Latest News: MuTools updates MuLab and MUX VST to 5.1.5
|
|||
> DiGiT < wrote: do you relish using mux vst with a single midi input? why wouldnt anyone want to use mux vst the way you can use mux in mulab--with no restrictions?
those are interesting plugins Perhaps because that single midi input can take 16 channels of midi which is enough for the majority of people? It is an interesting idea you have proposed but one that is probably quite niche and which can currently be achieved using alternatives such as Senderella and Wormhole. |
|||
| ^ | Joined: 25 Apr 2005 Member: #66287 | ||
|
|||
Caco wrote: Perhaps because that single midi input can take 16 channels of midi which is enough for the majority of people? It is an interesting idea you have proposed but one that is probably quite niche
+1 |
|||
| ^ | Joined: 24 Jun 2008 Member: #183484 Location: Europe | ||
|
|||
Robert Randolph wrote: I understand your decision to use this notation in MuLab, but when MUX Vst is being used in another host it maybe quite confusing. Most hosts notate with 1/8. -1/8 - 1/8t - etc.. and since they also may be operating at different ppq/clock settings, someone who reads the MUX manual might get very confused.
"MIDI Clocks" is a standard term. It's 1/24th of a beat = quarter note. It's independent from the PPQN resolution. Anyway, i understand the "x/24th" notation is confusing because it's referring to 1/24th of a beat while eg 1/16th refers to 1/16th of a measure. In the next version the 1/xth of a measure notation is always used. That's a quick short term solution. Further improvements may come lateron. The next MuLab version M4.2.1 will be released soon. |
|||
| ^ | Joined: 24 Jun 2008 Member: #183484 Location: Europe | ||
|
|||
Robert Randolph wrote: mutools wrote: Robert Randolph wrote: There are ways to get around the 1 midi I/O problem though. Really? Didn't know that. Do you know how? (at this point just out of curiosity)Well you can't do it in the VST 2.4 spec itself, but you can make simple midi effect plugins that send midi to another plugin via your choice of interprocess data sharing. Thanks, i see. I don't want to go that path on short term. It's too specific imho. Still more than enough to do on the standard aspects of MuLab (multi-core, 64 bit, browser, further streamlined workflow, enhanced window management, enhanced undo system etc. etc.) and the MUX (many more modules including arpeggiators, sequencers, enriched oscillator and so much more). And not to forget the research of the Reason RE platform, the IOS and Android platforms for mobiles and tablets. |
|||
| ^ | Joined: 24 Jun 2008 Member: #183484 Location: Europe | ||
|
|||
mutools wrote: Robert Randolph wrote: I understand your decision to use this notation in MuLab, but when MUX Vst is being used in another host it maybe quite confusing. Most hosts notate with 1/8. -1/8 - 1/8t - etc.. and since they also may be operating at different ppq/clock settings, someone who reads the MUX manual might get very confused.
"MIDI Clocks" is a standard term. It's 1/24th of a beat = quarter note. It's independent from the PPQN resolution. Anyway, i understand the "x/24th" notation is confusing because it's referring to 1/24th of a beat while eg 1/16th refers to 1/16th of a measure. In the next version the 1/xth of a measure notation is always used. That's a quick short term solution. Further improvements may come lateron. The next MuLab version M4.2.1 will be released soon. Ahhhh, I just realize you were referencing beat clock events. Doesn't change my previous opinion, but that's irrelevant now Thank you for considering the issue. I hope it didn't suck up too much of your time |
|||
| ^ | Joined: 25 May 2003 Member: #7328 Location: Saint Petersburg, Florida | ||
|
|||
Caco wrote: > DiGiT < wrote: do you relish using mux vst with a single midi input? why wouldnt anyone want to use mux vst the way you can use mux in mulab--with no restrictions?
those are interesting plugins Perhaps because that single midi input can take 16 channels of midi which is enough for the majority of people? It is an interesting idea you have proposed but one that is probably quite niche and which can currently be achieved using alternatives such as Senderella and Wormhole. ok cool. but for side chain? |
|||
| ^ | Joined: 08 Jan 2005 Member: #54204 Location: Detroit | ||
|
|||
How do you mean? I use sidechaining a fair bit within mux as it is, can't see why it would be different in the vst version.
Sidechaining to me generally means a compressor feature that factors in one signal's volume to the gain reduction applied to another, are we talking about the same thing? |
|||
| ^ | Joined: 18 Jul 2005 Member: #75236 | ||
|
|||
Is the MUX VST going to be a single .dll file? Id prefer it to be as I don't want to have to install it as that causes problem if using on usb drive. |
|||
| ^ | Joined: 28 Mar 2008 Member: #177216 Location: U.K. | ||
|
|||
robenestobenz wrote: How do you mean? I use sidechaining a fair bit within mux as it is, can't see why it would be different in the vst version.
Sidechaining to me generally means a compressor feature that factors in one signal's volume to the gain reduction applied to another, are we talking about the same thing? yes same thing. how will you get the side chain signal into mux vst? (in a NON modular environment that is) |
|||
| ^ | Joined: 08 Jan 2005 Member: #54204 Location: Detroit | ||
|
|||
@DiGiT: possibly create a second audio in in the MUX and route your sidechain signal to that 2nd input |
|||
| ^ | Joined: 02 Mar 2009 Member: #202283 | ||
|
|||
AndreasD wrote: @DiGiT: possibly create a second audio in in the MUX and route your sidechain signal to that 2nd input
Yes, that is the principle of side chaining ..cheers |
|||
| ^ | Joined: 25 Oct 2008 Member: #192223 Location: Holland | ||
|
|||
DOH! forget i even wanted this feature... jthalamus is the answer Last edited by > DiGiT < on Thu Jun 21, 2012 9:34 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|||
| ^ | Joined: 08 Jan 2005 Member: #54204 Location: Detroit | ||
|
|||
In REAPER, you can send an audio, from a VST track for example, to another track that could host a MUX and there you have it.
In Live you should be able to do the same if the MUX loads with the same in/out as in MuLab (2/4). EnergyXT should do the same, being also modular (not to the extents of MuLab, far from it) Those are very flexible DAWs so I don't know if Studio One for example is able to do the same. ---- MuLab 4, Studio One v2. In that order. |
|||
| ^ | Joined: 30 May 2006 Member: #108991 Location: US / Italy | ||
|
|||
Hello, I've just read this entire thread. MUX sounds very interesting and I'll definitely be demoing it as soon as there is one available. I have a few questions:
1. I noticed MuLab uses a serial key -- will MUX use the same or similar (key file, serial) form of copy protection? 2. In the oscillator youtube tutorial I saw a "fatness" parameter. I assume that does some sort of voice stacking and detuning? If so is it possible to send non-linear event input to the value? I ask because a big part of the JP6000 super-saw sound was how the non-linear detune and respective saw balances were adjusted with respect to each other. I'd like to have this level of control when shaping sounds and I hope it's there. 3. Are there any plans for a script-able language (Lua, Javascript, Jesusonic, etc) to build MUX modules? I think I can use ReaJS inside MUX to get most of what I want but was curious as to your take on the idea. 4. How does MUX handle PDC? Let's say MUX loads a VST with X PDC and Y PDC where X < Y. Does MUX report X+Y to the DAW or does it analyze the signal path to determine the longest chain and report that? In the example above if X and Y were in parallel then the logical thing to do is report Y to the DAW. 5. How does the internal OSC do PWM? Does it have a concept of wavetables or some sort of osc start <-> end osc and intelligent morphing? I liked what I saw in the OSC video but it left me with a lot of questions that I could probably answer/discover after playing a bit. 6. Any ETA on pricing/availability? Thanks for taking the time to answer my questions -- you have something really interesting here. It reminds me of Apple Logic's Environment (but far superior). |
|||
| ^ | Joined: 11 Aug 2006 Member: #116141 Location: Austin, TX | ||
|
|||
Hi bmrzycki,
you could, in the meantime, download the free version of MuLab and explore the MUX ( mulab version, not the vst yet, but very similar) and the various modules inside the MUX and MuLab to get an idea of the modularity that will be available in the MUX VST. Welcome here. ---- MuLab 4, Studio One v2. In that order. |
|||
| ^ | Joined: 30 May 2006 Member: #108991 Location: US / Italy |
Disclaimer: All communications made available as part of this forum and any opinions, advice, statements, views or other information expressed in this forum are solely provided by, and the responsibility of, the person posting such communication and not of kvraudio.com (unless kvraudio.com is specifically identified as the author of the communication).
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group







