to an engineer who can give advice on large scale production. Product design is a lot of odd things you never thought of before, but many are common sense. Heat dissipation, EMI shielding, where to locate certain components for accessibility, physical strength, vibration. If you want to sell a product in most countries it needs to pass some basic safety requirements. Having external power supplies will solve 90% of these in one go. The most expensive ways are injection molded plastic. The best ways in the modern culture are good old fashioned wood and metal, renewable and recycleable materials. Do some cost calculations for folded steel box sections, extruded aluminium and plastic housings. Think about assembly all the time. Contact local engineering companies and get quotes, they are always happy to send single samples for free if you are serious. Use standard components wherever possible. Be creative in reusing things that are already mass produced and adapt them to the design. Think about weight because of shipping costs. Look at your competition all the time too. Think about why people would buy your turntable in preference to one of those DJCD boxes. How will you market it, what are the key features? The good news is that because of the economy in the US there will be a renaissance in small manufacture over the next decade. People have got used to the idea that we just design stuff in the West and let the Indians or Chinese build things. That economic pendulum will swing back and we find there's a shortage of skills in manufacturing. Getting a good base in product design now could pay rewards further down the road. Most first business projects are unsuccessful, don't let it knock you back. The second or third project is the one that pays.

Hi,

This is my first post here! I've been lurking around a bit occasionally. There seems to be a lot of nice and smart people around.

I'm a complete newbie when it comes to Pd, but I've got my head around the basics. You might call me lazy for asking this (instead of wading throught he documentation), but I just thought I might get advice on a few different approaches to a patch that would:

1. Create a list of sub-directories that recide in a 'main' directory
2. Randomly pick one of these directories
3. Randomly pick one of several MP3 files in this sub-directory
4. Randomly pick a start time (offset) in that file
5. Randomly generate a sample time (say, 2-20 seconds) of data which is extracted from the file, X amount of time into the file (as determined by the previous step). And also making sure that the file is long enough for this to happen (that the sample length does not exceed what's left of the file after X seconds of 'offset').
6. Generate a fade-in/fade-out (envelope?) for this sample
7. Place it somewhere in the stereo field (panning left or right) or even better, a placement in a 5.1 surround field.
8. Play it
9. Repeat and layer lots of random sounds from random locations according to a set 'density' control in the patch.

And also, how would I set up Pd to output 16 channels into Soundflower for recording individual tracks and later mixing them surround?

Regards