feature request: logical schematic design

Official support for: mutools.com
KVRer
10 posts since 3 May, 2021

Post Tue May 04, 2021 4:05 pm

Opening up preset modules can be frustrating to decipher and makes it difficult to learn how signal chains are routed. Also, as modules become more and more complicated, it begins to be unmanageable and limits how complex modules can reasonably get as it becomes increasing harder to debug and modify. In this example it only takes seconds looking at the signal chain to decipher what is happening, in stark contrast to the original spaghetti code approach. Implementing this approach in a future release of MUX would be a quantum leap in modular design and we would soon see a new level of complexity in synths, effects, and racks being made by even those just starting off. Nobody else is doing this. Pretty please, make it happen?
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

sdv
KVRian
662 posts since 15 Sep, 2003

Post Tue May 04, 2021 4:43 pm

+1 -- such a Visio-esque schematic could be very helpful.

Also, on a related-MUX note, I'm wondering if there's a way for the various modules groups (e.g. Audio Generators, Audio Processors, Event Generators, etc...) can have their own unique color coding? As is, once I color a rack which contains a MUX all the modules become the rack's color and I lose track of what kind of module type I'm dealing with.
"Music is directly tied to the technology of a culture."
"Modular gear is the craft beer of music."

User avatar
KVRAF
3536 posts since 25 Jan, 2014 from The End of The World as We Knowit

Post Tue May 04, 2021 5:35 pm

If you right-click in a MUX and choose Auto-Arrange in the context menu it:
  • groups each type of module into the same row
  • evenly distributes the modules in each row
That accomplishes much of what you want to do.
I think organising by location is faster than by colour.
MuLab Feels Simply Inspiring

User avatar
KVRAF
10998 posts since 24 Jun, 2008 from Europe

Post Tue May 04, 2021 6:48 pm

Michael L wrote:
Tue May 04, 2021 5:35 pm
If you right-click in a MUX and choose Auto-Arrange in the context menu it:
  • groups each type of module into the same row
  • evenly distributes the modules in each row
That accomplishes much of what you want to do.
I think organising by location is faster than by colour.
I agree.
sdv wrote:
Tue May 04, 2021 4:43 pm
As is, once I color a rack which contains a MUX all the modules become the rack's color and I lose track of what kind of module type I'm dealing with.
Maybe this should change so that, in the modular area, only the rack module itself uses the rack's color, but any deeper modules stay on standard color.

sdv
KVRian
662 posts since 15 Sep, 2003

Post Tue May 04, 2021 8:37 pm

mutools wrote:
Tue May 04, 2021 6:48 pm
sdv wrote:
Tue May 04, 2021 4:43 pm
As is, once I color a rack which contains a MUX all the modules become the rack's color and I lose track of what kind of module type I'm dealing with.
Maybe this should change so that, in the modular area, only the rack module itself uses the rack's color, but any deeper modules stay on standard color.
Sounds like a good idea (for me at least).
"Music is directly tied to the technology of a culture."
"Modular gear is the craft beer of music."

User avatar
KVRAF
1883 posts since 28 Mar, 2008 from a Galaxy S7 far far away

Post Wed May 05, 2021 1:47 am

@op: coming from an electronics background, I find the second pic enhances the ability to see what goes where.

Auto arrange tho, currently isn't to my liking. I always prefer things to work manually. It's very rare to find anything automatic that works how I want, least that's my experience. Even my car's heating auto setting doesn't work how I want lol

User avatar
KVRist
39 posts since 15 Jul, 2020

Post Wed May 05, 2021 6:33 am

I like organized things but auto arranging usually make things worse.

On the example you provided
2021-05-05 10_28_48-Window.png
Problematic area is the intersection of the signals. Are they forking, joining or are those separate signals?
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

KVRer

Topic Starter

10 posts since 3 May, 2021

Post Wed May 05, 2021 7:54 am

@pseudonym_303: The dots mean that the line is being tapped. No dots just means that the signals are crossing and not interacting.
The way this reads is as follows: LP 1 is getting modulation information from F-Env Amount. LP 2 is getting both of the modulation signals from F-Env Amount and LP2 FreqOf, and EQ is getting the same modulation information as LP2.

Edit: You're right I found an issue. I have to think about a work around.

User avatar
KVRAF
1883 posts since 28 Mar, 2008 from a Galaxy S7 far far away

Post Wed May 05, 2021 12:08 pm

The dots at intersecting connections could be brighter shades to increase visibility

User avatar
KVRAF
3536 posts since 25 Jan, 2014 from The End of The World as We Knowit

Post Wed May 05, 2021 12:36 pm

I often re-arrange the Auto-arrange; I like the clarity of direct connections; the electrical circuit schematic convention may take too much brainpower to sort out.
MuLab Feels Simply Inspiring

KVRer

Topic Starter

10 posts since 3 May, 2021

Post Wed May 05, 2021 1:13 pm

Looks like sl23 beat me to the punch! I changed things a little bit because there were some forking contradictions brought to my attention by pseudonym_303. This addresses those issues but it was a little harder to tell what was modulating what. The solution turns to be an option to brighten a dot to indicate that this is an important contact point that you want to be able to spot easily.

Edit: Looks like the logical inconsistency still exists. The connections going into LP 2 and EQ are fine. LP 1 just needs to be routed the same way as LP2 and EQ. I am not going to redo it. It is just for illustration purposes.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

sdv
KVRian
662 posts since 15 Sep, 2003

Post Fri May 07, 2021 3:47 pm

Michael L wrote:
Tue May 04, 2021 5:35 pm
If you right-click in a MUX and choose Auto-Arrange in the context menu it:
  • groups each type of module into the same row
  • evenly distributes the modules in each row
I'm not sure what Auto-Arrange is supposed to accomplish but here's a before & after which is quite baffling;
Before:
img1_myOrder.JPG
After:
img1_autoArrange.JPG
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
"Music is directly tied to the technology of a culture."
"Modular gear is the craft beer of music."

User avatar
KVRAF
10998 posts since 24 Jun, 2008 from Europe

Post Fri May 07, 2021 6:05 pm

Auto Arrange will make sure the modules are spread so the signal flows top down.
It's just a basic auto algo, and in many cases manual organisation will be better.
Nevertheless Auto Arrange often is a handy quick tool.

KVRist
77 posts since 29 Nov, 2006

Post Mon May 10, 2021 1:39 pm

Some graphical interfaces of this kind allow you to add nodes to a connecting line for more routing organization and help with readability. Perhaps such a thing would benefit MuLab.
nodes.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
KVRAF
1883 posts since 28 Mar, 2008 from a Galaxy S7 far far away

Post Tue May 11, 2021 4:11 am

That alone would solve much of the spaghetti syndrome of Mux wiring.

When you have 2, 3, 4, or maybe more modules all going to the same input, it makes sense to have these intersecting nodes so the output goes to a node with a single connection from node to input.

In complex Mux presets this would make things so much easier to read.

Return to “MUTOOLS”