issue09

EMUSIC-L Digest                                      Volume 68, Issue 09

This issue's topics: Computers for composers
	
	Current computers for composition (11 messages)
	Pen based computers and MIDI
	Pen based computers ... (2 messages)
	Platform wars? Not. (2 messages)
	Current computers for composition
	mac - pc (3 messages)	
	Platform wars? Not. (3 messages)
	Stop the World (Re: mac - pc) (2 messages)
	Platform wars? Not. (2 messages)
	Stop the World (Re: mac - pc)
	Platform wars? Not.
	Current computers for composition

Your EMUSIC-L Digest moderator is Joe McMahon .
You may subscribe to EMUSIC-L by sending mail to listserv@american.edu with 
the line "SUB EMUSIC-L your name" as the text.
 
The EMUSIC-L archive is a service of SunSite (sunsite.unc.edu) at the 
University of North Carolina.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date:         Fri, 16 Sep 1994 16:58:24 -0500
From:         Joe McMahon 
Subject:      Current computers for composition

>I am interested in purchasing a computer for the first time.  I would
>like to develop some compositional ideas involving sonic topography.
>There are some programs that I've worked with (in various labs) that
>approximate Pitch/Time graphs, but MIDI is getting pretty passe.  I need
>to get a 486.  Anyone know where I can get a good one?  Also, am working
>with CSound, and need to get a good sound card.  Have called Digital
>Audio Labs, but would like to hear some comments from users on the list.
>What have you found that works well for you?  etc...

I know that there are a number of people who swear by the Csound
implementation on the NeXT. Admittedly, you'll have to buy a used machine,
since they're not in production anymore, but they do have good onboard
sound support. The question is what kind of support network there is if the
machine breaks down...

Has anyone attempted to use the new NeXTStep system for the 486, and if so,
have you managed to support anything that can emulate the NeXT? Also, have
any of the Mac users any experience with Csound on the PowerPC,
particularly in native mode?

 --- Joe M.

--
"This trumpet is flatlining!" (MST3K, "Mr. B. Natural")

------------------------------
Date:         Fri, 16 Sep 1994 18:03:03 -0500
From:         The Digital Witchdoctor 
Subject:      Re: Current computers for composition

As far as soundcards go, Turtle Beach is the only way to go.  Most of the
nice cards sample 3 speeds (some to 48khz, i beleive) and the onboard
emu proteus 1/xr has some really nice sounds.  I run it on a 486 and
don't have any complaints, except that you don't get the submix outputs
that you get on a real proteus rackmount.

Csound does run pretty good on a 486, it just takes a lot of tweaking (at least,
   it did for me) to get it running if your memory configuration isn't
just so.

phil
sps5251@siena.bitnet

------------------------------
Date:         Fri, 16 Sep 1994 17:48:27 -0600
From:         Bet my hair is longer than yours! 
Subject:      Re: Current computers for composition

>I am interested in purchasing a computer for the first time.  I would
>like to develop some compositional ideas involving sonic topography.
>There are some programs that I've worked with (in various labs) that
>approximate Pitch/Time graphs, but MIDI is getting pretty passe.  I need
>to get a 486.  Anyone know where I can get a good one?  Also, am working
>with CSound, and need to get a good sound card.  Have called Digital
>Audio Labs, but would like to hear some comments from users on the list.
>What have you found that works well for you?  etc...

First question I have is, do you want a portable or a desktop computer?
I find that I'm using my laptop computer more and more and the desktop
less and less.  Especially now that there are several PCMCIA sound card
makers, you can get the same functionality with the laptop as with the
desktop, and as a bonus, you can take it with you!  Additionally, my
laptop is a Compaq Concerto, which is a pen-based computer.  That means
that you use a pen instead of a mouse.  You get the pen close to the
screen and it acts just like a mouse.  You can point to anything, and
then you just tap the pen on the screen instead of clicking a button.
The fun part is that you can actually write on the screen and it will
recognise your printing!  (Don't waste your time with a Newton!)  I use
Encore for music notation, and boy it sure is nice to use the pen to draw
in notes.  Much better than a mouse.  The Concerto has a 25 MHz 486 in
it, and it will run any Windows or DOS application.  Most Windows programs
work with the pen (the pen functions are built in to Windows), but DOS
applications have to be specifically written to use the pen...

There are several manufacturers of pen-based computers, IBM, Toshiba,
Fujutsu, etc.  Unfortunately, the Concerto has reached the "end of its
design cycle" and has been discontinued.  The nice thing about "end of
cycle" is that the price has been lowered.  You can still get a Concerto
with 4MB RAM and a 120MB hard disk for about $1300.  Call Compaq Direct...

For desktops, depending upon what kind of money you want to spend, I would
suggest getting a Pentium, as a basic Pentium system can be purchased for
about $1500.  These are entry level systems of course, but with some extras,
you can have a screaming computer!  (First thing to add would be at least
4MB of additional RAM (about $200).  Check out the latest Computer Shopper
for a review of five Pentium sytems that check in for that price...

As for sound cards, boy you're going to be treading in some very religious
waters here, and your decision will really depend upon what you want to get
from the card.  Do you want to be able to program the card yourself, or are
you just interested in playing back wave files?  I use a Gravis Ultrasound
to play back what I've created with Csound, and it sounds just fine, although
for serious multi-timbral playback, I go ahead and load the sounds into my
Peavey SP sampler.  (The SP costs about $700...)  It's quite easy to deal
with programming the Ultrasound.  There is a mailing list, and you can get
quite a lot of programming tools from the FTP site.  For serious DSP type
programming, you should also consider the IBM Mwave card or the Cardinal
card...

Have a good weekend all!

-Doug

Doug Wellington
doug@sun1paztcn.wr.usgs.gov
System and Network Administrator
US Geological Survey
Tucson, AZ Project Office

According to proposed Federal guidelines, this message is a "non-record".
Hmm, I wonder if _everything_ I say is a "non-record"...

------------------------------
Date:         Sat, 17 Sep 1994 20:14:02 -0500
From:         Arne Claassen ISE 
Subject:      Re: Current computers for composition

> I know that there are a number of people who swear by the Csound
> implementation on the NeXT. Admittedly, you'll have to buy a used machine,
> since they're not in production anymore, but they do have good onboard
> sound support. The question is what kind of support network there is if the
> machine breaks down...

Aside from the Csound implementation, the older NeXT machines had the Music
Toolkit, which was a collection of excellent objects for MIDI, the built in
DSP and other music related things. And of course, the built in DSP always
made the old NeXt machines a joy. I still would like to get one...

> Has anyone attempted to use the new NeXTStep system for the 486, and if so,
> have you managed to support anything that can emulate the NeXT? Also, have
> any of the Mac users any experience with Csound on the PowerPC,
> particularly in native mode?

The problem with NeXTstep for 486 is a) no DSP support (as far as i know) and
b) the Music toolkit is no longer bundled with the system. This actually
happened before NeXTstep486, around NeXTstep 3.0.

--
Arne F. Claassen             
On the Web:           
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Somebody's got his finger on a DX7!"                             

------------------------------
Date:         Sun, 18 Sep 1994 00:31:04 -0400
From:         John Shaft 
Subject:      Re: Current computers for composition

>
> > I know that there are a number of people who swear by the Csound
> > implementation on the NeXT. Admittedly, you'll have to buy a used machine,

Speaking of Csound, does anyone out there have it currently running on a
Linux box?  I am trying to do it, but so far I can't even un tar the file :P.

Csound on NeXT really does sound good, though.  They have one at Peabody
and a guy was showing me some stuff he did.  It was beautiful.  (partly
because of what he wrote, but also because of the machine sound itself.)

john

------------------------------
Date:         Sun, 18 Sep 1994 04:29:07 -0700
From:         atomic city 
Subject:      Re: Current computers for composition

Bet my hair is longer than yours! jotteth....
>
>laptop is a Compaq Concerto, which is a pen-based computer.  That means
>that you use a pen instead of a mouse.  You get the pen close to the
>screen and it acts just like a mouse.  You can point to anything, and
>then you just tap the pen on the screen instead of clicking a button.
>The fun part is that you can actually write on the screen and it will
>recognise your printing!  (Don't waste your time with a Newton!)  I use
>Encore for music notation, and boy it sure is nice to use the pen to draw
>in notes.  Much better than a mouse.  The Concerto has a 25 MHz 486 in
>it, and it will run any Windows or DOS application.  Most Windows programs
>work with the pen (the pen functions are built in to Windows), but DOS
>applications have to be specifically written to use the pen...

Tell me more. I'm intrigued by this conecpt, and saved your previous
message on the subject....this sounds quite appealing in some ways.

thanx
mike

--
mike metlay * atomic city * box 81175 pgh pa 15217-0675 * atomic@netcom.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Oh drat, these computers are so naughty and so complex,
 I could just PINCH them."                                  (m. t. martian)

------------------------------
Date:         Sun, 18 Sep 1994 16:46:57 +0100
From:         Stefan Scheffler 
Subject:      Re: Current computers for composition

>Aside from the Csound implementation, the older NeXT machines had the Music
>Toolkit, which was a collection of excellent objects for MIDI, the built in
>DSP and other music related things. And of course, the built in DSP always
>made the old NeXt machines a joy. I still would like to get one...
Yes, I never saw such powerful stuff anywhere else.

>The problem with NeXTstep for 486 is a) no DSP support (as far as i know) and
>b) the Music toolkit is no longer bundled with the system. This actually
>happened before NeXTstep486, around NeXTstep 3.0.
As far as I know there are some activities to put sound into NeXTStep for
486. At CCRMA you will be able to get the MusicKit and additional Sound
stuff for the NeXT. I am not too sure how far they build a base for
NeXTStep for 486. Anyway it is still one of the most interresting computing
platforms (not as boring as Windows, Mac or plain Unix).

Regarding CSound on PowerMacintosh I can tell you only my assumption that
it will blow you away. All the stuff I was doing with math intensive
computing was impressive on a PowerMacintosh. We did some comparisons
between the 56K DSP in the NeXT and a 66MHz PowerMacintosh, the PowerMac
always won.
This might be true with a Pentium based system, though I did no math tests
yet. When I comparing my 486DX2-66 with a 60MHz Pentium I want to switch
immediately.

Ciao,
 Stefan

<> stefan@mms-gmbh.de
<> Stefan Scheffler, Software Development
<> Steinberg Soft- & Hardware GmbH
<> Cubase Lite/Score/Audio for Mac/Atari/Windows

------------------------------
Date:         Sun, 18 Sep 1994 21:13:46 -0500
From:         Arne Claassen ISE 
Subject:      Re: Current computers for composition

> As far as I know there are some activities to put sound into NeXTStep for
> 486. At CCRMA you will be able to get the MusicKit and additional Sound
> stuff for the NeXT. I am not too sure how far they build a base for
> NeXTStep for 486. Anyway it is still one of the most interresting computing
> platforms (not as boring as Windows, Mac or plain Unix).

What i want is NeXTstep for PowerMac. Last i talked to NeXT, there was no plan
for it. They wanted to see how the PowerPC chip did on the market and aside
from that, they were busy with working on NeXTstep for Sun.


--
Arne F. Claassen             
On the Web:           
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Somebody's got his finger on a DX7!"                             

------------------------------
Date:         Mon, 19 Sep 1994 15:13:58 MEZ
From:         Thomas Neuhaus 
Subject:      Re: Current computers for composition

> The problem with NeXTstep for 486 is a) no DSP support (as far as i know)
> and b) the Music toolkit is no longer bundled with the system.

As far as I know, IRCAM in France are working on DSP-Support and a port
for the MusicKit for NSfIP. There might be more about that on their
ftp site (ftp.ircam.fr).

Have fun
TN

------------------------------
Date:         Mon, 19 Sep 1994 11:15:57 -0600
From:         Bet my hair is longer than yours! 
Subject:      Re: Current computers for composition

Atomic City Man wrote:
>Bet my hair is longer than yours! jotteth....
>>laptop is a Compaq Concerto, which is a pen-based computer.  That means
>>that you use a pen instead of a mouse.  You get the pen close to the
>>screen and it acts just like a mouse.  You can point to anything, and
>>then you just tap the pen on the screen instead of clicking a button.
>>The fun part is that you can actually write on the screen and it will
>>recognise your printing!  (Don't waste your time with a Newton!)  I use
>>Encore for music notation, and boy it sure is nice to use the pen to draw
>>in notes.  Much better than a mouse.  The Concerto has a 25 MHz 486 in
>>it, and it will run any Windows or DOS application.  Most Windows programs
>>work with the pen (the pen functions are built in to Windows), but DOS
>>applications have to be specifically written to use the pen...
>
>Tell me more. I'm intrigued by this conecpt, and saved your previous
>message on the subject....this sounds quite appealing in some ways.

Quite appealing in LOTS of ways!  Techie stuff is that the Concerto is
a quite normal 486 with the addition of a digitizer behind the screen.
(486-25, 4MB RAM expandable to 20, 250MB hard disk, B&W display, $1325)
The operating environment has built in support for the pen.  (Windows
for Pen Computers.)  Any Windows app that uses the standard "I-beam"
cursor for entry is supported for the handwriting recognition.  (Actually,
that should be "printing" recognition...)  There is also a "trainer" where
you can practice writing.  The computer "learns" how you write, and of
course, you learn how it interprets as well.  (In the beginning, I had
some problems writing 9 and g for instance.  But after spending a few
minutes with the trainer, I don't have that problem any more...)
Like all Intel based personal computers, you have a choice of Operating
Systems and/or Operating Environments.  I know that you can get pen support
for DOS, MS-Windows and OS/2.  I bet that you'll be able to get pen support
for  Windows NT as well, although I haven't looked at it yet.  I'm also
exploring the possibility of adding pen extensions to Linux.  (Try doing
all that with a Newton!)  Additionally, since this is a standard laptop,
I have a parallel port and two PCMCIA slots.  I use the Music Quest 2port/SE
parallel port MIDI interface for communicating with my Rack-O-Synths(tm).
There are now four PCMCIA soundcards being shipped, with more on the way.
I'm waiting for the Turtle Beach Daytona card myself...  (With that, it will
be possible to write music anywhere and hear a fairly good representation
of it.)  Compaq makes a "docking bay" for the Concerto.  I got the "Enhanced
Flexconnect", as it's called, which includes the usual keyboard, mouse, serial,
parallel, and external display ports.  The enhanced version also includes a
SCSI port and an ethernet port.  I have the SCSI hooked up to my Peavey SP
sampler.  Since the SCSI port has an ASPI driver, I can use SampleVision or
any other program that supports ASPI.  (I wrote a SMDI sample transfer program
myself.)

I like how using a pen is so direct- that is, you point at exactly the
place you want to go.  Trying to use a mouse is much harder I think.  Using
Corel Draw on the Concerto is just like using an electronic Etch-A-Sketch!
Since the keyboard can be detached from the Concerto, it even looks like
an Etch-A-Sketch...  One thing that I particularly like is that you don't
have to find a flat surface to put your mouse on!  It is even possible to
walk around while using the pen.  Standing at a bus stop, I can play a
game of Solitaire, or edit my papers, or write music, or work with csound...

Since I'm a programmer, I also look at programmability.  Both Visual Basic
and Visual C++ have all the tools necessary to write programs that use the
pen.  I have been working on several music oriented programs that use the
pen extensively.  I am working on a rather large project ("DIME" - Doug's
Integrated Music Environment) which I ultimately want to use as a realtime
performance controller.  In other words, I plan to hook up a long MIDI cable
to the Concerto and walk around on stage controlling everything with the
pen.  Look out Nick Rothwell!  ;-)

Hmm, downsides?  Well, the Concerto really doesn't sit in your lap too well
if you're trying to use the keyboard, and at six pounds, it's a little
heavier than a lot of other laptop computers.  Let me know if you have any
other questions!

-Doug

Doug Wellington
doug@sun1paztcn.wr.usgs.gov
System and Network Administrator
US Geological Survey
Tucson, AZ Project Office

According to proposed Federal guidelines, this message is a "non-record".
Hmm, I wonder if _everything_ I say is a "non-record"...

------------------------------
Date:         Mon, 19 Sep 1994 14:14:10 -0500
From:         Arne Claassen ISE 
Subject:      Re: Current computers for composition

Bet my hair is longer than yours! writes:
> Since I'm a programmer, I also look at programmability.  Both Visual Basic
> and Visual C++ have all the tools necessary to write programs that use the
> pen.  I have been working on several music oriented programs that use the
> pen extensively.  I am working on a rather large project ("DIME" - Doug's
> Integrated Music Environment) which I ultimately want to use as a realtime
> performance controller.  In other words, I plan to hook up a long MIDI cable
> to the Concerto and walk around on stage controlling everything with the
> pen.  Look out Nick Rothwell!  ;-)

While you're at it, why not get some the wireless MIDI system. :)

This doesn't happen very often, but i wish that this technology was available
for Mac. Apple, are you listening? Drow the newton and make a pen based
powerbook! I just cannot go back to PC, it's against my religion.


--
Arne F. Claassen             
On the Web:           
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Somebody's got his finger on a DX7!"                             

------------------------------
Date:         Tue, 20 Sep 1994 11:38:10 -0700
From:         atomic city 
Subject:      Pen based computers and MIDI

Arne Claassen ISE jotteth....
>
>This doesn't happen very often, but i wish that this technology was available
>for Mac. Apple, are you listening? Drow the newton and make a pen based
>powerbook! I just cannot go back to PC, it's against my religion.

Me too, alas. I have a PC with Windows on my desk, and I've learned
enough to decide that I was right to use a Mac at home for the way I
tend to think and work with computers. I can't see buying a Concerto
for MIDI, although it does sound like ea lovely way to work. *sigh*

mike

--
mike metlay * atomic city * box 81175 pgh pa 15217-0675 * atomic@netcom.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"You probably never thought of Bing Crosby as an electronic musician....
Some of you may have never thought of Bing Crosby as a musician."(m. simon)

------------------------------
Date:         Tue, 20 Sep 1994 18:26:06 EDT
From:         Michael Bellusci 
Subject:      Re: Pen based computers ...

I wonder why there is such line in the sand drawn between the IBM and Apple
platforms. I work in both environments and can honestly say that I don't have
a preference for either. They both work well and don more things than I need
to do. I also work with Atari and Amiga. The latter are really not up to
snuff, but there is not much between the two major platforms.

CAN'T WE ALL JUST GET ALONG?

------------------------------
Date:         Tue, 20 Sep 1994 17:35:09 -0500
From:         Arne Claassen ISE 
Subject:      Re: Pen based computers ...

> I wonder why there is such line in the sand drawn between the IBM and Apple
> platforms. I work in both environments and can honestly say that I don't have
> a preference for either. They both work well and don more things than I need
> to do. I also work with Atari and Amiga. The latter are really not up to
> snuff, but there is not much between the two major platforms.

not to stir up an age old battle... but if you're just hoping between major
applications in windows and on the mac, teh two are quite comparable. but when
it comes to specialized apps, working with the environment on a more
fundamental level, the differences do show.

Music reasons not to go PC again: StudioVision, Digidesign software and
hardware (turbosynth), MAX, Quicktime (yeah, it' son the PC, but it's not
the same to work with) and OMS. Personal preferences, sure, but i'm stuck in
them..

--
Arne F. Claassen             
On the Web:           
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Somebody's got his finger on a DX7!"                             

------------------------------
Date:         Wed, 21 Sep 1994 07:24:01 -0700
From:         atomic city 
Subject:      Platform wars? Not.

Arne Claassen ISE jotteth....
>
>[Michael Bellusci says]
>> I wonder why there is such line in the sand drawn between the IBM and Apple
>> platforms. I work in both environments and can honestly say that I don't have
>> a preference for either. They both work well and don more things than I need
>> to do.

The problem is that the two machines are reasonably compatible in
terms of how one works at this point (modulo the usual flamewars about
how the Mac sucks, Windows sucks, etc.), but that as Arne points out,
individual music programs are available which direct one's way of
working. When there's a working, integrated environment from Opcode
(OMS, controlling Vision, Galaxy and MAX) running on an Intel based
machine as well as it works on Macs, I may well jump ship for the
easily obtained and inexpensive PC clone hardware. But until then, I
can't. And it has to be the whole package, not bitznpieces, to work
practically. I suppose a Compaq Concerto running the purported
real-soon-now-unless-it's-just-a-rumor Vision for Windows would work
for a small portion of my output, but I need the integrated
environment for most of what I do. I have a lot of music in my head
and a very tight deadline to get it all out; I need something that
works NOW.

>Music reasons not to go PC again: StudioVision, Digidesign software and
>hardware (turbosynth), MAX, Quicktime (yeah, it' son the PC, but it's not
>the same to work with) and OMS. Personal preferences, sure, but i'm stuck in
>them..

Arne's needs are a superset of mine, but the integration is what I'm
on about. Given time, the PC platform will settle down and offer what
I want, maybe even the same apps and functionality exactly, but I
can't wait.  'Personal preference' is a nice way of saying that if one
has a tool that works, one doesn't throw it away for one that might
work better someday. Not if one's on deadline. I have friends who are
burning it up on PCs with Cakewalk Pro and so forth, but I need a Mac.

>> I also work with Atari and Amiga. The latter are really not up to
>> snuff, but there is not much between the two major platforms.

THIS, on the other hand, is the sort of statement that will start a
major flamewar in no time flat. While the number of Amiga apps is not
as great as that of the other platforms, Amigaphiles are fiercely
proud (and rightly so!) of the capability of their hardware, and a lot
of folks are doing damn good music and other things on them; and the
Atari was the Euro standard for years and is still quite musically
competitive. It's dangerous to ask why two factions can't get along,
while summarily dismissing two others. I would humbly (?) submit that
we can ALL get along if we so choose, and ask that this go no further?

mike
--
mike metlay * atomic city * box 81175 pgh pa 15217-0675 * atomic@netcom.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Pushing the envelope of the German angst tradition....blowing the roof off
 of tonality, and what an exciting roof blowing it is!"              (thom)

------------------------------
Date:         Wed, 21 Sep 1994 11:23:48 -0400
From:         "Prof. Alvin Toro" 
Subject:      Re: Platform wars? Not.

I agree with Mike, we are all prety big to start this
 mine-is-bigger-mine-is-better discusions.  Although I haven't ever used a Atari
 or Amiga I'have seen them
in action and they make some really good music.  I have used Macs and PCs and
there really is difference between them.  But it's not a thing of "Whitch is
best". It's a thing of "What I need, what I like, what I'm used to "

Peace,
Alvin

------------------------------
Date:         Wed, 21 Sep 1994 11:57:32 -0600
From:         Bet my hair is longer than yours! 
Subject:      Re: Current computers for composition

Arne wrote:
>This doesn't happen very often, but i wish that this technology was available
>for Mac. Apple, are you listening? Drow the newton and make a pen based
>powerbook! I just cannot go back to PC, it's against my religion.

That's too bad.  I mean about your religion.  My guess is that in a couple
years, Apple will be just another computer vendor.  What I mean is, you'll
just buy some CPU from some vendor and some OS from some other vendor, and
you won't really care that much which is which...  When IBM finally gets
a PowerPC based computer out there, it probably won't be much different
from Apple's.  How are you going to reconcile your religion then?  Just
by the name on the box?

-Doug

Doug Wellington
doug@sun1paztcn.wr.usgs.gov
System and Network Administrator
US Geological Survey
Tucson, AZ Project Office

According to proposed Federal guidelines, this message is a "non-record".
Hmm, I wonder if _everything_ I say is a "non-record"...

------------------------------
Date:         Thu, 22 Sep 1994 08:16:25 LCL
From:         Michael Carnes 
Subject:      Re: mac - pc

----------
X-Sun-Data-Type: text
X-Sun-Data-Description: text
X-Sun-Data-Name: text
X-Sun-Content-Lines: 7
X-Sun-Content-Length: 458

Let's not get the religious war about Mac vs. PC going again.  I have both
machines and use the PC for business and the Mac for music.  My only caution
is not to underestimate your needs.  As you get some experience with MIDI,
you will undoubtedly want more.  When it comes time to move up to a more
full-featured program, make sure your computer has the power to handle it.
In other words, get more computer (a lot more) than you think you need.
Good luck.

------------------------------
Date:         Thu, 22 Sep 1994 11:04:00 +0200
From:         Sven Herrlinger 
Subject:      mac - pc

hey

I am on the decission now, to work with a MAC or a WIN-PC
 I want to have a cheap sequenzerprogramm (on PC I thought about POWER-
TRACKS - I saw it running an a fair - and it's quite o.k. for my needs (I
think) )
 but on the MAC I dont know anything about sequenzers even not how to get
MIDI - sockets on power books (I only wanto work with notebooks)

 things I want to do in the future is probably  sample editing
 synthesizer editing - and one of the most necesary things is editing of
effect machines ( like Quadraverb - or lexicon - etc.)

I also want to do all the mail stuff with this notebook then.
(at this time I am working with a PC- DOS notebook )

Is there anybody who maybe got some experience with working on both
plattforms, and could tell me about differences between those machines.

I know MAC is a little bit more expensive, but perhaps its weighted out
with more functionality or so...
or there are editing programms that does not exist on PC's ...

 sven

sven@asd.bb.bawue.de


## CrossPoint v3.02 ##

------------------------------
Date:         Thu, 22 Sep 1994 17:35:47 -0500
From:         Arne Claassen ISE 
Subject:      Re: mac - pc

> In other words, get more computer (a lot more) than you think you need.
> Good luck.

Some of the best advice i've heard in a while. I can't sit comefortably from
all the times i've kicked myself getting the Centris650 without FPU. FPU? I
don't need no stinking FPU. Then i wanted to do more digitial processing and
got into Rendering. Shoot myself, that's what i should do. No matter what
you get, you'll outgrow it. This probably goes along with, whatever you buy
will be outdated next week.. ho hum. no win.

--
Arne F. Claassen             
On the Web:           
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Somebody's got his finger on a DX7!"                             

------------------------------
Date:         Fri, 23 Sep 1994 18:43:56 +0100
From:         Nick Rothwell 
Subject:      Re: Platform wars? Not.

>Although I haven't ever used a Atari
>or Amiga I'have seen them
>in action and they make some really good music.

I have several Macs, but I will point out that *I* make the music, not them.


    Nick Rothwell     CASSIEL Contemporary Music/Dance     nick@cassiel.com

------------------------------
Date:         Sat, 24 Sep 1994 16:24:33 +0100
From:         Stefan Scheffler 
Subject:      Re: Platform wars? Not.

>I have several Macs, but I will point out that *I* make the music, not them.

With todays music programs you can find that you interact with the music
created by the computer ;-) though it is based on your input. But why
should have the computer not an input/impact on the music.

Don't get me wrong, you are one who decides which music is worth to
remember or to make permanent.

Did you ever got the chance to see Henning Berg playing with his Tango ? He
is a trombone player who has written a jazz accompanion program which will
"listen" to his input and create its own reply. (Yes it is very much based
on his input and programming)

You can use the computer as a tool which will assemble your music or you
can use it as a source for ideas.
(My favourite Henning Berg comment after a concert, "Did you realize the
phrase at the beginning of the last piece ? Tango did that modulation never
before!")

There are other examples, where the computer programs "create" music.
There're M,JamFactory,Band-In-A-Box,some Bach composition programs, etc.
There are always human beings are involved, but can they predict what kind
of music will be generated, but for sure they make the decision about the
results to keep.

Ciao,
   Stefan


Note: Even though I work for the company which distributes Tango, I would
still like it if somebodyelse would distribute it. It is incredible.

<> stefan@mms-gmbh.de
<> Stefan Scheffler, Software Development
<> Steinberg Soft- & Hardware GmbH
<> Cubase Lite/Score/Audio for Mac/Atari/Windows

------------------------------
Date:         Sun, 25 Sep 1994 12:04:23 +0100
From:         Nick Rothwell 
Subject:      Re: Platform wars? Not.

>With todays music programs you can find that you interact with the music
>created by the computer ;-) though it is based on your input. But why
>should have the computer not an input/impact on the music.

OK, fair point: but the process of art, of whether something is music, then
moves to the listener (or human participant) rather than the generator. But
that's cool.

(As it says in blue neon letters high above a trendy bar here in Edinburgh,
"LET'S TALK ABOUT ART. MAYBE.")


    Nick Rothwell     CASSIEL Contemporary Music/Dance     nick@cassiel.com

------------------------------
Date:         Sun, 25 Sep 1994 12:05:45 +0100
From:         Nick Rothwell 
Subject:      Stop the World (Re: mac - pc)

What the hell, devil's advocate hat to the ready.

>As you get some experience with MIDI,
>you will undoubtedly want more.  When it comes time to move up to a more
>full-featured program, make sure your computer has the power to handle it.

As I gain more experience with MIDI, I undoubtedly want less. Two years ago
I used 20U of gear and 200ft of MIDI cables. It looked superb on stage, but
I got sick of the setup procedure and hassles and risk in driving something
that complex. And at the same time, the major MIDI programs were starting
to get really bloated; Performer in particular, with bug-fix releases
coming out and more and more useless features being rolled into it for no
particular gain (for me) and ever more hassle. Running two computers and
two MIDI Time Pieces didn't help either, what with all the MIDI fader boxes
and stuff. That and the MIDI OS wars really burned me out.

These days I perform with a 6U rack with a couple of Wavestations and a
couple of Lexicons. Or I'll swap in the MicroWave. And a simple 1-in, 1-out
MIDI interface ($50). I have three obsolete Macs, each with a tiny (by
today's standards) 40Meg disk. That's enough. The slow, underpowered
PowerBook 100 with its dead battery is great as a waveform editor for
Alchemy. The 170 is an ideal MAX platform, despite being black and white
only. And the SE/30 runs Vision and Galaxy. All three machines run System
7.0.1 from years ago (I need 7.5, PowerTalk, OpenDoc, QuickTime, QuickDraw
GX, General MIDI and a talking computer like I need a hole in the head).
And for the first time in years, my rig is stable and accessible, and I can
keep its operation completely in my head at one time. And even with this
setup I have much more power than had been available for some of the best
electronic music albums I can think of.

I cancelled my MacUser subscription a couple of months ago. Computer
technology is vampiric, and there are lots of big companies and rich
advertising agencies pulling you by the nose to keep buying more and
bigger, and living with the hassles, distractions and incompatibilities.

Basically, I stopped the world and got off. I wanted to do music, not
follow computers around.


    Nick Rothwell     CASSIEL Contemporary Music/Dance     nick@cassiel.com

------------------------------
Date:         Sun, 25 Sep 1994 06:48:03 CDT
From:         HARRY HAECKER 
Subject:      Re: Stop the World (Re: mac - pc)

To paraphrase N. Rothwell (I don't have a fancy email program to inc. the
original message):
"As I gain experience with MIDI, I want less of it"

I agree with you, not only in the $$ sense (cents?), but also in regards
to composition.  The more gear, the more options.  the more options, the
more difficult it becomes to make choices.  Not impossible, of course;
but one HAS to limit the content of a piece to a finite subset of the
infinite.  Most of the higher end synths out there today have so many
settable (sp?) parameters, confusion may reign.

I like to artificially limit myself to just a couple of pieces because of
this phenomenon, especially if I find myself using a synth or FX module
just because it's there.

Harry Haecker

------------------------------
Date:         Sun, 25 Sep 1994 13:14:39 GMT
From:         Stuart Anderson 
Subject:      Re: Platform wars? Not.

>>With todays music programs you can find that you interact with the music
>>created by the computer ;-) though it is based on your input. But why
>>should have the computer not an input/impact on the music.
>
>OK, fair point: but the process of art, of whether something is music, then
>moves to the listener (or human participant) rather than the generator. But
>that's cool.
>
>(As it says in blue neon letters high above a trendy bar here in Edinburgh,
>"LET'S TALK ABOUT ART. MAYBE.")
>
>
>    Nick Rothwell     CASSIEL Contemporary Music/Dance     nick@cassiel.com
>

But what would they know, the beer is crap there so they are all 'Tennents Lager
Heads' anyway!!

Cheers
Stuart

BTW Someone has offered me MAX for 120 (yes it's legit). Do you thinks it's a
good deal or should I go for a kosher version so I can get upgrades ? How stable
is the current version ? I'd only be running on a 475... Thanks

------------------------------
Date:         Sun, 25 Sep 1994 17:14:18 LCL
From:         Mike Chandler 
Subject:      Re: PLATFORM WARS? NOT.

Platforms count. The fact that my Amiga natively has 4 channels that can
playback digitized samples without an add-on sound board, including
text-to-speech, makes a difference in what I am able to do....

------------------------------
Date:         Sun, 25 Sep 1994 19:05:48 PDT
From:         Casey Dunn 
Subject:      Stop the World (Re: mac - pc)

nick's comments should go in the "mysterious FAQ" for this, and
snyth-l as well.
It is so so so so easy to be distracted doing this computer/midi
stuff. Hell, I think I have had more actual sonic fun this last
few months beating on my gong agung and tooting the damn zurna
than tormenting the computers into shape.
casey

------------------------------
Date:         Mon, 26 Sep 1994 10:00:53 -0400
From:         "Prof. Alvin Toro" 
Subject:      Re: Platform wars? Not.

Sorry, I was talking about their sound capability not their composing ability.
Have you ever heard a .MOD file?

>I have several Macs, but I will point out
>that *I* make the music, not them.

altoro@inter.ui.clu.edu

------------------------------
Date:         Mon, 26 Sep 1994 13:27:34 -0500
From:         Arne Claassen ISE 
Subject:      Re: Current computers for composition

> That's too bad.  I mean about your religion.  My guess is that in a couple
> years, Apple will be just another computer vendor.  What I mean is, you'll
> just buy some CPU from some vendor and some OS from some other vendor, and
> you won't really care that much which is which...  When IBM finally gets
> a PowerPC based computer out there, it probably won't be much different
> from Apple's.  How are you going to reconcile your religion then?  Just
> by the name on the box?

Well, my "religious" beliefs are less a "pro Mac" then a "die Windows die"
religions. it's one of the old religions that does not believe in the kinder
gentler god, but sure as hell believes in the temptations of Satan. Just
kidding.

If the integration of the Apple GUI, and a number of Apple system specific
features and software were available on another platform, i would not hesitate
considering it. Alas, at this time, i have not found a platform that satisfies
me in this fashion. For the comming years, i will take the best power/price
platfrom as long as the operating system of my choice would run on it.
Whether Apple can pull the system I hope for off, i cannot tell. What i'm
really hoping for is a system as well integrated and slick and fun to develop
in as nextstep, but with the special features of Apple's System, such as true
Quicktime 2.0, Quickdraw GX, applescript.

I have not found any worthy system (IMHO), in Windows or Windows NT, and while
the unix system is great, i find Xwindows and Openwindows primitive in
terms of GUI integration. OS/2 is a system I respect and nextstep is a system
i dream off, but only System 7 is a system i have found to serve all my needs
at this point in time.



--
Arne F. Claassen             
On the Web:           
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Somebody's got his finger on a DX7!"                             

------------------------------
End of the EMUSIC-L Digest
******************************