Mux modular system by MuTools - your experience? Offers other things than ZEBRA 2?

[ghettosynth]

How long/often did you concentrated yourself using the Oscillator and Multiform Oscillator with all of available features... if your answer is less than at least 50 years but it´s too limited... than: back to school

Trancit presents an elegant "logical proof."

LOL! Hold on, let me get a rag to wipe the coffee off of my monitor. You guys both need to learn something about how to think about your music tools intelligently. If you need to twist every knob then you don't understand what the tool will do. It may take you guys a lifetime to learn about it, but it will take anyone else about three seconds to realize that it won't make you a soft boiled egg. And therein lies the rub, if you want a soft boiled egg, this isn't going to get it done.

These kind of environments are defined by their limitations as well as their features.

If we choose modulars based only on the number of possibilities, they are all greater than we can ever explore, so they are effectively equal.
∞ = ∞

Only the ignorant chooses a modular environment on the "number of possibilities." I never suggested that, in fact, you cannot enumerate them. I suggested that you choose one without obvious limitations with respect to experimental music if your interest is experimental instruments/effects. The depth of MUX, and most tools of its ilk, is limited. That is a fact. There is no feedback which even simple combination effects such as a delay with feedback need if you want to build it from your own existing processes and not some built in limited delay.

Again, Plogue Bidule is a better tool for this if you want to build your own combination effects from the plugins that you have. Bidule supports feedback and effortlessly loads waves plugins. It also has a more complete library, and for the adventurous, an API to build your own modules using C.

And, because our expertise increases with practice, but our practice time is limited, we should choose fewer rather than more modular programs. So, how do we choose among infinitely-equal software?

By choosing the one that won't limit us prematurely with respect to our stated goals. If you want to build synths, MUX is a very limited environment. If you want to use interesting synths, MUX can't hold a candle to Reaktor, or really, pretty much any other synth building tool.

If you're only going to pick one modular environment, then MUX is a very weak choice.

[Michael L]

I never suggested that

I was replying to Trancit's post, not to you.

[Trancit]

If you're only going to pick one modular environment, then MUX is a very weak choice.

I save my words on everything else you wrote here... but one things interests me:

I would like to hear meaningful examples (so not feedback sounds) of what is Reaktor able to do and MUX not...

We were just talking about the theory here and of course on the paper something like Reaktor is nearly capable of everything you can imagine... but what are the useable results which sets Reaktor or MAX up from others???
I never heard anything meaningful from Reaktor a skilled person couldn´t do in MUX somehow...

I remember as somebody was requesting an imitation of Darude´s famous Sandstorm sound...
I don´t know how the original sound was created, but it took Jo about half an hour to just draw a waveform into an MUX oscillator, which sounded exactly like the original...
That was all... no filters...no distortion...no fm... just a simple MUX oscillator with a drawn waveform...

This example had let me think different about synthesis and this is the reason why I took this example of MUX´s 2 main Oscillators in my previous post...
If it is possible to get such a harmonic complex sound just out of an oscillator...where is the limit than

Back to the topic: as long as you cannot provide something hearable (uncreateable with "normal" methods), which prooves your statements, who is the fanboy of what then...

[ghettosynth]

If you're only going to pick one modular environment, then MUX is a very weak choice.

I save my words on everything else you wrote here... but one things interests me:

I would like to hear meaningful examples (so not feedback sounds) of what is Reaktor able to do and MUX not...

If you don't know them already, then this really isn't a conversation that you're qualified to have. Since you believe in MUX so much, post your MUX only version of Monark or the Buchla style synth posted earlier.

Moreover, you give away your ignorance by saying "not feedback sounds", feedback is a common feature, It is a key part of many of the built in modules in MUX. Almost every delay you own has it, resonance in filters is implemented with it. Nobody is talking about some screamy feedback noise show. Instead of holding on to your ignorance, read what I write and learn something. Hell, you don't even need to actually have "feedback" to use feedback. IIRC, it stopped me from doing even basic things like feeding the FX bus back into a channel on a mixer that wasn't being sent to a bus. IOW, there is no feedback there, the channel output wasn't being routed to the FX bus, but the outputs weren't allowed to be fed back into the inputs in any way. Feedback is exceedingly common and the fact that you don't know that reflects on your limited ability.

Again, Bidule is currently, IMNSHO, the best choice for this kind of work. If there is a better choice, I will buy it TODAY!

In fact, for the MUX users that think that MUX is comparable, how about posting links to what you think is the most interesting MUX "experimental" synths so the OP has some idea of why you believe that it's so great? We're not talking theory here, where's your Monark, your Spark, your DroneE, your SpaceMaster, your Metaphysical Function? That, BTW, is only scratching the surface with some of the most well known Reaktor synths.

There's no comparison AT ALL and the same could be said for Max. If you want to build or use experimental stuff, MUX is not even close to being an ideal tool. The user efforts are more like the sea of SynthEdit mediocrity that was pervasive for years. The reason why is pretty clear, any dev with any skill is going to immediately see the limitations of MUX as a competitive building tool.

IMO, the dev is barking up the wrong tree focusing on these built in modules and things like scripting. He should be focusing on making it the best modular host for other plugins. That means adding feedback, hosting Waves plugins, adding better capability for building better U/Is, and, ideally, the ability to write a plugin ala PlugNScript.

[Trancit]

Like I thought... sorry but again only blahblahblah...

What are bringing synths like Monark or Spark on the table, what cannot be achieved with other synths: Nothing... quite weak examples you are mentioning here... Mux (like most other synths) can make fat analog sounds too and I bet you would loose every blind test...

Is Reaktor capable of doing more than MUX: Yes of course...
How much can you gain out of this potential which cannot be achieved with something else: for me little to nothing... and I think I am not alone ...otherwise it would be far more popular
It´s not like other developers are silly or just ignore very (or perhaps the most) useful features...

Perhaps you get me wrong as well...
I am not against full modular enviroments even if I am very sure, that they are mostly a placebo for nerds...
Or just as a playground for synth enthusiasts, who just like to make everything on their own...

But to state to someone, who is looking for honest advice, that one, who dives deep into MUX will be bored in short time and will soon reach nothing but limits is simply wrong...
...at the most an opinion of somebody who didn´t understand using MUX the right way and very unfair against a very gentle developer, who brought us a very good, capable and affordable allround product...

You can say, it´s not for you... you can say, you would prefer Reaktor... you can say, you are not skilled enough inside MUX to realize, what you are looking for ...but stop writing nonsense and sell it as the one and only truth especially, if you are that wrong as in this special case

I have said all on that topic, what I want to say, so please don´t wonder if I don´t continue further on this stupid discussion...
I know you´ll smile at what I´ve wrote... but in a relaxed minute, perhaps you´ll rethink your comments and be a bit more fair and careful in future posts

Have a nice life...