Multicore support

[MuTools]

Now it's you, who promises, yes it's important, it's on the to do list, but I need more time...

To avoid any confusion: I did not promise multicore support. I can only say it's on the wishlist. The wishlist here is not a todo-list, but a pool of requests we would like to see implemented. When starting the M4 cycle i will go thru the wishlist again and communicate here about it to get an impression of the priorities here. At the same time i will also research the newbie world (kvr world is rather advanced users) and see what they really wish/need. Back to multicore: I can't promise it yet because i don't yet see how to do it, technically. I did already do some thinking and research, but only part of the puzzle is solved. I wish it was more easy as i would like to have that feature myself too! And commercially it is also a very interesting feature as many users want it.

I don't want to imply anything, but please accept a little bit scepticism and that people like me, who have made bad experiences...

I understand. I can only try to be clear: At this point no promises about multicore. But i will research it more. And i will also research other ways for how to get more music out of the same system.

I don't want to request, turning your product in an "standard" sequencer like implied in the from me started topic, but sadly, there are very good vstis, which are again sadly very cpu hungry and somtimes introduce latencies as well, so to implement features like Multiprocessor support and PDC (or better APDC) is, imho, really a must to be "compatible"...and should, again imho, have a very, very, very high priority...

Making MU.LAB even more easy to newbies and include much more preset content is very, very, very high priority too. Just to name something. Around mid june i'll join discussing all this more in detail. I first need to finish some other tasks.

Perhaps, my post is a little bit harsh...

No problem man! I understand what you mean. I also apologize i can't implement all these wishes faster and better. Constantly looking for ways to optimize the development process.

[Trancit]

Glad to see you are honest

The more I try MuLab, the more I like it....

Is there any way, if a multi I/O plugin is routed to different racks, to mixdown them in one step to seperate wav's per rack???


Trancit

[MuTools]

No, not in 1 step. In a couple of steps: yes!

It's would not be good to make a separate menu option for every possible combination of steps. That would create way too big menus. For every user would come up with his/her own "this+that+that in 1 step" requests. A scripting system could be a solution for that. But that's not (yet?) planned.

[Trancit]

Ok,

here another one...

You told in another post, it is possible to route different outputs (from plugins) to different racks directly in MUX...

Can you explain how to do this, I've tried a bit, but cannot see...


Trancit

[MuTools]

(sorry, i edited my previous post after your post)

About your new question:

1) New Session
2) Insert MUX in Rack A
3) Switch to MUX Deep Editor
4) Plugin the multi-out VST
5) Plugin more stuff as needed (racks, reverbs, eq, compressor, whatever...)
6) Connect things as you want

So in fact this MUX then works as a separate modular studio for that multi-out VST plugin.

The 'separatness' of this way of working may be a good thing or a bad thing it depends on the situation.

If you really need to route the outs of that multi-out VST to other jacks in the session, then simply plug the multi-out VST into the Modular Area and connect things there. You could also connect the outs to a bunch of racks if you want and then you got everything available in the rackdesk.

Does this answer your question?

[Trancit]

Yes, I first missunderstood...

I thought it would be possible direct from the MUX deep editor to choose real already existing racks for different outputs...


Trancit

[dwsel]

My only addition to multicore support would be ability to have this feature as an option (to turn multicore on and off on user demand) to maintain compatibility with older plugins built with old SynthEdit that causes instability when host takes advantage of multiple cores. I'm bothering you with this feature request now because I understand that you'd have to take it into account at the moment of separating code and implementing multicore support. Thank you in advance. Thank you for constantly improving MU.LAB. I'm gonna try M3.1 soon

[janamdo]

It just saw the release of a AMD Phenom II X6 processor
If you get this working on MUlab than there is bright future