[linux-audio-user] Common Music vs Open Music
jamie at postlude.co.uk
Fri Mar 18 09:26:28 EST 2005
Many thanks Dave. I think I'll take the plunge into CM, as that sounds
more like what I am looking for. I run a planerccrma system already, so
installation should be straightforward. I'll try and get hold of the
book as well.
On Fri, 2005-03-18 at 08:03 -0500, Dave Phillips wrote:
> Hi Jamie:
> OM is effectively unsupported. In its Mac incarnation it's an
> ultra-cool graphic environment for the development of musical ideas and
> forms; unfortunately, the Linux port is incomplete and cannot be
> considered fully operational. It is usable, but it's quite limited
> compared to the original. Btw, if you do decide you want to try it, I
> suggest using the package from either AGNULA/Demudi or Planet CCRMA.
> CM is incredible. IMO it ranks among the best music software available
> for any platform, but it is not an essentially graphics-based
> environment. The latest versions do include a nice GTK-based front-end
> for rendering CM code to its various targets. That GUI also includes the
> Plotter, a sort of graphic output display that can be edited for
> interactive use with your code. Output targets include MIDI (files and
> realtime streaming via MidiShare), Common Music Notation (if you'd like
> to experiment with algorithmically produced scores), and score formats
> for Common Lisp Music and Csound (with realtime audio output if
> desired). Documentation is very good, and you can purchase the author's
> book (Notes From The Metalevel) for in-depth explication and exercises.
> Both OM and CM are Lisp-based environments, so you'll have to learn
> some Lisp-ish ways. Fortunately that's not too difficult, and you really
> only need to familiarize yourself with some basics before you can dive
> deeply into the environments. I advise getting Rick's book if you really
> want to get into Common Music, it's an excellent introduction not only
> to CM but to the domain of computer-assisted algorithmic music composition.
> Jamie Bullock wrote:
> >Dear list,
> >Could anyone who has used both of the above pieces of software give a
> >brief comparison, or point to an appropriate url? Aside from the fact
> >that OM is graphical, what are the functional differences? Which offers
> >the broadest range of features, and which is more widely used/better
> >Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated, as I don't particularly want
> >to install and learn both just to find out which I prefer!
More information about the linux-audio-user