Melda 2021 *wishlist* what's yours?

[Mrs_Midi]

More and better tutorials on operating their plugins.

https://www.meldaproduction.com/tutorials

More and better

If you look at the Reaper tutorials by Kenny Gioia, you know what I mean. Common tasks are explained in depth. With the material available right now, Melda stuff is only accessible via experimenting a lot. Lots of good tutorials are a selling point after all.

Yes, Kenny is great. I purchased his first Reaper (and mixing) courses, before he started working with cockos.
It would indeed be cool if someone could make a set of Melda tutorials that really show the ins and outs of those plugins.
I recently started digging deeper into the edit mode of MTurboComp..this alone would need a whole
set of tutorials. From the basics to how to build your own compressors.
But I'm afraid only Vojtech knows everything about it..

Yes, that would be cool.

[Svama]

But, why not the other way? Easier handling of plugins, if possible. Maybe some drag and drop features for mps for example? UVI Shade or Fabfilter shows that it’s possible without reading a manual. This plugins maybe doesn’t go that deep in features.
Avoid second window use.

[Hexspa]

More and better tutorials on operating their plugins.

https://www.meldaproduction.com/tutorials

More and better

It would indeed be cool if someone could make a set of Melda tutorials that really show the ins and outs of those plugins.

And over here, you have your modulators. But if you click over here, you have an LFO, right here, that can be assigned... over here... to this envelope follower, right here... over here.

[buing]

My best wish is :
Make it possible to design custom reverb algorithm in MTurboReverb with something new GUI or modular environment like MXXX.

[Nicolaibob]

Spectral editing. I.e Spectro by stillwell audio.... it’s a beast!! One of my absolute favorite tools.

I would also like to see a series of transformers and impedance emulations for different kinds of character supplements to put om busses and mixtracks.

And last, but not least, some capacitor induced airness... it’s hard to explain, but i ones had it in an old midrange preamp, focusrite twintrak.

[Hexspa]

Just wanted to bump my request for some kind of sampler emu. Airwindows just put out Mackity which is exactly what it sounds like. Not a sampler emu but the input stage of a Mackie 1202 mixer. I haven't tried it yet but it got me thinking.

I'm so tempted to get one of these sampler emu plugins. Right now it's not my priority to try to clone one with Melda's existing tools. Maybe this will inspire some MXXX gurus here.

Some kind of 'front-end' processing would be cool. Not just saturation but maybe something that could combine preamp and console emulation as well as sampler input stages with stretching algorithms. I have Maschine and it has some nice options. I don't think it emulates sampling something at double tempo and an octave up and then pitching it down, however.

Please consider this request but also take it with a grain of salt. I hope more that Mr. Melda has plenty of time to rest. Without doubt, if I were to learn all of the current offerings, I probably wouldn't get to this requested feature for about two years.

Thanks.

[Codesound]

Hi,

I think opening up to the LINUX world would be another step forward for these plugins!Yes, "they work well via wine," but wine often presents problems...There are now several software houses that develop for LINUX: the latest are U-He and Cockos....

@Vojtech, are you going to give us this present?

Thanks....

[Hanz Meyzer]

- More filter types / colors, also special unusual ones, SVF, moog, blahblah. Much better visualization of filters, WYSIWYG
If you have three filters in the modular stream, couldn't then a type of analyzer filter view should all of the filters and provide controls?

- Little but important comfort functionality: Duplicating elements in the grid by shift-dragging, multiple-select modules and choosing "put into container". Dragging from children to parent. etc.

- morphing transition in wavetable, make more of the wavetable synth module

- EQ as per-voice module

[Qqq_7]

Much better visualization of filters

This is one of my biggest gripes with MWobbler/MPowerSynth. MWobbler has a lot of cool/weird filters, but I don't really know how they're different. MFilter has basic filters with the EQ for a visualizer, while MWobbler has cool filters and nothing for visuals. Even if the filter display doesn't fully explain all the details of the filter, at least some sort of interactive visualization would help a lot.

Take kiloHearts new Non-Linear filter for example.

This filter preview thing doesn't fully illustrate the distortion/whatever else is going on, but it provides the user with at least a little visual feedback.

Same with Serum/LFO Tool and the weird filter types.

I wouldn't really know what the parameters were doing to the French LP without the visualization. I can visually see where the fun stuff starts happening with the Reverb filter in LFO Tool. I can see the difference between the "Reverb" filter and the "Combs" filter, even if it's minor.

A whole version main focus on UX improvement.

Honestly, I think visual feedback is what's lacking in the world of Melda. The layout of controls, and they way you use them all make a lot of sense. The way you map multi-parameters is so effortless compared to some other synths.

These basic ADSR knobs need an upgrade for sure. (This analog style plugin is a bad example for this, but whatever. Basic ADSR sliders/knobs might work in some cases, but an interactive visualizer would be very helpful.)


The addition of the basic envelope image still isn't enough here IMO.


I also think this is a big reason why MSF isn't taking off. You can put pretty pictures, labels, and knobs on the screen all you want, but as long as there's no visual feedback given to the user on the easy (non-edit) screen, the crazy stuff going on behind the scenes is a mystery.

Compare MSF interfaces to those found in Kontakt/Reaktor.

Images and knobs.

Visualizers! Feedback! Fancy sights along with fancy sounds!

Currently mainly the EQ is fantastic in UX, that's it.

I 100% agree here. MAutoDynamicEQ and MSpectralDynamics absolutely nail the UI/UX for me. They may not be the sexiest plugins with a bunch of extra eye candy, but they have everything you'd want. The compressors aren't too bad either if you turn on the histogram view. The current GR meters are okay, but I think needles/dials would be a little more fun.



Overall, I love Melda. While there's a lot of little quirks that kind of annoy me with Melda plugins, I can live with most of them due to the insane functionality/flexibility they give me. (Why does MTurboAmp have more dynamic EQ bands that the other dedicated EQs??) For me, the only real drawback to the plugins is the lack of meaningful visual feedback.

[Hanz Meyzer]

Yes. I love Melda stuff, too. And I was a bit inaccurate:

Not only the EQ is good, the meters are great, the dynamics view is very useful, too. The LFOs are good and the normal waveform display is nice. But what's missing is:

- Filter view, even multiple at once. Could be inside an EQ view, that would make the most sense.

- In modular, Melda stuff very quickly tends to be cluttered. If I add three filters in serial, I would only require one visual for all three filters, not three visuals for each single filter. Such stuff, visual grouping is missing

[peejay123]

I can deal with the GUI. I'm happy with the features – those that I understand. The problem is that there are features for which I don't understand their purpose or how to use them.

What I would love is a reference doc for all the modular elements in MSF (and a bit with MXXX) – what do all the generator modules do? What are they for? I feel like I'm only scratching the surface with MSF.

Examples: Integrator, GenerateCustomMod, Set, Math, ChannelMatrix etc

[ralfrobert]

I can deal with the GUI. I'm happy with the features – those that I understand. The problem is that there are features for which I don't understand their purpose or how to use them.

What I would love is a reference doc for all the modular elements in MSF (and a bit with MXXX) – what do all the generator modules do? What are they for? I feel like I'm only scratching the surface with MSF.

Examples: Integrator, GenerateCustomMod, Set, Math, ChannelMatrix etc

+1

The documentation thing, well. It could be split as follows:

1. Features common to all Melda. One manual.

2. Single products, the special functionality. Several. Divided in beginner and advanced.

[vectorwarrior]

I still want the same thing I've asked for for years now; real time spectral matching.

Analyse input, analyse output, match frequency response (and allow variable amounts, e.g. 50%), update the matching constantly.

Isn't this morphing I hear you ask; no, morphing is simply a spectral envelope follower, this is why an input sound set to 99% morph doesn't sound anything like the other sound. You need to analyse and compare BOTH sounds and match as needed, morphing only analyses one of the sounds, which is why the results are often horrible, as it's not taking into account what the input sounds like.

Yes, the latency would be bad as it has to do the FFT process twice, but it would be worth it. Not only would it be useful for creative sound design (a 50% spectral match would sound like the exact middle between each sound, rather than a potential mess created by a morph)... but it would also be useful for processing too. For instance, you could take a mix and a master of the same track and use this to blend between the two if you find the master 'too much'. It's potentially everything a morph should be, but without the weird unusable crap you can get out of morphing when the two inputs sound very different.

I've asked for this a ton of times but still no luck. Annoyingly, all morphing on the market suffers from the same problem. Someone will fix this at some point.

[Nspace]

I still want the same thing I've asked for for years now; real time spectral matching.

Analyse input, analyse output, match frequency response (and allow variable amounts, e.g. 50%), update the matching constantly.

Isn't this morphing I hear you ask; no, morphing is simply a spectral envelope follower, this is why an input sound set to 99% morph doesn't sound anything like the other sound. You need to analyse and compare BOTH sounds and match as needed, morphing only analyses one of the sounds, which is why the results are often horrible, as it's not taking into account what the input sounds like.

Yes, the latency would be bad as it has to do the FFT process twice, but it would be worth it. Not only would it be useful for creative sound design (a 50% spectral match would sound like the exact middle between each sound, rather than a potential mess created by a morph)... but it would also be useful for processing too. For instance, you could take a mix and a master of the same track and use this to blend between the two if you find the master 'too much'. It's potentially everything a morph should be, but without the weird unusable crap you can get out of morphing when the two inputs sound very different.

I've asked for this a ton of times but still no luck. Annoyingly, all morphing on the market suffers from the same problem. Someone will fix this at some point.

Brilliant reasoning and quite attractive usage cases that you describe.
Who better than Voftech to work on this, and improve it within time?

[KenjiDeVries]

I still want the same thing I've asked for for years now; real time spectral matching.

Analyse input, analyse output, match frequency response (and allow variable amounts, e.g. 50%), update the matching constantly.

Isn't this morphing I hear you ask; no, morphing is simply a spectral envelope follower, this is why an input sound set to 99% morph doesn't sound anything like the other sound. You need to analyse and compare BOTH sounds and match as needed, morphing only analyses one of the sounds, which is why the results are often horrible, as it's not taking into account what the input sounds like.

Yes, the latency would be bad as it has to do the FFT process twice, but it would be worth it. Not only would it be useful for creative sound design (a 50% spectral match would sound like the exact middle between each sound, rather than a potential mess created by a morph)... but it would also be useful for processing too. For instance, you could take a mix and a master of the same track and use this to blend between the two if you find the master 'too much'. It's potentially everything a morph should be, but without the weird unusable crap you can get out of morphing when the two inputs sound very different.

I've asked for this a ton of times but still no luck. Annoyingly, all morphing on the market suffers from the same problem. Someone will fix this at some point.

Brilliant reasoning and quite attractive usage cases that you describe.
Who better than Voftech to work on this, and improve it within time?

Zynaptiq, iZotope, Voxengo, Wavesfactory, oeksound, or every dev with time I just chose these because they've already done much spectral stuff.