What is KVR Audio? | Submit News | Advertise | Developer Account

Options (Affects News & Product results only):

OS:
Format:
Include:
Quick Search KVR

"Quick Search" KVR Audio's Product Database, News Items, Developer Listings, Forum Topics and videos here. For advanced Product Database searching please use the full product search. For the forum you can use the phpBB forum search.

To utilize the power of Google you can use the integrated Google Site Search.

Products 0

Developers 0

News 0

Forum 0

Videos 0

Search  

MUX in review

VST, AU, etc. plug-in Virtual Instruments discussion

Moderator: Moderators (Main)

User avatar
KVRAF
 
3202 posts since 20 Sep, 2005

Postby codec_spurt; Sun Mar 16, 2014 5:47 pm Re: MUX in review

chk071 wrote:That's MuLab, Mux costs 49 €.


Thanks for filling me in.

I still can't see any distinction.

Ah.

Now I do.

I see.

Maybe I am not the only one that has made that mistake.

You must admit, to the untrained eye, that was pretty easy to get confused.
--------------------------------------------
"One never loves enough" - R.D. Laing
--------------------------------------------
User avatar
KVRAF
 
2762 posts since 10 Apr, 2010, from Germany

Postby chk071; Sun Mar 16, 2014 5:51 pm Re: MUX in review

It's a bit confusing, as the poor Mux is surrounded by MuLab's in that table. :) Maybe they should just mention the price on the product page.
User avatar
KVRAF
 
8848 posts since 12 Mar, 2012, from South Bavaria - near the alps... :-)

Postby Tricky-Loops; Sun Mar 16, 2014 5:58 pm Re: MUX in review

codec_spurt wrote:You must admit, to the untrained eye, that was pretty easy to get confused.
I think it's big enough...

Image
User avatar
KVRAF
 
3202 posts since 20 Sep, 2005

Postby codec_spurt; Sun Mar 16, 2014 6:00 pm Re: MUX in review

chk071 wrote:It's a bit confusing, as the poor Mux is surrounded by MuLab's in that table. :) Maybe they should just mention the price on the product page.


It's clear as day when you have it pointed out.

But I went to buy there the other day and that put me off.

A little colour coding would do the trick.

Mux - Blue

Mu Tools - Red

Whatevers, you know...

Just for the challenged like me,

It's a small price difference, but from a marketing point of view these are two totally different markets, so it might be important information.

If you are not being underhanded or dealing in subterfuge it benefits everyone to make your products well defined.

And I know Jo is the last person in the world to be underhand.

Give it a bit of colour coding. It really makes a lot of difference. Not just to retards like me, but most people in general. I think you will find studies find that to be true.

:-)
--------------------------------------------
"One never loves enough" - R.D. Laing
--------------------------------------------
User avatar
KVRAF
 
3202 posts since 20 Sep, 2005

Postby codec_spurt; Sun Mar 16, 2014 6:02 pm Re: MUX in review

Tricky-Loops wrote:
codec_spurt wrote:You must admit, to the untrained eye, that was pretty easy to get confused.
I think it's big enough...

Image



The size of the thing was not in doubt.

Everything was the same size.

How was the distinction supposed to be made between them, without any colour difference?
--------------------------------------------
"One never loves enough" - R.D. Laing
--------------------------------------------
User avatar
KVRAF
 
2806 posts since 5 Jun, 2012

Postby fluffy_little_something; Sun Mar 16, 2014 6:10 pm Re: MUX in review

Gee, this board sucks, I just wrote a longer comment, and when I sent it, the board was down, and back did not work, either. How unprofessional is that, thanks for wasting my time KVR... :P
User avatar
KVRAF
 
3202 posts since 20 Sep, 2005

Postby codec_spurt; Sun Mar 16, 2014 6:42 pm Re: MUX in review

fluffy_little_something wrote:Gee, this board sucks, I just wrote a longer comment, and when I sent it, the board was down, and back did not work, either. How unprofessional is that, thanks for wasting my time KVR... :P



It sucks sweaty hairy donkey balls when it does that (not that I would know), but there is a disclaimer here about backing up your post before sending.

They have been doing a quick couple of sneaky upgrades here between posts, and you got caught in the crossfire. But it would be prudent to back anything up, that if you missed it, you would complain about. That's a good measure.

It's pretty much the same for all boards that use this software. It is not bullet proof.

Anyway, never mind all that. Give us the gist...
--------------------------------------------
"One never loves enough" - R.D. Laing
--------------------------------------------
User avatar
KVRist
 
471 posts since 4 Oct, 2012, from Utah
    

Postby dakkra; Sun Mar 16, 2014 6:57 pm Re: MUX in review

I absolutely love the MUX. Even without FM, PD, Wave tables, etc... It's an amazing device for synth work. I don't much in the effects area but from what I've seen from AndreasD, MUX has that covered. I just like the idea of making my own deep lush pads with 7 oscillators running their own effect trees and still packaging it all up into one Instance of my synth. This synth is my go to along with Synthemaster. Both get used evenly in my world. :D
yul
KVRist
 
383 posts since 26 Sep, 2002, from Montreal, CANADA

Postby yul; Sun Mar 16, 2014 7:41 pm Re: MUX in review

I have Mulab and use MUX mainly as a drum machine that can map a single vst to every key on an octave. It's one of the very few ways this can be done as far as I know.

It has really made my writing drum parts a pleasurable experience from one single track.

I basically map individual FM8 to every keys and each plug has its drum sound.

There is also the pads/triggers and phrases/sequencer that are potentially great or live use.
User avatar
KVRAF
 
2806 posts since 5 Jun, 2012

Postby fluffy_little_something; Mon Mar 17, 2014 7:17 am Re: MUX in review

codec_spurt wrote:
fluffy_little_something wrote:Gee, this board sucks, I just wrote a longer comment, and when I sent it, the board was down, and back did not work, either. How unprofessional is that, thanks for wasting my time KVR... :P



It sucks sweaty hairy donkey balls when it does that (not that I would know), but there is a disclaimer here about backing up your post before sending.

They have been doing a quick couple of sneaky upgrades here between posts, and you got caught in the crossfire. But it would be prudent to back anything up, that if you missed it, you would complain about. That's a good measure.

It's pretty much the same for all boards that use this software. It is not bullet proof.

Anyway, never mind all that. Give us the gist...


Glad none of the other boards I am on uses that software :) Copying the contents of an entry box before sending, that is so 20th century...

Anyway, the gist, well, I only have Mulab, not the separate Mux. Which is a kind of problem, actually. There doesn't seem to be an upgrade path from Mulab to Mux for those who switch DAW's, but want to continue to use their presets.
I don't like the synth component enough to pay 49 euros for Mux, though. I bought Mulab because of the DAW component, not the synth.

Having said this, I think MuTools stuff is actually pretty cheap, especially since one major version is maintained for quite some time and the developer lives in Belgium, which is not exactly a cheap country. So if I needed all that modular functionality, I would certainly buy it.

Regarding the synth itself, I don't think it is overly intuitive. It is too freakish to understand without the manual. It really is for synth and sound freaks, not so much for normal musicians. When I look at the envelope module for instance, I am confronted with a dozen or so controls, which is too much for me. I am happy with my conventional 4 or 5 controls.
The user interface of the polysynth has been improved quite a bit, but I can hardly read those white on light blue labels anymore. So I no longer use that, either.

Generally speaking, the sound of Mulab/Mux seems geared towards electronic genres and the European/Asian pop sound. Since I am more into the old-skool American sound, I don't like the sound and presets too much. There are quite a lot of presets, but somehow I like hardly any of them. With other synths it does not matter as I don't care about factory presets anyway, but with Mux/Mulab it is different because I would have to base my own patches on factory presets since I never really know which modules to use. That is not Mux's fault, though, I guess Mux and I just don't match :) For synth experts it probably is heaven :)
User avatar
KVRAF
 
3202 posts since 20 Sep, 2005

Postby codec_spurt; Mon Mar 17, 2014 3:33 pm Re: MUX in review

Interesting perspective.

I would also like to see a really great preset showcase.

Maybe Jo should let this out to a few people that are mad enough to do crazy modular stuff, people that think nothing of losing a few days on creating a crossover with null tests...

We are available.

The invitation is there.

It must be pretty difficult making this stuff up and then putting it out into the world.

I guess I'd like a fully functioning free copy, and I might or might not do something interesting with it.

It's not hard to see why people don't beat down my door.
--------------------------------------------
"One never loves enough" - R.D. Laing
--------------------------------------------
User avatar
KVRAF
 
8848 posts since 12 Mar, 2012, from South Bavaria - near the alps... :-)

Postby Tricky-Loops; Mon Mar 17, 2014 3:56 pm Re: MUX in review

Indeed that's sad. For NI Massive there are zillions of sound sets but for MUX there's nothing...

Maybe because it's not the most demanded synth/effect, so sound designers rather make sound sets for synths which are better known in the hope to sell more sound sets...
User avatar
KVRAF
 
2806 posts since 5 Jun, 2012

Postby fluffy_little_something; Mon Mar 17, 2014 4:00 pm Re: MUX in review

Maybe it is too time-consuming to make presets for Mux and thus not worth the effort. Even experienced programmers might have to invest quite some time to familiarize themselves with that environment first.
But yes, maybe they also think nobody will buy them anyway, like if you did presets for SynthEdit synths. And those who might be interested in buying them, might also want to modify them, which would also require more knowledge than with regular synths and thus deter people.
User avatar
KVRist
 
176 posts since 31 Jul, 2013, from Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil
    

Postby animehaus; Mon Mar 17, 2014 4:09 pm Re: MUX in review

One of OSC 60 entries has some real badass MUX sounds, quite different from the usual presets geared towards electronic music:
https://soundcloud.com/dwsel/dwsel-guit ... labs-mux-1
User avatar
KVRAF
 
2577 posts since 15 Sep, 2005, from Connecticut, USA

Postby Examigan; Tue Mar 25, 2014 7:04 am Re: MUX in review

codec_spurt wrote:
Examigan wrote:I am starting to write a review about MUX by MuTools.

I am not sure why I haven't heard much else about it.
http://www.mutools.com/mux-product.html

This looks like a go-to product, really cool

:)



I tried it out recently. I was lusting after it after seeing demos.

Was a bit let down. Maybe coz I was doing band splitting crossover stuff.

Meh.

It looks like a great tool. But it didn't really do what I wanted it to do.

It is too crippled unless you pay too high a price. What is it? 99 dollars or euros?
But maybe they got it right.

Jo is a super cool guy and dev. I just wanna pay 50 bucks and have a full functioning version. I'd spring for that. Maybe I just don't realise how much I need it.



:-)

The presets did not invite me in.

A three band or four band crossover is the most basic of things for this kind of thing.

The Juce framework is it?, I don't know, done by Julian Storer of Tracktion fame. It's great and all that, but, it's just a bit lame. There must be a reason why devs use it I suppose. I must sound hyper critical. It's just slow with bad graphics.

I really wish Jo well with it though, and I will buy it in the future at some point even if he doesn't change the price. Even the cripped version is worth the money.

It just doesn't cry 'Take me now!'.

Maybe that was a bad analogy. I'll leave it there. Then again, maybe I shouldn't have used that word.

:-)


I asked him about multiband crossover stuff you mentioned, and he said you just route the audio input through some parallel filters, each filter selects a separate part of the frequency spectrum, and then you can hook up anything you like to these spectra.
PreviousNext

Moderator: Moderators (Main)

Return to Instruments