Another Idea to make Mulab better

[dakkra]

Hmm. Trancit you also have a good point. If the vst itself doesn't work with the bridge then I do become very limited. Then again it could be the DAW itself. Too many variables when it comes to this in my opinion. Maybe a test run with this idea and if it has more issues than fixes, we could revert back.

[Trancit]

Plugin firewalling is a kind of bridge used between the host and the plugin!!! And like all bridges, the bridge itself can cause trouble with certain plugins...
i.e. Reapers firewall bridge is incompatible to a number of plugins I tried

Yeah that's also something i was wondering about: does such firewall/sandboxing not have disadvantages of itself? Doesn't it affect performance or latency? I admit that i don't have any experience with it yet.

1. Performance: I think on nowadays machines this will be hardly noticeable...
2. As far as I observed, there is no extra latency envolved, but I am no expert in this topic
3. Disadvantages: of course and I think that it isn't worth the hassle... why do I want a bridge, which make a plugin crash (without crashing the host, ok ), which runs very stable natively???

I think, it's much better to improove VST handling in general to perhaps avoid crashes with unstable VST/i's without such a bridge...
There could be some options implemented for VST handling to make some VSTs running better...
I am no programmer though, so I don't have any clue about the technique behind, but looking at some other daws, there are options for i.e. fixed/variable buffers, GUI problems etc.

[sorohanro]

To ad my input on this.

I read the topic and, sincerely, some of the stuff I don't really understand, but I have a problem in this area.
Some time ago, EWQL put out their Symphonic plugin for free and at that time that was the only quality orchestral plugin I could afford. The problem was that came without support and would always crash in most of the DAWs on my computer. I was writing all instruments with MuLab piano and then export MIDI, then import midi and render the instruments one by one.
The quality was bad because I could not use any kind of phrasing, velocity, legato, trying different articulations...


Back to our days, MuLab doesn't have a time stretch/ pitch correct, so I have to use Melodyne, which crash every time I use a IK Multimedia plugin (Amplitube, T-Racks, Miroslav, Sampletank).

So, there is a reason to have a "controlled crash" not to lose a project. Not only bad cheap synth maker plugins crash, sometimes good useful expensive ones crash too and sometimes those are very important for your production.

[EvilDragon]

So you like using crashy VST plugs?

No, the plugins I use are pretty stable, but you never know what can happen during a project. So it's good to host a plugin in its own process, so if something becomes unstable for whatever reason, you do not lose the project at all. You simply reload the plugin and there you go. Extremely useful.

does such firewall/sandboxing not have disadvantages of itself? Doesn't it affect performance or latency? I admit that i don't have any experience with it yet.

Reaper's bit-bridge/firewall (it's the same executable doing both things) is absolutely the leanest and most efficiently coded bridge that I've ever used. I cannot notice any performance loss or added latency with it.

The greatest thing about Reaper's firewalling is that it bit-bridges at the same time. So I don't have to purchase Jbridge or whatever. It's all in the app. And it's been rock-solid for me for quite a long time. As I can see MuLAB doesn't have its own bit-bridge yet. Here's a chance to introduce it at a certain point, since it seems to have become a competitive feature between DAWs.

[> DiGiT <]

hold it now, we dont need a bunch of useless features bloating our program do we? there are other more important features that need attention. the wish list has thousands of items on it after all... hey what about that one graphics program... doesnt it have a lot of windows? thats a good reason for not implementing this feature... you may think you want this now but blah blah blah think of the future of mulab when youre long gone to the next DAW and we are all stuck here and still using the silly little features you wanted... jo cant build every feature request, better luck next time kid!

[dakkra]

hold it now, we dont need a bunch of useless features bloating our program do we? there are other more important features that need attention. the wish list has thousands of items on it after all... hey what about that one graphics program... doesnt it have a lot of windows? thats a good reason for not implementing this feature... you may think you want this now but blah blah blah think of the future of mulab when youre long gone to the next DAW and we are all stuck here and still using the silly little features you wanted... jo cant build every feature request, better luck next time kid!

That's why I said we should test out the idea and see how it goes. That way if it brings more pain than gain we can trash it. Also this is just an addition to the wish list. Not an immediate thing. I'm just saying that we could "entertain" the idea. That's all. Jo and Trancit have good points in this. Why use useless VST and what problems may it bring? Well, again we can test it and see if it has more pain than gain. And again this is JUST another addition the the wish list, nothing more.

Thankyou

[mutools]

you may think you want this now but blah blah blah think of the future of mulab when youre long gone to the next DAW and we are all stuck here and still using the silly little features you wanted.

Please stay gentle and respectful.

Eventhough i'm also not enthusiast about this idea at first, at least this topic proves that talking about it can reveal various interesting aspects. Agreed?

jo cant build every feature request, better luck next time kid!

FYI: No definite decision yet. I conclude that you vote against the idea.

[EvilDragon]

hold it now, we dont need a bunch of useless features bloating our program do we? there are other more important features that need attention. the wish list has thousands of items on it after all... hey what about that one graphics program... doesnt it have a lot of windows? thats a good reason for not implementing this feature... you may think you want this now but blah blah blah think of the future of mulab when youre long gone to the next DAW and we are all stuck here and still using the silly little features you wanted... jo cant build every feature request, better luck next time kid!

What the hell are you smoking?! Don't you have a least bit of respect?


By the way, I'm already using a different DAW that's so far good to me (Reaper). I'm exploring MuLAB as a second option. There are things missing in it that I feel it should have to be competitive to the rest of the pack. Internal bit-bridge/firewalling is one of them. That's it.



Oh. And I'm not a "kid". And Jo might be one guy working hard at his thing, but Reaper is not much different than that - it's only three guys working hard at their thing. Both should be respected to the utmost.

[> DiGiT <]

im sorry guys thats just my humor. no harm done?

no really i think it sounds interesting!

and hasnt mulab crashed on us all because of a vst before hmm guys? i know when i test em out they fail. mulab is very stable by its self, its always them dang vsts oh i do agree.