Maybe one could morph the wave index of two Multiform Oscillators via an X-Y controller (wave index of MFO 1 as X-axis and wave index of MFO 2 as Y-axis). That would be very expressive playing capabilities.
Anyway: The Multiform Oscillator is a stunning piece of art - better than many synths specialised in wave table synthesis.
Formant Filter in Mux?
-
- KVRAF
- 12739 posts since 24 Jun, 2008 from Europe
Agreed. An X-Y controller is already on the wishlist, will come thru one day.DIGIFEX wrote:Maybe one could morph the wave index of two Multiform Oscillators via an X-Y controller (wave index of MFO 1 as X-axis and wave index of MFO 2 as Y-axis). That would be very expressive playing capabilities.
Thanks for your appreciation. Do you have any idea, from your personal experience, why it is so unknown?The Multiform Oscillator is a stunning piece of art - better than many synths specialised in wave table synthesis.
-
- KVRist
- Topic Starter
- 125 posts since 14 Dec, 2010
Well, there are a couple of reasons whay the Mux hasn't been that successul in the past:
1. Marketing: To be honest I stumbled over the Mux by accident about two years ago when version 5 was released. I was looking for a modular synth these days and I first did a search in the KVR "Search plugins" section to find a modular synth. I typed in the tags "Synth" and "Modular Synth" and finally the Mux wasn't among the shown up items. Since I didn't want to spend 400 Euros for Reaktor (which is also a little beyond my skills to be honest) I had a hard time to find something useful. There are lots of freeware tools which didn't seem to be very promising and so I went to the forum section at KVR to read a little in the threads on modular topics and someone wrote about Bidule and the Mux which finally led me to the Mutools homepage. So without any doubt the Mux is a serious tool that went under the radar of ambitious synth artists - may be because few people know that it exists.
2. Prjudices: Many users fear using a modular synth because they think it's difficult to use it. And in fact this is true regarding some modular aproaches that came up in the past. I'm using AAS Tassman for about 5 years now and sometimes I think I'll never completely understand what's going on. The front panel is rather complex, so even editing an already existing machine to your taste is not that easy. You always see every parameter of a synth creation on the front panel which sometimes leads to front panels that are larger than the biggest displays available. These are concepts that were born in the stone age of plugin design, but they even have an impact on how users think about modular systems today. They simply don't know that you can design your own front panel in Mux - as simple or as complex as you like. (I discovered that feature after I had bought a MUX license; when I decided to by it, I didn't know how elegant this aproach is and was surprised in a positive way.)
3. Continuous development and support: Of course there are some serious companies out there that do synth development for many years (like Image Line, Native Instruments, Spectrasonics, only to name a few) and people expect to get support for the next years if they pay for a product. If you don't know the developer you will never know how it will go on. I currently have 4 synths in my arsenal that were discontinued shortly after I purchased a license for different reasons: One was taken over as a programmer at Spectrasonics, one decided to quit his job as a programmer and one has simply disappeared - no one knows what has happened to him.
When I bought Mux 5 some time ago I didn't expect very much to be honest. Now I see that there are updates on a regular basis - just as if Mutools was a large premium developer. But who knows? I suppose only few enthusiasts know how well Mulab and Mux are supported.
So what can I do? I'm surprised to see that there are no reviews on Mux here on KVR. Not a single one after years of development. Sometimes you can find KVR reviews on the simplest machines that hardly can do more than some bleep and bluup noises. Totally unusable, but with high score reviews.
Perhaps it may help if some Mux users are going to write some lines on their Mux eperience. And if they don't - I will do it. And if I do, I do it for those who are passionate for electronic music and sound creation. Not for those who seem to hear with their eyes. Raving about fancy graphics and shiny looks. I'm afraid they won't buy the Mux anyway because it doesn't come with photorealistic chrome plates and pseudo wooden side bars.
1. Marketing: To be honest I stumbled over the Mux by accident about two years ago when version 5 was released. I was looking for a modular synth these days and I first did a search in the KVR "Search plugins" section to find a modular synth. I typed in the tags "Synth" and "Modular Synth" and finally the Mux wasn't among the shown up items. Since I didn't want to spend 400 Euros for Reaktor (which is also a little beyond my skills to be honest) I had a hard time to find something useful. There are lots of freeware tools which didn't seem to be very promising and so I went to the forum section at KVR to read a little in the threads on modular topics and someone wrote about Bidule and the Mux which finally led me to the Mutools homepage. So without any doubt the Mux is a serious tool that went under the radar of ambitious synth artists - may be because few people know that it exists.
2. Prjudices: Many users fear using a modular synth because they think it's difficult to use it. And in fact this is true regarding some modular aproaches that came up in the past. I'm using AAS Tassman for about 5 years now and sometimes I think I'll never completely understand what's going on. The front panel is rather complex, so even editing an already existing machine to your taste is not that easy. You always see every parameter of a synth creation on the front panel which sometimes leads to front panels that are larger than the biggest displays available. These are concepts that were born in the stone age of plugin design, but they even have an impact on how users think about modular systems today. They simply don't know that you can design your own front panel in Mux - as simple or as complex as you like. (I discovered that feature after I had bought a MUX license; when I decided to by it, I didn't know how elegant this aproach is and was surprised in a positive way.)
3. Continuous development and support: Of course there are some serious companies out there that do synth development for many years (like Image Line, Native Instruments, Spectrasonics, only to name a few) and people expect to get support for the next years if they pay for a product. If you don't know the developer you will never know how it will go on. I currently have 4 synths in my arsenal that were discontinued shortly after I purchased a license for different reasons: One was taken over as a programmer at Spectrasonics, one decided to quit his job as a programmer and one has simply disappeared - no one knows what has happened to him.
When I bought Mux 5 some time ago I didn't expect very much to be honest. Now I see that there are updates on a regular basis - just as if Mutools was a large premium developer. But who knows? I suppose only few enthusiasts know how well Mulab and Mux are supported.
So what can I do? I'm surprised to see that there are no reviews on Mux here on KVR. Not a single one after years of development. Sometimes you can find KVR reviews on the simplest machines that hardly can do more than some bleep and bluup noises. Totally unusable, but with high score reviews.
Perhaps it may help if some Mux users are going to write some lines on their Mux eperience. And if they don't - I will do it. And if I do, I do it for those who are passionate for electronic music and sound creation. Not for those who seem to hear with their eyes. Raving about fancy graphics and shiny looks. I'm afraid they won't buy the Mux anyway because it doesn't come with photorealistic chrome plates and pseudo wooden side bars.
-
- KVRAF
- 12739 posts since 24 Jun, 2008 from Europe
Interesting feedback, thanks!DIGIFEX wrote:1. Marketing: To be honest I stumbled over the Mux by accident about two years ago when version 5 was released. I was looking for a modular synth these days and I first did a search in the KVR "Search plugins" section to find a modular synth. I typed in the tags "Synth" and "Modular Synth" and finally the Mux wasn't among the shown up items. Since I didn't want to spend 400 Euros for Reaktor (which is also a little beyond my skills to be honest) I had a hard time to find something useful. There are lots of freeware tools which didn't seem to be very promising and so I went to the forum section at KVR to read a little in the threads on modular topics and someone wrote about Bidule and the Mux which finally led me to the Mutools homepage. So without any doubt the Mux is a serious tool that went under the radar of ambitious synth artists - may be because few people know that it exists.
There is a tutorial movie about the front panels, did you find it?2. Prjudices: Many users fear using a modular synth because they think it's difficult to use it. And in fact this is true regarding some modular aproaches that came up in the past. I'm using AAS Tassman for about 5 years now and sometimes I think I'll never completely understand what's going on. The front panel is rather complex, so even editing an already existing machine to your taste is not that easy. You always see every parameter of a synth creation on the front panel which sometimes leads to front panels that are larger than the biggest displays available. These are concepts that were born in the stone age of plugin design, but they even have an impact on how users think about modular systems today. They simply don't know that you can design your own front panel in Mux - as simple or as complex as you like. (I discovered that feature after I had bought a MUX license; when I decided to by it, I didn't know how elegant this aproach is and was surprised in a positive way.)
Yes it's a pity MuTools stays so unknown, even with almost 25 years of music app r&d experience. I guess it also falls down on the marketing/advertising aspect. But then it's chicken and the egg: Too low sales = no money for ads = too low sales. Difficult to break that vicious circle. But it will also be partly caused by my handicaped marketing drive. I hate to push people or to do bloated product talk. But then your feedback in section 1 is interesting: You wanted to find something like MUX but it was difficult to find. That's not good indeed. There indeed should be more pointers towards MuLab / MUX. Will think this thru.3. Continuous development and support: Of course there are some serious companies out there that do synth development for many years (like Image Line, Native Instruments, Spectrasonics, only to name a few) and people expect to get support for the next years if they pay for a product. If you don't know the developer you will never know how it will go on. I currently have 4 synths in my arsenal that were discontinued shortly after I purchased a license for different reasons: One was taken over as a programmer at Spectrasonics, one decided to quit his job as a programmer and one has simply disappeared - no one knows what has happened to him.
When I bought Mux 5 some time ago I didn't expect very much to be honest. Now I see that there are updates on a regular basis - just as if Mutools was a large premium developer. But who knows? I suppose only few enthusiasts know how well Mulab and Mux are supported.
Indeed, it has amazed me many times too.So what can I do? I'm surprised to see that there are no reviews on Mux here on KVR. Not a single one after years of development. Sometimes you can find KVR reviews on the simplest machines that hardly can do more than some bleep and bluup noises. Totally unusable, but with high score reviews.
@everyone: Yes please do spread the news & tips & tricks about MuLab and MUX Modular as much as possible. Thx!Perhaps it may help if some Mux users are going to write some lines on their Mux eperience. And if they don't - I will do it. And if I do, I do it for those who are passionate for electronic music and sound creation. Not for those who seem to hear with their eyes. Raving about fancy graphics and shiny looks. I'm afraid they won't buy the Mux anyway because it doesn't come with photorealistic chrome plates and pseudo wooden side bars.
-
- KVRAF
- 1836 posts since 29 Mar, 2013
Just going back to the XY thing,
if you are using 32 bit you can use Midipads from Piz, a workaround, yes but til an integrated one is available it does the job. A bit fiddly to set up but it does work, shame there is no 64 bit version but there's always JBridge
if you are using 32 bit you can use Midipads from Piz, a workaround, yes but til an integrated one is available it does the job. A bit fiddly to set up but it does work, shame there is no 64 bit version but there's always JBridge
Beauty is only skin deep,
Ugliness, however, goes right the way through
Ugliness, however, goes right the way through
