Facebook Twitter Music RSS

Weeklybeats 2016 was a 52 week long music project in which artists composed and publicly released 1 song a week for the entire year. Enjoy this archive of over 3,700 music compositions by over 260 artists.
Sign up or Login to give feedback or chat up on the forums.

Prime II

By vinpous on January 30, 2016 4:09 am

Second SuperCollider study, this time I tried to do some panning (with mixed results - must work on that), and some more sophisticated structuring. I'm sure I did not do it particularly efficiently, but that will come with practice. Again based on the prime number series, this time to 31. But also much more randomisation. Because of this randomisation the piece is longer than I anticipated, and I cut it down a little.

Post production reverb and audio cleanup done with Audacity.

What I set out to do and what I did are different, but that is often the way.

SuperCollider source file, if you run this you will get a slightly different piece to what I got. It might be shorter or longer, with different gestures and stuff.

Screen Shot 2016-01-30 at 3.10.44 pm by Vincent Giles, on Flickr

This submission is licensed by author under CC Attribution Noncommercial No Derivative Works (BY-NC-ND)

  • Play
  • Download
February 1, 2016 1:04 am

Wonderful work. The idea is focused and texturally minimal but doesn't feel hollow or underdone. Though it is a mathematical concept, it's kind of moving in its understatement. It makes me think of a gritty barren landscapes you would see in an David Firth animation. I would love to see this series of works continued.

SC code is well structured, except for the single letter variable names (a bit naughty). The only thing I would do functionally is pull things into Tasks, which gives you a few more options in terms of sequencing, but also means you can fire the whole thing off with one cmd+enter. That should be a relatively straightforward refactor.

Also, with your use of git, commit more often and more descriptively. It makes fixing things if you break the actual things you've done into individual commits . It's also useful if you want to go over your work again because you can retrace your steps quickly. Go through the commits you've been seeing from me recently to see what I mean. I do make a racket in the Slack channel just to be annoying. If you use something like SourceTree, it's very easy to stage hunks rather than full code snapshot to make your commits more meaningful.

February 1, 2016 1:12 am

I can't pretend to understand the coding involved, but the results are sublime :-))

February 1, 2016 1:15 am
kevanatkins wrote:

Wonderful work. The idea is focused and texturally minimal but doesn't feel hollow or underdone. Though it is a mathematical concept, it's kind of moving in its understatement. It makes me think of a gritty barren landscapes you would see in an David Firth animation. I would love to see this series of works continued.

SC code is well structured, except for the single letter variable names (a bit naughty). The only thing I would do functionally is pull things into Tasks, which gives you a few more options in terms of sequencing, but also means you can fire the whole thing off with one cmd+enter. That should be a relatively straightforward refactor.

Also, with your use of git, commit more often and more descriptively. It makes fixing things if you break the actual things you've done into individual commits . It's also useful if you want to go over your work again because you can retrace your steps quickly. Go through the commits you've been seeing from me recently to see what I mean. I do make a racket in the Slack channel just to be annoying. If you use something like SourceTree, it's very easy to stage hunks rather than full code snapshot to make your commits more meaningful.

Thanks Kevan. I will most definitely look at tasks in my next SC piece, and will consider changing from the GitHub client to SourceTree. That is definitely good advice on the revising work quickly - I guess that is actually the point, after all.

Jim Wood wrote:

I can't pretend to understand the coding involved, but the results are sublime :-))

A means to an end. Thanks so much, it's a really fun journey exploring code (rather than patching) to make stuff.

February 1, 2016 1:34 am
vinpous wrote:
kevanatkins wrote:

Wonderful work. The idea is focused and texturally minimal but doesn't feel hollow or underdone. Though it is a mathematical concept, it's kind of moving in its understatement. It makes me think of a gritty barren landscapes you would see in an David Firth animation. I would love to see this series of works continued.

SC code is well structured, except for the single letter variable names (a bit naughty). The only thing I would do functionally is pull things into Tasks, which gives you a few more options in terms of sequencing, but also means you can fire the whole thing off with one cmd+enter. That should be a relatively straightforward refactor.

Also, with your use of git, commit more often and more descriptively. It makes fixing things if you break the actual things you've done into individual commits . It's also useful if you want to go over your work again because you can retrace your steps quickly. Go through the commits you've been seeing from me recently to see what I mean. I do make a racket in the Slack channel just to be annoying. If you use something like SourceTree, it's very easy to stage hunks rather than full code snapshot to make your commits more meaningful.

Thanks Kevan. I will most definitely look at tasks in my next SC piece, and will consider changing from the GitHub client to SourceTree. That is definitely good advice on the revising work quickly - I guess that is actually the point, after all.

I used the Task class in Inharmonicity Study #1. I Often use that structure as boilerplate code to get started on a work to the point where I keep it as a snippet in Sublime Text.

When I started with version control, I would do a whole bunch of work in a night, then one big commit for the night. I realised it was like saying "I did a bunch of stuff" rather "I did this". Made tracking issues much easier.

PS: I did investigate Atom again for use with SuperCollider. It's still a bit ehh, which is a shame because Atom is otherwise great (and free instead of $70).

February 1, 2016 2:09 am
kevanatkins wrote:
vinpous wrote:
kevanatkins wrote:

Wonderful work. The idea is focused and texturally minimal but doesn't feel hollow or underdone. Though it is a mathematical concept, it's kind of moving in its understatement. It makes me think of a gritty barren landscapes you would see in an David Firth animation. I would love to see this series of works continued.

SC code is well structured, except for the single letter variable names (a bit naughty). The only thing I would do functionally is pull things into Tasks, which gives you a few more options in terms of sequencing, but also means you can fire the whole thing off with one cmd+enter. That should be a relatively straightforward refactor.

Also, with your use of git, commit more often and more descriptively. It makes fixing things if you break the actual things you've done into individual commits . It's also useful if you want to go over your work again because you can retrace your steps quickly. Go through the commits you've been seeing from me recently to see what I mean. I do make a racket in the Slack channel just to be annoying. If you use something like SourceTree, it's very easy to stage hunks rather than full code snapshot to make your commits more meaningful.

Thanks Kevan. I will most definitely look at tasks in my next SC piece, and will consider changing from the GitHub client to SourceTree. That is definitely good advice on the revising work quickly - I guess that is actually the point, after all.

I used the Task class in Inharmonicity Study #1. I Often use that structure as boilerplate code to get started on a work to the point where I keep it as a snippet in Sublime Text.

When I started with version control, I would do a whole bunch of work in a night, then one big commit for the night. I realised it was like saying "I did a bunch of stuff" rather "I did this". Made tracking issues much easier.

PS: I did investigate Atom again for use with SuperCollider. It's still a bit ehh, which is a shame because Atom is otherwise great (and free instead of $70).

Can you email me Inharmonicity Study #1 again? I lost the file, and would very much like to pull it apart.

I'm still pretty content with the SC IDE, but might investigate Sublime at some stage.

February 1, 2016 2:47 am
vinpous wrote:
kevanatkins wrote:
vinpous wrote:
kevanatkins wrote:

Wonderful work. The idea is focused and texturally minimal but doesn't feel hollow or underdone. Though it is a mathematical concept, it's kind of moving in its understatement. It makes me think of a gritty barren landscapes you would see in an David Firth animation. I would love to see this series of works continued.

SC code is well structured, except for the single letter variable names (a bit naughty). The only thing I would do functionally is pull things into Tasks, which gives you a few more options in terms of sequencing, but also means you can fire the whole thing off with one cmd+enter. That should be a relatively straightforward refactor.

Also, with your use of git, commit more often and more descriptively. It makes fixing things if you break the actual things you've done into individual commits . It's also useful if you want to go over your work again because you can retrace your steps quickly. Go through the commits you've been seeing from me recently to see what I mean. I do make a racket in the Slack channel just to be annoying. If you use something like SourceTree, it's very easy to stage hunks rather than full code snapshot to make your commits more meaningful.

Thanks Kevan. I will most definitely look at tasks in my next SC piece, and will consider changing from the GitHub client to SourceTree. That is definitely good advice on the revising work quickly - I guess that is actually the point, after all.

I used the Task class in Inharmonicity Study #1. I Often use that structure as boilerplate code to get started on a work to the point where I keep it as a snippet in Sublime Text.

When I started with version control, I would do a whole bunch of work in a night, then one big commit for the night. I realised it was like saying "I did a bunch of stuff" rather "I did this". Made tracking issues much easier.

PS: I did investigate Atom again for use with SuperCollider. It's still a bit ehh, which is a shame because Atom is otherwise great (and free instead of $70).

Can you email me Inharmonicity Study #1 again? I lost the file, and would very much like to pull it apart.

I'm still pretty content with the SC IDE, but might investigate Sublime at some stage.

Still in the same place I left it: https://gist.github.com/unclewalter/96c … 23821e6c02

Sublime is great. A good coding text editor is one of those things that once you find one you like (especially one as customisable as Sublime), you find the productivity improvement so great that any other form of text editing feel slow and broken. Also, it's good to have a common text editor between various languages that you're really fast with. I've never been the same since I learned how to use Vim in high school. You use Sublime without paying, it just pesters you to buy it every now and then. On the other hand, if you're content with the IDE, not planning on playing with any other code and you don't feel like joining me down the text editor rabbit hole, that's understandable. I'm far gone, there's no turning back for me. It's probably why I'm mad as a hatter now.

February 1, 2016 2:54 am
kevanatkins wrote:
vinpous wrote:
kevanatkins wrote:
vinpous wrote:
kevanatkins wrote:

Wonderful work. The idea is focused and texturally minimal but doesn't feel hollow or underdone. Though it is a mathematical concept, it's kind of moving in its understatement. It makes me think of a gritty barren landscapes you would see in an David Firth animation. I would love to see this series of works continued.

SC code is well structured, except for the single letter variable names (a bit naughty). The only thing I would do functionally is pull things into Tasks, which gives you a few more options in terms of sequencing, but also means you can fire the whole thing off with one cmd+enter. That should be a relatively straightforward refactor.

Also, with your use of git, commit more often and more descriptively. It makes fixing things if you break the actual things you've done into individual commits . It's also useful if you want to go over your work again because you can retrace your steps quickly. Go through the commits you've been seeing from me recently to see what I mean. I do make a racket in the Slack channel just to be annoying. If you use something like SourceTree, it's very easy to stage hunks rather than full code snapshot to make your commits more meaningful.

Thanks Kevan. I will most definitely look at tasks in my next SC piece, and will consider changing from the GitHub client to SourceTree. That is definitely good advice on the revising work quickly - I guess that is actually the point, after all.

I used the Task class in Inharmonicity Study #1. I Often use that structure as boilerplate code to get started on a work to the point where I keep it as a snippet in Sublime Text.

When I started with version control, I would do a whole bunch of work in a night, then one big commit for the night. I realised it was like saying "I did a bunch of stuff" rather "I did this". Made tracking issues much easier.

PS: I did investigate Atom again for use with SuperCollider. It's still a bit ehh, which is a shame because Atom is otherwise great (and free instead of $70).

Can you email me Inharmonicity Study #1 again? I lost the file, and would very much like to pull it apart.

I'm still pretty content with the SC IDE, but might investigate Sublime at some stage.

Still in the same place I left it: https://gist.github.com/unclewalter/96c … 23821e6c02

Sublime is great. A good coding text editor is one of those things that once you find one you like (especially one as customisable as Sublime), you find the productivity improvement so great that any other form of text editing feel slow and broken. Also, it's good to have a common text editor between various languages that you're really fast with. I've never been the same since I learned how to use Vim in high school. You use Sublime without paying, it just pesters you to buy it every now and then. On the other hand, if you're content with the IDE, not planning on playing with any other code and you don't feel like joining me down the text editor rabbit hole, that's understandable. I'm far gone, there's no turning back for me. It's probably why I'm mad as a hatter now.

A hatter? You?!
Thanks for posting the piece. I see the use of tasks - very elegant, and in principle means you could run the piece (and others) in a headless configuration. Elegant. I've a little way to go I think, but Tasks are certainly the next step.

I try not to think about Vim. I understand why it's good, but I just can't (read: haven't tried or ever needed to) wrap my head around it.

February 1, 2016 3:59 am
vinpous wrote:
kevanatkins wrote:
vinpous wrote:
kevanatkins wrote:
vinpous wrote:
kevanatkins wrote:

Wonderful work. The idea is focused and texturally minimal but doesn't feel hollow or underdone. Though it is a mathematical concept, it's kind of moving in its understatement. It makes me think of a gritty barren landscapes you would see in an David Firth animation. I would love to see this series of works continued.

SC code is well structured, except for the single letter variable names (a bit naughty). The only thing I would do functionally is pull things into Tasks, which gives you a few more options in terms of sequencing, but also means you can fire the whole thing off with one cmd+enter. That should be a relatively straightforward refactor.

Also, with your use of git, commit more often and more descriptively. It makes fixing things if you break the actual things you've done into individual commits . It's also useful if you want to go over your work again because you can retrace your steps quickly. Go through the commits you've been seeing from me recently to see what I mean. I do make a racket in the Slack channel just to be annoying. If you use something like SourceTree, it's very easy to stage hunks rather than full code snapshot to make your commits more meaningful.

Thanks Kevan. I will most definitely look at tasks in my next SC piece, and will consider changing from the GitHub client to SourceTree. That is definitely good advice on the revising work quickly - I guess that is actually the point, after all.

I used the Task class in Inharmonicity Study #1. I Often use that structure as boilerplate code to get started on a work to the point where I keep it as a snippet in Sublime Text.

When I started with version control, I would do a whole bunch of work in a night, then one big commit for the night. I realised it was like saying "I did a bunch of stuff" rather "I did this". Made tracking issues much easier.

PS: I did investigate Atom again for use with SuperCollider. It's still a bit ehh, which is a shame because Atom is otherwise great (and free instead of $70).

Can you email me Inharmonicity Study #1 again? I lost the file, and would very much like to pull it apart.

I'm still pretty content with the SC IDE, but might investigate Sublime at some stage.

Still in the same place I left it: https://gist.github.com/unclewalter/96c … 23821e6c02

Sublime is great. A good coding text editor is one of those things that once you find one you like (especially one as customisable as Sublime), you find the productivity improvement so great that any other form of text editing feel slow and broken. Also, it's good to have a common text editor between various languages that you're really fast with. I've never been the same since I learned how to use Vim in high school. You use Sublime without paying, it just pesters you to buy it every now and then. On the other hand, if you're content with the IDE, not planning on playing with any other code and you don't feel like joining me down the text editor rabbit hole, that's understandable. I'm far gone, there's no turning back for me. It's probably why I'm mad as a hatter now.

A hatter? You?!
Thanks for posting the piece. I see the use of tasks - very elegant, and in principle means you could run the piece (and others) in a headless configuration. Elegant. I've a little way to go I think, but Tasks are certainly the next step.

I try not to think about Vim. I understand why it's good, but I just can't (read: haven't tried or ever needed to) wrap my head around it.

I make hats, didn't you know? I just don't wear them. That would be like making meth and dipping into the product yourself. Not good practice.

Tasks are definitely worth looking into. Just do it incrementally. Rather than jumping straight into nested tasks in the way I've done it, just encapsulate certain things and see how you go. A good start is sequencing parameters like I did in masterSequence Task object.

Don't bother with Vim nowadays. It well superceded by much more modern and easier to use alternatives. But I had to give it an honourable mention since it did set a pretty high productivity standard for me despite its high initial learning curve. I don't use it anymore. Editors like Sublime, Atom, TextMate, etc have pretty much the same kind of power, but much less learning curve and don't require complete remapping of your brain just to get started.

February 1, 2016 7:10 am

"With mixed results."

A pun. smile

February 1, 2016 8:02 am

this is awesome. very cinematic. if I were a sound director for a really iconic creepy / scifi flick, this is what I'd be putting over a scene or two.

February 1, 2016 8:32 am

Loving code based submissions - very intriguing.

February 1, 2016 9:17 am

haunting and bleak

February 1, 2016 12:09 pm
Edmund Snyder wrote:

"With mixed results."

A pun. smile

Hah!

thricefoldedcloak wrote:

this is awesome. very cinematic. if I were a sound director for a really iconic creepy / scifi flick, this is what I'd be putting over a scene or two.

Thanks! I'm not much into film music, but I appreciate the sentiment immensely. I always find it fascinating how people associate image with music so strongly.

tim koch wrote:

Loving code based submissions - very intriguing.

big_smile A single frame of those gifs would make an awesome album cover.

paul raygun wrote:

haunting and bleak

Woohoo! Thanks.

February 1, 2016 6:42 pm

This track and your experimental work here makes me sad there's no "follow" action on WeeklyBeats

February 1, 2016 10:00 pm
scottux wrote:

This track and your experimental work here makes me sad there's no "follow" action on WeeklyBeats

Hey thanks. Very complimentary. The closest I'm aware of is if you favourite a piece by someone, you can then filter a week's music by 'artists you have favourited', which can be helpful.

February 2, 2016 12:00 am

Great stuff. Thanks for including the source file!!

Agreed re: follow

February 2, 2016 3:13 am

I'm surprised by how satisfying this is in the end.
Definitely more than just a sum of its parts

February 2, 2016 3:15 am
scottux wrote:

This track and your experimental work here makes me sad there's no "follow" action on WeeklyBeats

You can always filter like Vinpous said.
Following would be bit pointless for a project like WB imo as you'd be less exposed to random tracks/people.

It'll be easier later in the year when most people give up smile

February 2, 2016 3:30 am
iLKke wrote:

It'll be easier later in the year when most people give up smile


True, but super sad.

February 2, 2016 3:46 am
tim koch wrote:

Loving code based submissions - very intriguing.

big_smile A single frame of those gifs would make an awesome album cover.

It would appear so!

[img]https://www.dropbox.com/s/y7rx1qzsq7h8s6w/Photo 2-02-2016%2C 2 11 17 PM.png?dl=0[/img]

February 2, 2016 4:26 am

ooops dead link - was meant to be:

February 2, 2016 6:01 am
little-scale wrote:

Great stuff. Thanks for including the source file!!

Agreed re: follow

Thanks man. That means a lot coming from you!

iLKke wrote:

I'm surprised by how satisfying this is in the end.
Definitely more than just a sum of its parts

Thanks, I would hope it is more than the sum of its parts! I'm glad it comes across so convincingly.

tim koch wrote:

ooops dead link - was meant to be:

Maybe if I do another couple in the series I'll make an EP called Prime, and make some similar artwork.

February 2, 2016 5:45 pm
iLKke wrote:
scottux wrote:

This track and your experimental work here makes me sad there's no "follow" action on WeeklyBeats

You can always filter like Vinpous said.
Following would be bit pointless for a project like WB imo as you'd be less exposed to random tracks/people.

It'll be easier later in the year when most people give up smile


scottux wrote:
iLKke wrote:

It'll be easier later in the year when most people give up smile


True, but super sad.

Agreed, although what I love here is that it encourages you to the oldschool "pay actual atention to somebody" smile

I miss something in the week if I haven't checked your stuff, guys smile

Pretty good code there, Vinpous

February 2, 2016 9:19 pm

Very interesting work here man!

February 2, 2016 11:55 pm
laguna wrote:

Agreed, although what I love here is that it encourages you to the oldschool "pay actual atention to somebody" smile

I miss something in the week if I haven't checked your stuff, guys smile

Pretty good code there, Vinpous

Thanks man. I'm yet to check out your ChucK stuff, but I will! I had a squiz at it myself over the weekend and felt it was so much like a patching environment in code (ie. Oscillator => Output; or whatever the actual objects are) that it kinda put me off. I can see however how potentially easy that would be to adapt to.

donnyjankowski wrote:

Very interesting work here man!


Cheers!

February 4, 2016 5:07 am

Very jouney-esque.  I like the way the layered LFOs come and go in such an organic way....

February 5, 2016 12:23 am
cTrix wrote:

Very jouney-esque.  I like the way the layered LFOs come and go in such an organic way....


Hey thanks. Let nobody say that algorithms are not natural!

February 5, 2016 6:15 pm

beautiful

February 6, 2016 5:03 am
yan_g wrote:

beautiful

Thanks!

February 7, 2016 8:12 pm

Very interesting Sounds! i like the modulated sine tones and noises big_smile

You need to login to leave a comment.
Login Sign-up