Good job, a nice looking and fun program, first time i spent this long starring at one of the programs made by the team. The code is quite complex, took me a while to understand how it precisely works. It really shows how much time you save by using p5 elements, imagine the complexity and size of the code, if you where to write it without the p5.FFT() and p5.amplitude() function. It is actually a quite short code if you trim it down and remove comments, but there is still so much going on considered, i find that pretty cool.
Just to challenge this program with the task of creating a Throbber. The Throbber is described by Winnie Soon as something that does not indicate completion or status and progress, but is presented as continuous and repetitive for an indeterminate amount of time and for an unforeseeable time span.
As i experience this program, it does not quite fit these criteria's of a Throbber. To me, the number in the middle that is changing over time, can be described as a process indicator. Since i know the number won't go higher than 2010, i kind of know when the program is gonna end. And since the program does not go on forever, it does not live up to the criteria of something living in an unforeseeable time spam. Every time i run it, it will run for the same determinate amount of time.
If we look at the verb "Throb" that is defined as a strong and regular pulse rhythm. Totally agreeing that the rhythms and pulse created here are way cooler, i don't get the feeling of something regular when it is constantly changing. Maybe that is because we are used to throbbers fitted to this micro-temporality and we don't see them like here, stretched on a longer time-span.
Maybe see if you can create a pause function, i used the stop function to find out i had to listen to everything all over again, and i just got to the 2000s. :)
Good job, a nice looking and fun program, first time i spent this long starring at one of the programs made by the team. The code is quite complex, took me a while to understand how it precisely works. It really shows how much time you save by using p5 elements, imagine the complexity and size of the code, if you where to write it without the p5.FFT() and p5.amplitude() function. It is actually a quite short code if you trim it down and remove comments, but there is still so much going on considered, i find that pretty cool.
Just to challenge this program with the task of creating a Throbber. The Throbber is described by Winnie Soon as something that does not indicate completion or status and progress, but is presented as continuous and repetitive for an indeterminate amount of time and for an unforeseeable time span.
As i experience this program, it does not quite fit these criteria's of a Throbber. To me, the number in the middle that is changing over time, can be described as a process indicator. Since i know the number won't go higher than 2010, i kind of know when the program is gonna end. And since the program does not go on forever, it does not live up to the criteria of something living in an unforeseeable time spam. Every time i run it, it will run for the same determinate amount of time.
If we look at the verb "Throb" that is defined as a strong and regular pulse rhythm. Totally agreeing that the rhythms and pulse created here are way cooler, i don't get the feeling of something regular when it is constantly changing. Maybe that is because we are used to throbbers fitted to this micro-temporality and we don't see them like here, stretched on a longer time-span.
Maybe see if you can create a pause function, i used the stop function to find out i had to listen to everything all over again, and i just got to the 2000s. :)
Keep on the good work!