My thoughts on MuLab after a few weeks of use

[mehum]

Since the ongoing One Synth Challenge featured MUX this month and Jo generously also provided a key to MuLab for the entrants I thought I'd take the chance to give it a test run to see if I should get it as a second DAW beside Reaper. I've been using Mux for about half a year and love it so far (although it has its quirks )

Reaper is great in many ways but I also get frustrated quite a lot, especially when working with Midi and automation.

This will not be a full review or something, just some thoughts on what I consider MuLab's strengths and weaknesses from my personal standpoint and needs. If I come up harsh in some areas it's not meant as bashing, but to give some feedback from my point of view.
I'm sure there are solutions to some of my problems, but the problem then is that the solution weren't obvious (to me) and that might be a chance for some usability improvements...

Modular area
It's nice how MuLab is a big Mux in the background. I really think this is MuLab's greatest strength but that said I very rarely went into there unless I needed (for getting MuDrum multi out to work). The real modular work happens mostly inside of Mux:es anyway.
The modular area also gets rather limited since the workflow basically forces you to put everything inside of racks anyway, so making stuff modulate each other or send audio in unorthodox ways is not really viable.

MIDI monitoring and recording
Easy to set up MIDI devices but I think the approach to play the selected Rack is too simplistic and does not really make sense. Since the events get recorded to the tracks, these should "receive" the inputs instead.
Very obvious in the case where I put a MuDrum in the modular area and couldn't play it. Recording worked fine but without monitoring... (granted, I might just have f**ked up the routing )
Recording is also unnecessarily simplistic. I cannot arm a track, starting recording and then clicking around stopped recording.
How would I go about record multiple tracks simultaneously? I didn't need to do this and there is probably a way to do it but that's one thing that really should be obvious in a professional DAW.
My recommendation: Add monitor and record arm buttons on each track. There's a reason this is practically standard in every other DAW.
But the worst offender of all when it comes to recording is that looping writes over the last played loop (if you play). I practically consider this a serious bug rather than a feature request...

Editing
There were a lot of minor frustrations when it came to editing. I'll try to summarize... Generally I felt like there were a lot of small inconsistencies that took me out of the workflow to instead need to fix something that went wrong.
I couldn't really get a sense of what double clicking and right clicking would do. In most cases double clicking opened up the editing screen but sometimes it instead deleted the part. Right clicking sometimes opened up the editing screen instead of displaying the menu.
Is there a way to directly resize parts from the compose-area without looping?
Editing part lengths overall is a hassle and often the effect was not obvious. Same thing with notes. Sure, it's cool to have all these options when changing note lengths but it quickly becomes old since 90% of the time you want the same option. The language in the dialog is not obvious either, like the difference between Relative and Percent.
Catching the end or start of midi notes is sometimes impossible without zooming in.
More than once I accidentally changed a shared part because I forgot to consolidate. Perhaps make it more obvious it's a shared part in the view?
CTRL-Click for both delete and copy (+drag) goes wrong too often. Especially frustrating in Mux where there's no undo...
Would be helpful to light up the note on the keyboard when editing MIDI. I guess the color scheme can be changed but I found the default to be a bit too low contrast to separate white keys from black on the piano roll.
Sometimes when selecting a bunch of notes and right clicking I don't get the full menu. Instead of Quantize and Quantize % i think it says Quantize selected events. I don't think I got any options to transpose (which, if I recall correctly, was just what I wanted to do at least once)
Editing automation without reference to either the notes on the track or the compose area is time consuming... Having to switch back and forth between edit and compose to see if you got the timing right just seems like bad workflow. I could probably float the editor and try to line it up with an editor for the instrument track but that also means extra hassle... Perhaps there could be choice to show the notes from an instrument track in the automation edit view?
Options of 12th and 24th notes just seems off to me... They're triplets of 8ths and 16ths.

Mixer
This applies to the tracks as well, but I found it annoying to always have to add racks to the end. Combined with the poor integration between racks and tracks it gets doubly annoying since you probably want to move the rack and the track to the "same place".
When creating sends or routes I always found it hard to find the right one. Seems like they're sometimes alphabetical and sometimes in rack order...
I found the rack size limiting. With only 6 positions, of which some might be used as sends, you can quickly run out of space. Sure, you could add a rack inside the rack but that just breaks the workflow and if you realize this when you already have a full rack all solution becomes dirty... It's Cubase SX2* all over again
Moving stuff around in the racks does not really work either. Say I have a full master rack and want to switch order between a compressor and eq... Again, you can do it, but it's dirty.
Perhaps an option to extend a rack could be implemented as well as an option to Insert Before when dragging something into an occupied rack space.

Menus
I don't really dig the custom menus in MuLab. For the context menus when right clicking they're ok, even though there often seems to be a lot of digging sub menus for even the simplest things (copy/paste). For the file menus, when saving or loading, it's in my opinion terrible. The standard API:s for these dialogs in windows and OSX is so much more powerful.
Search field is desperately needed when browsing patches.

VST:s
My VST library is a total mess... That will probably not change ever but it also means MuLabs VST file browser (see also above about the browser) just does not work for me. If you really really want to go this way, please at least add some kind of Search field!

Assorted points
Since CTRL-Z does not work inside a Mux, please make it do nothing instead of making changes that might be invisible to a user!
Why, oh, why, show tempo connected rates in Cpb? I really don't want to do maths when setting my LFO:s This is a small thing that I think will potentially shy away hobbyist users. It's nice that you can do sweeps between tempo matched rates but it could be optional. Snap the control and show 1/8T, 1/8, 1/8D and so on... In the automation window this gets ridiculous. I'm not really helped by knowing where 6.48Cbp is located (happens if you set range 1.5 - 15 for the automated param).
I couldn't find a way to change master tempo or time. And when this gets implemented you really need to let the user set time to 7/8 as well...

Bottom line
I've seen more than a few users around here asking "why doesn't more people use MuLab" and I might have some harsh critique but it is solely meant to help understand at least why MuLab, in its current state, is not the DAW I am looking for.
All in all it seems a bit too unfinished and rough around the edges and suffers perhaps a little bit of not knowing its target audience. The price tag and simplistic approach to certain things implies it's mainly for hobbyists but the modularity and some rather odd design choices implies it's for more advanced and certainly tech-adept user (ie: me ).
To me the only selling point would be the modularity but everything I need in this regard I already get from MUX. I will, however, keep an eye on the development and see where it's heading.
I hope you take this as it is meant, as honest critique and not bashing.
Some things are probably just a figment of me not understanding the optimal intended workflow...

* Cubase SX2, if I remember correctly, had a limit of 8 inserts and 8 sends per track.

[pljones]

The modular area also gets rather limited since the workflow basically forces you to put everything inside of racks anyway, so making stuff modulate each other or send audio in unorthodox ways is not really viable.

You don't need to use Racks at all. You can delete every single one. Tracks can send to anything - direct to any module. You can do all your mixing direct in the modular area. This removes all the boundaries racks impose.

Mixer

There is no mixer as such - that concept does not really exist in MuLab. It's got a (non-MuX) container dedicated to holding Rack modules where the routing is a preset (but not fixed) and that's really all.

Combined with the poor integration between racks and tracks it gets doubly annoying since you probably want to move the rack and the track to the "same place".

Nope, tracks aren't related to racks. Tracks, as noted above, target whatever module you like, so there's only loose coupling wanted between tracks and the racks in the Rack desk. (Multiple tracks - indeed multiple modules receiving from the same track - could send to the same rack. Or different ones (from the same track or different ones).)

I found the rack size limiting. ... Perhaps an option to extend a rack could be implemented

You can route the output from one rack to the input of another to "vertically stack" racks already. You don't get the visual cue, admittedly, but it's nearly as usable.

[mehum]

You don't need to use Racks at all. You can delete every single one. Tracks can send to anything - direct to any module. You can do all your mixing direct in the modular area. This removes all the boundaries racks impose.

There is no mixer as such - that concept does not really exist in MuLab. It's got a (non-MuX) container dedicated to holding Rack modules where the routing is a preset (but not fixed) and that's really all.

Nope, tracks aren't related to racks. Tracks, as noted above, target whatever module you like, so there's only loose coupling wanted between tracks and the racks in the Rack desk. (Multiple tracks - indeed multiple modules receiving from the same track - could send to the same rack. Or different ones (from the same track or different ones).)

Well, I kinda disagree here, for a couple of reasons.
First of all, the concept of a mixer does exist (and even has it's own button called Mixing desk), even if it's possible to totally ignore it.
Not using the racks in the mixer area, while removing the boundaries, means you also don't get the benefits of the mixer; having a good overview of everything and to quickly be able to mute, solo, set levels, add processors and so on.

And tracks and racks also do have a light relation in that whenever you create an instrument track a rack is automatically created and routed for you. This means there is an implied optimal workflow, coupling tracks and racks together.

I love the concept of the modular area for doing creative work but when mixing it's instead important to have overview and be able to make quick decisions. That is why the mixer is a staple of basically any DAW out there, and to a large degree also MuLab. The solutions to my problems means taking away the lean workflow and that's not really acceptable to me and the way I want to work.

You can route the output from one rack to the input of another to "vertically stack" racks already. You don't get the visual cue, admittedly, but it's nearly as usable.

Yes of course Don't know why I didn't think of doing that. Again, a bit of a dirty solution, especially if you have some post level sends you need to move to the new rack, but certainly works for the master.

[MuTools]

It's nice how MuLab is a big Mux in the background.
I really think this is MuLab's greatest strength but that said I very rarely went into there

Which can be interpreted as a compliment for the racks.

The real modular work happens mostly inside of Muxes anyway.
The modular area also gets rather limited since the workflow basically forces you to put everything inside of racks anyway

As pljones already mentioned: No you're not forced to use racks, you're free.

so making stuff modulate each other or send audio in unorthodox ways is not really viable.

Yes it is possible. You can combine all kinds of audio, event and modulation signals.

Easy to set up MIDI devices but I think the approach to play the selected Rack is too simplistic
and does not really make sense. Since the events get recorded to the tracks, these should "receive" the inputs instead.

It's practically the same: Click a track or rack will route MIDI input to that track / rack.

Very obvious in the case where I put a MuDrum in the modular area and couldn't play it.

Didn't you make a track for it? If yes the you can simply click the track to play that MuDrum.

Recording is also unnecessarily simplistic. I cannot arm a track, starting recording and then clicking around stopped recording.

This simplicity has the advantage you don't have to arm tracks! That's a big advantage imho. Just click record and capture your inspiration.

How would I go about record multiple tracks simultaneously?

You can record several MIDI channels at the same time, the resulting MIDI parts will be automatically put on the relevant tracks.

I couldn't really get a sense of what double clicking and right clicking would do.
In most cases double clicking opened up the editing screen but sometimes it instead deleted the part.
Right clicking sometimes opened up the editing screen instead of displaying the menu.

I assume you did some fast left-right-clicking, right?
Well there indeed is a little quirk in M6 when you quickly left- and right-click then this is interpreted as a double-left-click, which is not ok indeed.
This has been fixed in M7 already so from M7 on you'll not encounter this quirk anymore.

Is there a way to directly resize parts from the compose-area without looping?

If you don't want a sequence part to be looped then don't loop it i.e. remove it's loop markers.

Editing part lengths overall is a hassle and often the effect was not obvious. Same thing with notes.

Why?

Sure, it's cool to have all these options when changing note lengths but it quickly becomes old since 90% of the time you want the same option.

It simply takes 1 key press to select the option you want. In other hosts these options are not available (not ok) or they're hidden under hidden modifier key combies which is not ok either, imho, and certainly also not faster as you need a key press too.
So that's why popping up the available options is a good solution, imho.

The language in the dialog is not obvious either, like the difference between Relative and Percent.

I understand your point. Which terms would describe them better?

Catching the end or start of midi notes is sometimes impossible without zooming in.

Only occurs when your parts/notes are very small and indeed i can't change the physical reality that only a few pixels are only a few pixels. Do you see a solution for that?

More than once I accidentally changed a shared part because I forgot to consolidate. Perhaps make it more obvious it's a shared part in the view?

A shared part is indicated with a 'link' icon in its titlebar. I think that's clear. Maybe you didn't notice it as you're new to MuLab?

Sometimes when selecting a bunch of notes and right clicking I don't get the full menu.
Instead of Quantize and Quantize % i think it says Quantize selected events.

Happens when you have a mixture of event types eg notes and controllers.

This applies to the tracks as well, but I found it annoying to always have to add racks to the end.
Combined with the poor integration between racks and tracks

About tracks and racks:
Basically they're indeed independent and free towards eachother but MuLab supports a coupled approach because that's what many users are used too. The support for track-rack coupling can and will be extended and improved in M7. You're right that when using multi-out VSTs the racks may not be the ideal solution, depending on which routing you need. In M7 there will be important improvements in this context.

But hard-linking tracks and racks has the disadvantage that when you have a simple send effect rack then you _have to_ have a track for it, which may be annoying, imho. If you think of it in more real life then isn't it perfectly logical and natural that tracks and racks are independent and free?!

Search field is desperately needed when browsing patches.

The browser's "Which" field is such search field. And it works for patches, VSTs, ..., anything which is listed there.

Why, oh, why, show tempo connected rates in Cpb?

The background reason is cause it's a continuous parameter. Showing it as 1/8, 1/16 etc can't be done in a continuous way.

I really don't want to do maths when setting my LFO:s

Double-click the value and enter eg "1/8" that will do the math for you.

I hope you take this as it is meant, as honest critique and not bashing.

Certainly, your vibe clearly is constructive. Thanks for your honnest and straight feedback, also about the UI looks, all much appreciated!
Please keep on sending comments and constructive criticism about these little things that make a big difference. Here and there we may have different views, and it's certainly not my ambition to make MuLab the same as Reaper, but i'm eager to streamline and extend MuLab & MUX as good as possible with the emphasis on sound and creativity.

[pljones]

>> Catching the end or start of midi notes is sometimes impossible without zooming in.
> Only occurs when your parts/notes are very small and indeed i can't change the physical reality that only a few pixels are only a few pixels. Do you see a solution for that?

In Audacity, the end of a selection can be "picked up" when the mouse cursor is "close enough". Now, with a tiny selection, "close enough" has to decide to which side -- basically, it's the nearer side, always. This would only work if you allowed that extra margin, though -- which is difficult if you're not easily able to say explicitly "Now I want to change the length rather than select or delete a note or draw a new note".

[bibz1st]

[quote]
Is there a way to directly resize parts from the compose-area without looping?[
quote]

I think this a preference setting ??

[MuTools]

Indeed there is the "Auto Loop Recorded Sequences" preference, which is on by default. Can be set to off via MuLab menu -> Edit Preferences.

[sl23]

Regarding extending small sequences ~ Jo, can you make it that on small parts that mulab detects the cursor from outside the sequence? This would make it easier to determine what is trying to be done. All it takes is a couple pixels or so from the left or right hand of the outside of the sequence.

Regarding the left/right click bug ~ I don't think he was referring to the bug, but instead the way that there's no uniformity with regards to how these functions work. I think he's referring to clicking is trick and error to find out what it does instead of thinking, for example, I want to copy this part, right click is obviously the next step. But for something that doesn't get used often, sometimes it's less obvious how to perform the required steps and you literally are guessing and clicking away to find the required function. Unable to specify at present, I'm currently in hospital awaiting the birth of my daughter!

[pljones]

I think part of the issue is that right-click doesn't always change the selection and provide the menu for the clicked-over object. I can't think of examples, though.

All the best sl23, by the way!

[sl23]

Yeah that's it, same here.

And, thank pljones

[MuTools]

Jo, can you make it that on small parts that mulab detects the cursor from outside the sequence?

Simple answer: Yes i guess so. But i'll give it some time to check whether there are no disadvantages. And as with all FRs, i'll also try to sort this per priority.

Regarding the left/right click bug ~ I don't think he was referring to the bug, but instead the way that there's no uniformity with regards to how these functions work.

No uniformity? How do you mean?

I think he's referring to clicking is trick and error to find out what it does instead of thinking, for example, I want to copy this part, right click is obviously the next step. But for something that doesn't get used often, sometimes it's less obvious how to perform the required steps and you literally are guessing and clicking away to find the required function.

I think that in any app with lots of functionality it's always possible that you have to search for certain "how tos".

Unable to specify at present, I'm currently in hospital awaiting the birth of my daughter!

Wow man good luck to all you 3!

[MuTools]

I think part of the issue is that right-click doesn't always change the selection and provide the menu for the clicked-over object. I can't think of examples, though.

Simple rule: Right-click = popup context menu. Right-click should not select objects. Selecting objects is done via left-click.

Are there exceptions to this? I'l keep an eye on it.

[sl23]

Thanks Jo. When I get more time I'll give a better explanation, didn't bring my laptop with me to hospital

[pljones]

Simple rule: Right-click = popup context menu. Right-click should not select objects. Selecting objects is done via left-click.

Are there exceptions to this? I'l keep an eye on it.

The exception is MuLab -- every other program on all platforms uses right-click to select the object being right-clicked over, in my experience. So newcomers feel alienated and maybe give up, frustrated, not knowing why things aren't working as expected. It may be a clear and simple rule within the bounds of the program but this doesn't help people who are new to the program.

[sfd]

There is just one (1) thing that kills it al for me with MuLab/MUX.

In MUX you can change the font size. The fonts of the browser for example. This is great. But you can NOT change the font size of the audio browser if Sampla.

It shouldn't be a problem to fix this. As the fucntion is allready there on all other browsers - expect this one.

The developer has bee informed about this a couple of times. From me and others...still no fix...