>I guess by your estimation this is a tiny audience with no musical composition involved.

It's in a large hall with nice projections and apparently still no one dancing.. Plus it's in Germany (so maybe someone is dancing!) and _part of a much larger multi-day city wide festival that was well attended_; in other words.. nice try. Give it a go in the US sometime at a non-festival based event and good luck with that... I'm sure most of the one off LC events are of average non-mainstream club going size, 100 if lucky, and composed of mostly performers and their significant others + handful of chin scratching friends.

In regard to "no musical composition...", well if I had to guess there is probably plenty of basic _production_ involved, but well before the performance as part of a basic selection process. This selection process being no more advanced per se than most electronic music production using off the shelf software. Advanced composition... not so much...

In this case the aspect of replacing turning a knob on a controller or hitting a key on a keyboard by choosing pre-determined (when things actually sound good!) algorithmic sequences by a small code change effectively does nothing to move live performance forward. Technically without having more insight into the linked performance I'd argue that there is a high chance it's also not truly "live coding".

The REPL as the new keyboard is not novel and should not grant the music created in this direction any extra staying power or attention.

>While clearly knowing little about the movement or the events we put on?

What makes you think that especially when it comes to the technology involved? I personally would enjoy a LC event and if I'm ever nearby one I'd probably actually check it out.

The whole LC movement if you will seems more like an excuse for various artists to get involved with a meme who otherwise would not be given any attention at all; a relatively good thing for your average computer music student within or just out of academia I guess. Smoke and mirrors basically...

>And do you think the manifesto is particularly serious? Have you read it?

No, it's ridiculous, and indeed I read it when it first came out ~10 years ago.. I assume it's not less ridiculous now?

>Are you seriously declaring that your own work....

Uh, no, you're erroneously suggesting that, but that was my only mistake in this dialogue because it's the only thing you apparently can attack while avoiding a sound critique of LC. I took note of live coding capabilities and put them in the toolbox and continued on my way...

Like I said LC is a very basic technique and one of many in the toolbox. I use it at times, but just not up on stage or as an excuse as to why my process is worth paying attention to over any other.

from a previous yaxu post:
>"This is not the future of electronic music, but now we've given it a stupid name people seem to be more interested."

We agree on something... :)

Would you agree that there is a fairly high percentage of artists performing under the LC banner that indeed precompose the majority of their performance?

You seem to realize the actual situation and you must understand you are not trying to convince someone who is new to the domain / computer music or someone who doesn't write their own extensive software for creative coding.

It was all hype then; it's all hype now... This doesn't mean live coding as a tool is invalid; just that it's being used at worst by tools to justify why they are special and the music isn't.

At the end of the day one could argue that any attention by the larger public to computer music derived tools & techniques (SuperCollider, Chuck, Max/MSP, etc.) is a good thing, but there will be those like myself that will throw up a little in our mouths behind the scene...

LC still doesn't solve the public appreciation / performance gap for computer music; it's still a perplexing problem and one that is going to require moving beyond LC to continue making progress.