Mulab under the hood

[humanboeing]

C++

With classes or not?

feel ashamed i spent so many precious years of life to it. But i guess that's typical when someone is passionate about something.

If you enjoyed it then the time wasn't wasted!

I have a question too: What about the hypothetic idea to make MuLab plugin-free and focus 100% on the internal sound engine? Like the original Reason. It surely has both advantages as disadvantages and so i wonder what you guys think & feel about the idea.

I'd be fine with it but I think people would be unhappy with that decision. Especially considering how many people ask for vst3.

[Cochrane]

I have a question too: What about the hypothetic idea to make MuLab plugin-free and focus 100% on the internal sound engine? Like the original Reason. It surely has both advantages as disadvantages and so i wonder what you guys think & feel about the idea.

I'd be fine with it but I think people would be unhappy with that decision. Especially considering how many people ask for vst3.

I can confirm: vst(3) support is fundamental for a lot of workflows. Even in sub-hosting for people working with a main DAW. Please don't abandon plugins support!

[Scrubbing Monkeys]

My observation. I have several VSTis that I use and find very creative and inspiring

That said....

I have recently done some projects using only Mulab. I found the proceas faster, more enjoyable and the sound was as good as anything I have ever done. These projects included electronic as well as totally organic acoustic recordings.

I guess if its not too distracting, having a vst option is a bonus but if I had only Mulab I would still be a fan..

[heks]

Please don't stop supporting vst's.

[FabBad]

What programming language is Mulab written in?

C++

How much of it is your own code written from scratch?

Didn't make a precise calculation but i'd say 98%.
The remaining 2% are a couple of open source libs.

This is mind blowing admirable
why this DAW is so underrated?

Jo, i hope you a well recovery soon as possible.
Regards.

[Michael L]

Some unique and long-established composing applications do not host plugins so I am curious what MuLab could become if Jo was freed from those constraints!

[sl23]

When I started using MuLab, I was in agreeance with humanboeing, the idea of being plugin free was simply brilliant. But I found that the way things worked in the synthesis section of MuX didn't work for me. Even a simple thing like setting an envelope to work as I expected it to was really difficult, if not impossible.

For that reason, I turned away from MuX and bought several vst's. I only have around 25 vst synths, but they have many thousand presets, around 200,000 in total. A great deal of these are very inspiring, many arent, but the issue I have is that I'm not a sound designer and don't wish to be. I want a large library of presets and am quite happy with my current set up.

I hope you don't give up on VST3 as my only reason for wanting that is to be able to add some decent and unique fx plugins to MuLab. Some of which will never see the light of day in MuLab.

MuLab is very unique in its simplicity and minimalistic user interface, that makes it easier to focus on making music with it.

What if for this version you get VST3 compatibility, then concentrate on MuLab's sound engine etc for v10?

As it stands, MuLab supports vst 2.4,why remove that? What do you gain by removing that support?

I understand VST3 is a mighty hurdle for development, initially at least, but it'll get less over time as issues with it get solved. So the gain here is short term.

What I'm getting at is what is the long term gain in removing all plugin support? Development time is really the only gain, that I can see, which again, is short term. After all, how much time is spent on sorting out issues with VST2 plugins?

One other thing that would really help MuLab, which has been mentioned before, is outsourcing module development. In other words, allowing anyone to write their own. Maybe you could look at the code for such modules to approve it? But this is something that will make MuLab more open and increase its functionality giving you more time with other things.

[humanboeing]

One other thing that would really help MuLab, which has been mentioned before, is outsourcing module development. In other words, allowing anyone to write their own. Maybe you could look at the code for such modules to approve it? But this is something that will make MuLab more open and increase its functionality giving you more time with other things.

I really like this idea
Developing custom modules for Mulab would be a great introduction to dsp for me.

[Michael L]

One other thing that would really help MuLab, which has been mentioned before, is outsourcing module development.

Developing custom modules for Mulab would be a great introduction to dsp for me.

Outsourcing development sounds like another business. Perhaps start with JUCE.com & online tutorials to make VST plugins specialised to MuLab? For example, JUCE YouTube Tutorial #60 at theaudioprogrammer.com is 'Create your first MIDI Plug-in with Eyal Amir' a great guy who co-created the popular Beat Scholar and free EON-Arp midi plugins.

[humanboeing]

I was looking into JUCE but I think I'd rather do my own thing than rely on 3rd party code/frameworks.

[Scrubbing Monkeys]

Ooooo.......user built modules ala JS for Reaper. That would be cool. Seems to be a seperate thing but integrates well. Mulab already has the gui part ready to go.....if that aspect could be ported to a Lua or Python......now Im talking above my level of understanding.

[liquidsound]

I thought that just using CLAP method you can bake vst3 and vst2 out of it in a more easy way with all the modulations advantages…
Have you seriously looked into it?

[Michael L]

This would be my tool of choice, as I like the patching and sound design approach of puredata and Max: https://cycling74.com/products/rnbo

[rickpress]

Regarding mulab not having plugins that would alienate some of the customer base. Also why remove vst2 functionality when it's already there. Having plugin compatability expands the workstation just as it does any daw.

Regarding vst3 I am not a programmer but both yabridge and Carla are open source for Windows Linux and mac (yabridge for Linux) but these bridges / plugin hosts are open source code and have implemented vst3 successfully. Would looking at how they have done it help with vst3 for mulab and if the code is open source which it is can it not be adapted or used? Just an idea but maybe not a great one for the dev as I am. Not a coder. Just a thought that came by.

I could see mulab plugin selling very well with vst3 compatability as it will be so useful for other daws. Maybe once that is done (vst3) the rest can be done.

[focusrite]

For the VST3 support all you need is vst3 shell

https://www.xlutop.com/buzz/zip/vst3shell_v1.2.1.zip

To use it, place the dll(s) in your regular vst folder. Load the one you're going to use into Mulab. On first scan it will most likely crash. So restart mulab and load the vst3.shell.dll again and it will have scanned your regular vst3 folder and will show a list of vst3 plugins you can now load into the shell. Works for me on windows.