Audio plugins built for a modular environment (similar to REASON), why not?

[Architeuthis]

So, what's wrong with taking the idea of REASON and applying it generally to an audio plugin?

I imagine it like this: You have an audio plugin with, say, 10 aux audio inputs. They are named 1 through 10. Yeah, not very glamorous, but that's ok, because inside the audio plugin you hit a button "goto back" and you can assign virtual wires from a given audio input to a given parameter, or something. Then you have 10 aux audio outputs. You can patch LFOs and other signals out of the audio plugin to those outputs.

The only thing Reason really has going for it is that there's a dedicated interface for auxiliary ins/outs with virtual wires and a nice organization of virtual jacks/sockets. For an audio plugin it would lack that immediate visual impression, you'd have to look at what's going on a little longer... but probably still worth it for the possibilities it would grant you.

I'm working on an audio plugin that will be mainly for eye candy (an X/Y scope that has lots of "fun" parameters which you can modulate to get various visual effects and make pretty pictures)... and I'm thinking... how awesome would it be to patch LFOs and multipoint envelopes to any of its parameters, instead of having a bunch of these things cluttering the interface, which may not provide the features that the user wants. Another audio plugin's LFO or multipoint envelope might have those features!

F*** the DAW companies that haven't caught up with implementing modern side chaining, put pressure on them by releasing great products and having more and more of their user base complain and/or defect... but just in case maybe said products should have built-in LFOs so you don't screw over the less fortunate user base.

[Miles1981]

IMHO that's the job of the DAWs, not of the plugins, to implement this kind of workflow.

[Architeuthis]

Yes. But the plugin must have a modular environment in mind to get those most out of said DAW...

Edit: OR are you saying the DAW should provide LFOs and multipoint envelope tools?

But the other point I was trying to make: You should be able to modulate parameters at audio rate. Hence the need for auxiliary inputs.

[camsr]

Audio rate modulation is very taxing on memory throughput. IDK if Reason actually does audio rate modulation, it's a very old DAW that ran big projects on dinosaurs.

[Michael L]

You can do a lot of that in the modular environment of MuLab, one way or another. You can map a multi-point envelope to any vst parameter with a couple of clicks, or modulate the audio input of one vst by the audio of another, or build your own module. It's very flexible, and has a free version with few restrictions.

[Architeuthis]

Michael L, good!

camsr, When I say modulation I don't mean just FM, PM, AM, it could be anything. Side chain hard sync, soft sync, LFO phase reset, clock reset, pitch detection, envelope follower... heck, a vocoder is a good example. And bitspeek: http://soniccharge.com/forum/topic/233- ... for-reason. Why should bitspeek rack extension be superior to the VST version? I would assume Bitspeek RE relies on audio rate data for its aux inputs.

[whyterabbyt]

I would assume Bitspeek RE relies on audio rate data for its aux inputs.

dont assume.

[xoxos]

there are several SE developers who have released "plugins" for this application (eg. in eXT 1). course the only people who noticed were SE developers who use eXT 1.

eg. iirc spacedad released a set of such vst several years ago.

[GaryG]

You can do what you're asking (I think) in VSTForx too, assign inputs to VST parameters.

[Architeuthis]

You can do what you're asking (I think) in VSTForx too, assign inputs to VST parameters.

That's good if a plugin has an "audio out" for its multi-point envelope, for example.

Anyway, this conversation is mostly useless. I have the opportunity to create the example I'm looking for. I'll do that and shut up.

[ghettosynth]

You can do what you're asking (I think) in VSTForx too, assign inputs to VST parameters.

That's good if a plugin has an "audio out" for its multi-point envelope, for example.

Anyway, this conversation is mostly useless. I have the opportunity to create the example I'm looking for. I'll do that and shut up.

MUX has some of this functionality by itself. As long as you're not looking for audio rate on all parameters, you can get a lot of the kind of functionality that you're talking about with Mux and Reaktor. You need Reaktor to create more advanced modulators, e.g., tempo synced multipoint envelopes, you need Mux because Reaktor isn't a VST host.

There's no reason that you couldn't define a new plugin standard for a Reason-like environment that is itself a VST/AU plugin. There are several plugins that attempt to implement some aspects of this, e.g., softube modular, and I think KHZ has something as well. The challenge is getting people to develop for it. Of course, unlike Softube, it has to, at least, be an openly defined API. I think that even if you do that though it will be a challenge to get people to develop for it.

[Jbravo]

FLstudio does all of the above

you can assign LFOs or modulations to just about any parameter, or use the output of any mixer channel to modulate anything else

[Mayae]

FLstudio does all of the above

you can assign LFOs or modulations to just about any parameter, or use the output of any mixer channel to modulate anything else

True, and that makes it (by 'vanilla' settings) a very cool host, however it is non-documented whether these features are sample-accurate. In practice they are not, however FL studio will approximate line segments, automation clips and important points to a large degree by fitting rendering blocks around these.