Login / Register 0 items | $0.00 New @ KVR
Mivo
KVRist
 
361 posts since 13 Jan, 2014, from Germany

Postby Mivo; Sun May 13, 2018 1:25 pm Re: Mulab 8

fluffy_little_something wrote:I think Mulab is complex enough already, and not overly intuitive compared to other DAW's.


Late to this thread's party, but -- I just wanted to chip in that I always found Mulab more intuitive than other DAWs. It may just be me, or the Atari background I share with Jo, but Mulab always "clicked" with me whereas I had trouble getting into other DAWs. I also use FL Studio, which I think many people experience as intuitive, but it never felt that way to me. Then there's Reaper, which I am still learning and feel frequently overwhelmed by. Oddly, Renoise felt intuitive to me, but I suppose it's not that way for others. Oh, and Live, so many people's favorite, that I also failed to get into.

I guess it's always just very subjective what is and isn't intuitive. Mulab's UI being non-standard is something that actually helps me get into a creative mindset, because it puts me into a visually unique environment and snaps me out of the "I'm sitting at my work computer and trying to not work" feeling, which is usually my #1 problem when trying to make music at the computer. I'd probably do well (or better) with hardware, but the only hardware that appeals to me right now is Elektron's stuff, and I'm currently not ready to spend €1250 each for three devices.

If I had to identify the biggest "issue" that Mulab has, I'd say it's the lack of instructional content on YouTube, like "Song from Scratch" videos, narrated demonstrations, cool tricks and tips people have figured out, displays of workflow, etc. But this needs to chiefly come from the community, not from Jo.

What Jo said about "creative sequencing" really resonated with me. That's what I want. I don't look for another Cubase or software that tries very hard to mimic hardware and hardware workflows. I feel that the latter holds back DAWs from emphasizing and focusing on all the untapped potential that modern computers offer for more creative approaches that stray off the beaten track.
SparkySpark
KVRian
 
1239 posts since 30 Aug, 2004, from Skövde, Sweden

Postby SparkySpark; Sun May 13, 2018 3:38 pm Re: Mulab 8

What a great piece of insight!
Agree with all you wrote. Yes, away with the hw mimicking and let a sequencer be a sequencer in its own right (my first was Pro24 on Atari ST so I understand where - and roughly when - you're coming from).

MuLab is just such a joy to make music with, super fast workflow and easy to understand, while extremely configurable at the same time.

New videos have just been released by a member of the community and I hope for more. There was a really good one recently on side-chain compression.
Making music is a nine-to-five job:
From 9 PM to 5 AM.
Go MuLab!
User avatar
Michael L
KVRAF
 
2345 posts since 25 Jan, 2014, from the End of the World as we Knowit

Postby Michael L; Sun May 13, 2018 7:31 pm Re: Mulab 8

Mivo wrote:instructional content on YouTube, like "Song from Scratch" videos, narrated demonstrations, cool tricks and tips people have figured out, displays of workflow... needs to chiefly come from the community

Would each user make one video about something he does well in MuLab? If so, how could we easily make decent instructional videos the first time?

Maybe we could use the same free software (obsproject.com) and only 'talk using text' so people could share videos and translate the labels/captions into their own languages?

Also, if we followed a similar outline, our videos would look like a unified series. A simple outline might include:
1. Focus each video on a musical need (e.g. designing polyrhythms)
2. Start at the default page
3. Organise your workflow by 'steps'
4. Say the name of every thing you use
5. Try out and listen to different possibilities
6. Explain the musical reason for making your final choice

Those are my thoughts. What do you think?

Also, do you think folks need to learn 'how to play with MuLab' e.g. take-it-apart-to-figure-it-out?
User avatar
VariKusBrainZ
KVRAF
 
7987 posts since 16 Dec, 2002

Postby VariKusBrainZ; Wed Jun 06, 2018 1:22 pm Re: Mulab 8

Kind of strange that timestretch is being 'developed' when Muzys had it already back in 2002 ;)
mutools
KVRAF
 
9529 posts since 24 Jun, 2008, from Europe

Postby mutools; Wed Jun 06, 2018 2:28 pm Re: Mulab 8

1) Muzys' timestretch was a simple granular stretch function that could be applied to a sample in the wavelabo.
With M8 i'm researching higher quality timestretching. And it's about timestretch functionality that is fully integrated in the composer workflow, which really is a big difference to that isolated offline dsp function in Muzys.

2) Note that i do not own the Muzys code anymore. So whatever was in Muzys and we want to be reincarnated in MuLab needs to be re-developed.
User avatar
VariKusBrainZ
KVRAF
 
7987 posts since 16 Dec, 2002

Postby VariKusBrainZ; Wed Jun 06, 2018 2:34 pm Re: Mulab 8

mutools wrote:1) Muzys' timestretch was a simple granular stretch function that could be applied to a sample in the wavelabo.
With M8 i'm researching higher quality timestretching. And it's about timestretch functionality that is fully integrated in the composer workflow, which really is a big difference to that isolated offline dsp function in Muzys.

2) Note that i do not own the Muzys code anymore. So whatever was in Muzys and we want to be reincarnated in MuLab needs to be re-developed.


I know, Im just having a poke ;)

I just fired up Muzys and was remenicing

One day you have to tell us who bought the rights !!!
mutools
KVRAF
 
9529 posts since 24 Jun, 2008, from Europe

Postby mutools; Wed Jun 06, 2018 2:46 pm Re: Mulab 8

I can't tell due to an NDA. Anyway, why bother? It's more than a decade in the past. And MuLab already is much better than Muzys. And MuLab is actively being developed.
SparkySpark
KVRian
 
1239 posts since 30 Aug, 2004, from Skövde, Sweden

Postby SparkySpark; Wed Jun 06, 2018 3:07 pm Re: Mulab 8

Just wondering about the different types of time streching. Well, what are the possible differences, generally speaking? :)

I just thought ts is ts, just of better or worse sound quality, but I guess there is an interesting reason why MuLab gets its own ts implementation.
Making music is a nine-to-five job:
From 9 PM to 5 AM.
Go MuLab!
User avatar
VariKusBrainZ
KVRAF
 
7987 posts since 16 Dec, 2002

Postby VariKusBrainZ; Wed Jun 06, 2018 10:32 pm Re: Mulab 8

mutools wrote:I can't tell due to an NDA. Anyway, why bother? It's more than a decade in the past. And MuLab already is much better than Muzys. And MuLab is actively being developed.


Muzys was my first paid for VST host and she was so young when we lost her!

Dont NDAs come with a time limit....

Anyway :arrow:
mutools
KVRAF
 
9529 posts since 24 Jun, 2008, from Europe

Postby mutools; Wed Jun 06, 2018 11:31 pm Re: Mulab 8

VariKusBrainZ wrote:
mutools wrote:I can't tell due to an NDA. Anyway, why bother? It's more than a decade in the past. And MuLab already is much better than Muzys. And MuLab is actively being developed.

Muzys was my first paid for VST host and she was so young when we lost her!

I also felt very sad about what happened to Muzys.
But the answer to that sadness is to reincarnate Muzys into MuLab.
I know there still are some last remaining points where Muzys was better than MuLab but also those will be reincarnated step by step.

Dont NDAs come with a time limit....

I don't think so. Not going to look it up. Priority to the M8 works.
mutools
KVRAF
 
9529 posts since 24 Jun, 2008, from Europe

Postby mutools; Wed Jun 06, 2018 11:56 pm Re: Mulab 8

SparkySpark wrote:Just wondering about the different types of time streching. Well, what are the possible differences, generally speaking? :)

Basically there are 2 ways:

1) In the time domain (TD) = using grains.
2) In the frequency domain (FD) = using a technique called phase vocoding.

Both have its advantages and disadvantages.

I have a good TD based stretcher, happy about that one, i regard that as done. I'm even researching a 2nd specialized TD stretcher for monophonic sounds, interesting partial results, maybe i'll complete that too, it depends on the FD stretch R&D. Indeed i do want a good FD based stretcher too. Because stretching is very sound dependent and a good stretching solution is about a palette of stretch options so that all types of sounds can be stretched in good quality.

If you want more details about those stretch algos, please search the web.

I guess there is an interesting reason why MuLab gets its own ts implementation.

I already explained that in previous posts about this. But i realize the R&D is very time consuming. I hope i can complete a good solution soon. Theoretically i'm still open to use an existing time stretch library, though practically i'm too far into the time stretch research to give it up now. And thanks to that research i'm also learning a lot of things that can be very helpful in other fields too. The world of sound is amazing 8)

Note that not all the past months have purely gone into the time stretch algos only. Also integrating time stretching into the composer workflow was a serious task. And there was also R&D on other M8 aspects as you will see when M8 is out. Can't give a time estimation yet, but things are progressing. I'm eager to get it ready.
SparkySpark
KVRian
 
1239 posts since 30 Aug, 2004, from Skövde, Sweden

Postby SparkySpark; Thu Jun 07, 2018 10:24 am Re: Mulab 8

Thanks a lot for the detailed and informative reply!

I recall that Jorgen used the elastique library for the ts of EnergyXT, but having developed my own game engine from scratch, I do understand the power in developing one's own stuff.

And so it sounds very exciting with the new possibilities you are getting from this. Perhaps it would be worth chatting with the developer of PaulXStretch, since that is a creative way of using ts.

Really looking forward to M8!
Making music is a nine-to-five job:
From 9 PM to 5 AM.
Go MuLab!
mutools
KVRAF
 
9529 posts since 24 Jun, 2008, from Europe

Postby mutools; Fri Jun 08, 2018 5:30 am Re: Mulab 8

SparkySpark wrote:Perhaps it would be worth chatting with the developer of PaulXStretch, since that is a creative way of using ts.

Yes Paul Stretch / Paul X Stretch is an interesting thing, i already know about that. Thx for the hint.
luxgud
KVRist
 
282 posts since 27 Apr, 2004, from Always here

Postby luxgud; Thu Jun 28, 2018 2:36 am Re: Mulab 8

How does your time stretching/pitch shifting compare with Elastique ?
Elastique has become the standard, being used in many DAWs.

I have no idea how much the licensing costs but I suspect this could have an impact on the host's price.
vanhaze
KVRist
 
235 posts since 23 Oct, 2004

Postby vanhaze; Fri Jul 06, 2018 5:18 am Re: Mulab 8

I am not fund of the stretching quality of Elastique pro v3 on "full" material, like complete tracks or "full" audioloops.

I use it in Reaper and it sounds muffled really quick, even when just stretched a minimum amount.
Transients destroyed very easy.

I think i like the used stretch algorithm in Logic Pro X (Flex Time) the best atm.
Stretching in Ableton Live also s*cks, the complex mode is a joke.

I hope Jo's stretch algorithm tops Flex Time on full material. :D

Just my 2 cents ofcourse.
Rob van Hees
PreviousNext

Moderators: muzycian, mutools

Return to MUTOOLS