MuLab 4 Released

Official support for: mutools.com
RELATED
PRODUCTS

Post

I think so... but I'm used to a different way of doing things. It's not wrong, just different. My template has 8 tracks and 4 FX busses. But it kind of freaks me out when I add tracks and name them and the rack doesn't follow along...

Post

Tracks and racks are separate. It would be misleading and confusing if the "+" for a track also meant "add a rack", surely? You can add a track and target anything with it, whether it's a rack, a plugin, a parameter, whatever.

That's why the default naming is in the direction it is. The track is the "blank canvas" waiting for you to write on it. Setting its target sets its default name appropriately. But if you change the trackname, it'll stay changed.

Post

DHR53 wrote:I think so... but I'm used to a different way of doing things. It's not wrong, just different. My template has 8 tracks and 4 FX busses. But it kind of freaks me out when I add tracks and name them and the rack doesn't follow along...
Yes..how to solve this in MUlab?..if the track and rack are connected than it must be possible to chance a name..seems to me.
So you must focus the track with a rack..

I you add a track with a instrument with the + button than automatically there is added a rack too as you noticed.
Racks can stand on their own without a track: e.g a effectrack, so there it must be possible to add a isolated rack without a track.

As i see the workflow now: if you don't want to work with the colored tracks: start first with a rack adding( and that it is also focused ) and use than the + button for a adding track.
What happens if you do it the other way around :D

Note: i can imagine that someone don't want to work with the colored racks( the coloring is used for the userfriendlyness to show that the rack is focussed)

Perhaps a idea to not coloring the whole rack but the rackheader only..YES i like this more , because it is more in balance with the trackheaders and attract not to much attention.
Note: it is a also a marketing thing to attract youngster to start with Mulab as i can see it now.

Post

> DiGiT < wrote:were you gonna fine tune the task bar behavior? maybe make the modular section so you can hide it?

handsome program you got there.
just wondering if you saw this?

Post

Totally love the new version. Started to work with it even that I was in the middle of my album and I usually don't switch until I finish.
:tu:

Post

janamdo wrote:
DHR53 wrote:I think so... but I'm used to a different way of doing things. It's not wrong, just different. My template has 8 tracks and 4 FX busses. But it kind of freaks me out when I add tracks and name them and the rack doesn't follow along...
Yes..how to solve this in MUlab?..if the track and rack are connected than it must be possible to chance a name..seems to me.
So you must focus the track with a rack..

I you add a track with a instrument with the + button than automatically there is added a rack too as you noticed.
Racks can stand on their own without a track: e.g a effectrack, so there it must be possible to add a isolated rack without a track.

As i see the workflow now: if you don't want to work with the colored tracks: start first with a rack adding( and that it is also focused ) and use than the + button for a adding track.
What happens if you do it the other way around :D

Note: i can imagine that someone don't want to work with the colored racks( the coloring is used for the userfriendlyness to show that the rack is focussed)

Perhaps a idea to not coloring the whole rack but the rackheader only..YES i like this more , because it is more in balance with the trackheaders and attract not to much attention.
Note: it is a also a marketing thing to attract youngster to start with Mulab as i can see it now.
Create a rack with no track: right click in the empty rack area and Add Rack
Create a track without a rack: + button, Add Track. This track is not colored if the last rack used in uncolored (as in the New session). It's routed to the last focused rack, which can be changed.
Change rack name: Double click rack name
Change track name: double click track name
Track and rack should have the same name: create the rack first, the track will follow
Uncolor a rack/track: Choose Color and select "None"
Create an uncolored instrument track: Click the color button in the instrument selector and select "Nono" as color.
Change part color: right click on the part and Choose Color.

That means you can have, for a part that's on track x that's routed to rack y, a different name and color for the part, track header and rack. Note: an uncolored track with an uncolored part (color=none) leads to a blue part.
Or, they can all have the same name.

Looks pretty versatile.

Post

It is... but there are too many options/variations... speaking for myself, of course. If you get used to doing things in a certain order you can consistently get what you want. But seems like someone using the program for the first time would not "get that." I don't think you should have to rename a track and a rack when connected?

Post

DHR53 wrote:It is... but there are too many options/variations... speaking for myself, of course. If you get used to doing things in a certain order you can consistently get what you want. But seems like someone using the program for the first time would not "get that." I don't think you should have to rename a track and a rack when connected?
A important thing here, because Mulab removed the "target" feature in Mulab3 and chance this in mulab 4 for a more userfriendly experience

Now it is you as first time user with Mulab4 who says ..the workflow is still not "get that"
I understand what you mean i think ..
Well perhaps is there still room for improvement here ?
In the old DAW it is one track and that is it, but in MUlab it comes from 2 ways ..rack and track and there are not always connected

Therefore a NOOB must always start with the colored racks ( add track with instrument) than it goes not wrong

But do you start with a new session..than the trouble begins..for NOOB( not you hé :) )

Post

Well, I've been using "Mu" for years actually... but I go back to using Logic and have to review each new version. This is definitely the best, so I'm just adjusting to the new and trying to remember some of the old. Great strides have been made though and this is pretty slick! :)

Post

sorohanro wrote:Totally love the new version. Started to work with it even that I was in the middle of my album and I usually don't switch until I finish.
:tu:
Thanks Mihai!

That's great to hear!

Post

DHR53 wrote:I still think it's a little confusing (as I thought in 3 as well) that tracks remain independent of racks, whether they're targeted or not. So naming is not carried over from the tracks to racks? I name a track and the rack doesn't reflect that... etc. I realize it lets you change the target for anything, but it would be easier if a target rack name would show up in the track? ...to avoid confusion. Maybe just me.
Imagine you have a rack with MuDrum and you have several tracks connected to it, one for bassdrum, one for snaredrum, one for hats etc. Then if you would rename one of these tracks you don't want the rack to be renamed, do you?

Bottom line is: The modules (e.g. racks) are master!
Tracks are slave tools in function of the modules.
Mmm, may sound a bit strange, but hope it helps in explaining.

Post

i guess you did see my question and are not interested in replying? sorry if thats the wrong idea, but its all i can deduce :lol:

Post

Digit, sorry, i indeed missed that.

Yes i'm aware of your request, and i got it on the WL, connected to some other related aspects. I could postpone M4 and improve and extent forever, i had to draw a line somewhere. I do take this aspect serious.

Post

would i be out of place if i said wow what a handsome program once again? the steel grey default skin is my cup of tea. it looks very capable and utilitarian. im not so much a fan of the pastel color choices but im glad someone is making it the way they like it. my wish is for a muzys skin hahaha just kidding! :P

boy i can see the library growing easily from this point with all the new modules and more types on the way... wooh man this will be an intense upward and outward path from now on i believe!

Post

aMUSEd wrote:
janamdo wrote:
aMUSEd wrote: I can only see a main track with midi and an automation track - where are the others and how did they get there?

I assumed any params being moved would be recorded as automation - that seems a pretty normal thing that happens in other hosts when you move a param - why not just have it record straight off as automation instead of having to convert it? It seems an unnecessary intermediate step.
Say there is a midi track and you do want to automate a knob
- record and move the knob..a automation subtrack is added under the maintrack
That's the bit that seems not to be happening though. If I have record on (including record events) and move a knob it is creating what I thought was an automation track but it seems it's actually something else and does not have nodes or curves - its a bit weird tbh
OK thought I would give version 6 a go but it seems to still have this problem. When I record automation I can't see any way to then edit it, the pencil tool adds notes in the midi editor but disappears when I move into the automation lane. (edit if I double click in the automation lane the pencil appears for a second and allows me to draw 1 line then vanishes till I doubleclick again - that is very awkward - and no curves?)

Also there still seems to be no way to draw curves into the waveforms in synths etc. How are people getting sines etc if they can't draw curves?

Post Reply

Return to “MUTOOLS”