|
Date: 2001-09-21 |
Author: infinitylimited |
Viewed 3684 times |
ok, these are all wonderful ideas. i had many of these in mind, also. what we need to do is start recruiting. we'll put together a standard format and assign people for the tasks. we need basically two types of people for this:
1. doc writers
2. quality control (doc reviewers)
doc writers will need to be actively involved in this project. doc reviewers can be passive, i forsee there will be many more reviewers than writers, and this is good. so if you wish to contribute in either of the two ways you can e-mail me and i'll add you to my list. out of the people who already volunteered to help i've recruited MrBoo as a doc writer and thev and rymix can review docs. i still need many more people to help with this. here's the format i've been thinking up:
1. machine catagory - some examples for generators would be "virtual analogue" or "drum machine"; basically how the machine is organized in the "index" for buzz.
2. description - a brief description of the purpose of the machine, the sound it's supposed to generate or what effect it has on the sound. also if it emulates a particular "real-life" piece of gear it would be described here.
3. general use of the machine - self-explanatory. also describe here the style of music this sound or effect is generally used in.
4. what makes this machine unique - this is the most difficult part. here you must describe what makes this machine unique from the rest, why you should use this machine as opposed to others of the same catagory.
5. machine parameters - description of each individual parameter and how it affects the sound.
6. machine attributes (if any) - description of the machine atrributes and what they do.
this is just a basic outline. if you have any suggestions they are welcome. i will be contacting thev about hosting a site for this database, since i feel kindof bad about using buzzmachines for all this... once a site is up i will inform all of you and you can recieve updates there.
THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR SUPPORT!! i, and no one for that matter, could ever finish a project like this without it!
|
| No File Attached |
|
| Readers Comments: |
add comment |
|
| There should be guidelines for the docs, like file format, font(size), colours, and maybe something like a footer where you can link to other related generators or effects, like 'vintagesynth.org' uses. 2001-09-21 by bikkel |
|
| Isn't it a idea to include to the docs also a demo, so the use/purpose of a effect/generator can actually be heard ?
Good luck with this great plan :-) CX. 2001-09-23 by Constellation X |
|
| Yeah, I haven't really asked InfinityLimited about it, but I've already made a demo .bmx for my first doc of the FSM Arpman. I think its definately a good idea, because a .bmw is hardly bigger than an .html file, and somtimes explains a concept so much better than the equivalent text. 2001-09-23 by MrBoo |
|
| it would be lovely if all the machines had demo .bmw's. but it's frankly too time consuming. to produce a quality document AND a quality demonstration song file for all the hundreds of buzz machines?! it would be nice, but...hey, if you wanna do it, go ahead!! but i personally wouldn't unless the machine is particularly hard to understand or you know a really cool setup with the machine. 2001-09-24 by infinitylimited |
|
| Yeah, you've got a point there. Thanks for the offer anyway, but i'm afraid my knowledge about synthesis and stuff isn't that good to demonstrate properly what capacity the machines have :-) 2001-09-24 by Constellation X |
|
| What I forgot to mention is the fact that many machines allready do have a proper demo. So the first thing that has to be done is to look to what machines dont have one. Maby in the procces of making the documention it is a good idea to lean sometimes on the scene and ask for possible idea's in the Buzzmailinglists around. Why do such a large project as making demo's with one or two people when you can take advantage off idea's off at least 250 people. The only thing I think really is important, is to check the quality of a demo. Does the demo show properly the possibilities (or at leat some) of the generator or effect. So there has to be a group off people that are willing to check that. 2001-09-24 by Constellation X |
|
true, true. I hadn't thought of the sheer volume of work ahead! :)
Also- I don't know if anyone's read my Arpman post(s) on the msgboard (no replies for some odd reason. . .) but this is a perfect example of what CX is talkin' about- I'm 90% positive that documentation exists for this machine (in which case I'm wasting my time) but its not readily available. That could save us alot of time, if we rely as much as possible upon existing resources.
The only problem w. utilizing the body of knowledge already existing in the buzz community seems to be a general apathy about such projects. In the past (and now) people seem all to willing to let someone else handle it. . .sorry to be negative but thats how it seems. I think ppl are willing to jump in and get their hands dirty *after* the ball's already rolling, but no-one wants to lay the initial ground work. Oh well, c'est la vie (or something), right?
*BUT* I haven't tried the mailing lists that much so I'll give those a shot and hopefully ppl will prove me wrong 8P
Cheers-
Dan 2001-09-24 by MrBoo |
|
| ok yeah the above (about apathy etc.) was a little extreme. sorry folks. (wishing for an edit post button!) ok new rule for me: no posting before 10am :) 2001-09-24 by MrBoo |
|
| I'd like to be part of the project, too. I could select, check and edit the demos for the machines or make a translation into German. 2001-09-27 by renniac |
|
