BASIC vs Python

[Andrew Dalke]

Jan Dries:
> The funny thing is, for me, MIDI is dead old. One of my first computers, 
> back in 1986, was an Atari ST. It came equiped with a MIDI port.

While the time I was talking about was some 3 or 4 years
before 1986.  

> I seem to remember that even then we still had to rely on a keyboard or 
> so to do the playback.

And my memory was the Midi was this expensive thing that required
specialized hardware that (almost?) no one I knew had.

> But nowadays even the cheapest PC comes with "multi-media" sound 
> hardware, and playback of MIDI files is easy.

Which I think agrees with my belief that my knowledge of
computer sound is so historical that I can't make a
strong statement of what I would like in a modern library.

> Frankly I share your sentiment and "these newer things" like sound 
> clips, mixers, recording software and so have never managed to 
> interested me either.

I heard a really fun song at a student concert once.  The
musician played the same basic few bars on the electric ukulele
but really played with the downstream effects, like reverb
and delay.  At its peak there were so many modified copies of
the basic song being played that it was hard to pick out any
one of them.  The auditorium was filled with sound.  That piece
got the biggest applause of the evening.

I mention this because I can see how sound effects networks
would also be fun to have in a sound library.  What I don't
know is the tradeoff between the different factors: optimize
for programmers like me?  For beginning programmers?  For
people interested in creating new songs?  Those interested
in experimenting with atonal music?  Those who want to do
mashups?  Karaoke enthusiasts?  In looking around at the modern
libraries, one supported 3D placement of the audio.  I hadn't
even thought of that ability.

				Andrew
				dalke at dalkescientific.com