PDCON:Conference/A collaboration workflow from sound-based composition to performance of electroacoustic music using Pd as a framework: Difference between revisions

In the case the composer, the engineer and the performer is the same person and assuming that this person is sufficiently knowledgeable in each domain of expertise, the case seems to be ideal from a transfer of ideas point of view but may reduce the possibility of aesthetics innovation, because there are less associations, therefore, possibly, less meditation on ideas and aesthetic criteria. Furthermore, such a case enervates the energy that will be spent in each domain of expertise, since it will be a portion of the total energy of one person. In the case of an association of a composer, an engineer and a performer, the work is divided to three people and becomes more complicated from a transfer of ideas point of view but gains in possibility of aesthetics innovation.

Composers could use PD's visual programming environment to create data-flow diagrams for the sound processing as planned in their composition ideas. Then engineers could validate and, in collaboration with the composers, clarify any part of the diagrams. In order to program a sound synthesis engine as planned by a composer's digram, engineers could use any available method of PD or its external libraries, or develop new ones. The development of the performer's interface could be based on adaptive, device-focused (sensors-equipped, tangible etc.) data mining engines. Such an approach should not only support the development of performer specific interfaces but will also accelerate the process of the interface development and calibration. Furthermore, a performer gains dexterity on a certain interface by practice. Making available the mapped control parameters of the engine for calibration by the performer himself, should help his practice gain in quality.