Re: MIDI Data looping (Go to buzztrack.com)

[David Myers <dmgraph@earthlink.net>]

If any of this is available on the Mac platform, I'd appreciate hearing
about it.  And where is" Tim Thompson's website" to be found?  Thanks.

David Myers

> 
> KeyKit is beautiful. I've been looking for something like this for eons.
> Thanks for the link! I've yet to try BuildingBlocks... it sounds like
> Buzz for midi. If that's the case, I'd pay a lot more than 100 bucks...
> 
> Speaking of Buzz, I must must must plug it all I can. It's incredible.
> Everyone needs it. It's not useful for realtime, but having grown up on
> trackers, I couldn't live without it. It's been compared to ProTools, yet
> it's free! Anyone who composes anything must use it. USE IT.
> 
> sorry. I'd describe it further, but the buzztrackers do a better job than
> I ever could.
> 
> -><-
> 
> On Thu, 10 Aug 2000, Timoth E. Gard wrote:
> 
>>> Tell me more about KeyKit and BuildingBlocks.  I've looked at both of
>> these in
>>> the past but have never had the time try them.
>> 
>> KeyKit is the bomb when it comes to algorithmic composition. But I find
>> it's also good for some real-time processing. There's a mixed 
>text/graphics
>> interface with lots of tools for dealing with tracks, controllers, 
>phrases,
>> etc. There's even more statistically advanced features like the ability 
>to
>> create new tracks based on general characteristics of another 
>track/phrase
>> (Markov Maker). The data stream is in text form, so it's quite easy to
>> manipulate. Plus, I think it's been ported to every platform but 
>Atari2600.
>> It's very small and efficient. Check out Tim Thompson's website. There's
>> plenty more info there, plus he has some of the tools available in
>> web-accessible form. Cool.
>> 
>> Whereas KeyKit is mostly programmatical and composition-oriented,
>> BuildingBlocks is mostly graphical and performance-oriented. You have 
>small
>> modules that perform different tasks (note in, echo, arpeggiators) and 
>you
>> graphically connect them, i.e. drag a line from the output of one to the
>> input of another. Oh, and it's also set up to allow input from the
>> keyboard, from mice and from joysticks (2 buttons or 3!). Since the
>> learning curve is shorter for me with BB, I tend to favor it for 
>capturing
>> peformance ideas on the fly. It has a very LEGO feel to it. And don't 
>rule
>> it out for composing -- one fellow just used it as the major composition
>> engine in a minimalist piece. I can't recall his name right now. It's on
>> the BB website.
>> 
>> Wow. How's that for a sales pitch? Which reminds me, KeyKit is FREE, 
>and BB
>> is under $100 (don't remember the exact price).
>> 
>>> Probably not what you're after, but I've played around with combining a
>>> mouse-to-MIDI program (mouse movement generates two MIDI CC data 
>streams)
>> with a
>>> wireless (infrared) mouse.  It's fun!
>> 
>> That's a great idea! Sounds like fun. BB might be down your alley.
>> 
>>> What kind of MIDI do you want to transmit (wirelessly)?
>> 
>> I want the whole MIDI stream wireless. I have a WX5 wind controller 
>(MIDI
>> sax) and I want to be able to walk around without dragging a cord behind
>> me, just like guitarists get to do. MidiMan used to make one, but no
>> longer, and the company Aquila won't return my inquiries. Some people 
>have
>> suggested using a wireless network card, but the mod on that seems a bit
>> over my head. The primary issue is error correction. I've been wondering
>> about wireless modems (radio, not infrared, then there's no 
>line-of-sight
>> issues), but have been too busy on other projects to jump into that 
>quagmire.
>> 
>> Of course, if anyone else thinks this is a cool idea...
>> 
>> Hope all of this helps somebody, anybody.
>> 
>> Tim
>> http://www.quiltedfish.com