MUX Vst : What do you need?

[liquidsound]

oh really? you mean jo calls shots around here? when did you get here? are you tellin me that hes the big cheese? thanks, after a few years using mboom, muzys and now mulab i wasnt sure who was in charge. but you cleared it up for me and now there is no mistake. thanks brah.

DIGIT... Relax man. I'm sure Jo is trying to understand from a technical/developer standpoint and sometimes they see little thing we miss and take for granted.
And he never gives up until he fully understand you.
Hang on, he may come out with something even better in the future or sooner than that.

[Reincke]

Despite from all those interesting facts I'm not sure whether I like the tone of discussion at this moment. Cool down and keep objectively, please.

[zendorf]

Ah, ok thanks guys about the info on the delay times. I would never have guessed it was 24ths of a quarter note At least now I can make musical sense of it.

And Jo, I definitely think you should get the mux vst out asap. I am happy that you acknowledge the items I listed are already on your wishlist. Getting the v1 out pronto and having a clear roadmap of your planned development up to v2 is enough to get my wallet out...and I am sure of many other users.

Just having the Mudrum in a vst alone is enough for me to find it very usable and I think will be a good selling point for you. There is very little competition in the vst market for a drum sampler/synth that has the potential depth of all the mux goodies. Especially when there are many more library and user patches available.

[MuTools]

I think > DiGiT < would like additional VSTs that can communicate directly with the MUX VST even if they are not connected together. Imagine having a special VST on one track that receives audio/midi and then passes it directly into the MUX VST on a completely different track via shared memory/static data/tcp/ip/udp etc in the plugins rather than through its standard audio/midi inputs.

Ah, ok, i see. May be useful indeed. But i've not planned such feature on short term. If most users regard this as a high priority above other feature requests i'll update the wishlist. Personally i don't regard this as high priority because it's very specialized and therefore only a benefit to a small group of users.

[MuTools]

you dont understand me? why dont you understand me? is it the words i choose? i dont understand why you dont understand me. others seem to understand what i write perfectly well. how can i make it even more simple?

FYI: If you think this kind of vibe is increasing my software work efficiency, you're wrong. So i ask politly: If you care about MuTools development, please balance your phrases some more.

[MuTools]

Also, I can't get my head around the delay times. Why are they in 24ths, not 16ths/8ths etc?

Because this give you more rythmical options, while 16ths (=6/24ths) and 8ths (=12/24ths) are still possible.

true, but i also agree that labeling it in 24ths is a bit (if not a lot) confusing!
Specially if you're used to more standard divisions and just want quick, inmediate access to your favourite delay tempo settings without having to make some math exercise.

Same applies for the tempo synced LFO that is expressed in Cpb, sure it's the most correct way to express it, but i miss inmediate acces to regular tempo divisions like 1/2 1/3 etc.

Yes it should be called "MIDI Clocks". And maybe the well known terms should be used at the relevant values eg "1/16th" at 6 MIDI clocks. Added a note on the WL.

[MuTools]

There are ways to get around the 1 midi I/O problem though.

Really? Didn't know that. Do you know how? (at this point just out of curiosity)

[MuTools]

(VST 2.4 limitation) and 2 stereo audio inputs and 4 stereo audio outputs. I read in your post that you want more than 1 MIDI input for the MUX Vst. That's not possible.

I read that steinberg has a VST 3.5 ..how about VST 2.4 is this not outdated?

I regard VST 2.4 and VST 3 as two totally different plugin protocols. I don't think 2.4 is outdated.

[Robert Randolph]

Yes it should be called "MIDI Clocks". And maybe the well known terms should be used at the relevant values eg "1/16th" at 6 MIDI clocks. Added a note on the WL.

I understand your decision to use this notation in MuLab, but when MUX Vst is being used in another host it maybe quite confusing. Most hosts notate with 1/8. -1/8 - 1/8t - etc.. and since they also may be operating at different ppq/clock settings, someone who reads the MUX manual might get very confused.

Probably a silly thing to discuss so much I work with a number of hardware sequencers and this sort of thing drivers me crazy.

[Robert Randolph]

There are ways to get around the 1 midi I/O problem though.

Really? Didn't know that. Do you know how? (at this point just out of curiosity)

Well you can't do it in the VST 2.4 spec itself, but you can make simple midi effect plugins that send midi to another plugin via your choice of interprocess data sharing. Anytime someone wants to send a midi input to a main Mux instance, they place the send plugin on that track and select the send destination to the main instance.

Many years ago when JUCE was first adding VST we (some of the first people using JUCE) were experimenting with midi mergers/splitters effects that did this. At first there was an issue with processing order and the delay incurred by a send being after the destination, but someone solved it. I don't recall how that was done

edit: Someone described this earlier in the thread as well it appears.

[Caco]

Ah, ok thanks guys about the info on the delay times. I would never have guessed it was 24ths of a quarter note At least now I can make musical sense of it.

And Jo, I definitely think you should get the mux vst out asap. I am happy that you acknowledge the items I listed are already on your wishlist. Getting the v1 out pronto and having a clear roadmap of your planned development up to v2 is enough to get my wallet out...and I am sure of many other users.

Just having the Mudrum in a vst alone is enough for me to find it very usable and I think will be a good selling point for you. There is very little competition in the vst market for a drum sampler/synth that has the potential depth of all the mux goodies. Especially when there are many more library and user patches available.

+1 if there is a defined roadmap and regular updates then I would be happy to buy into the MUX VST early on rather than wait until you have perfected it. Maybe release a public beta with a discount for early adopters?

[> DiGiT <]

you dont understand me? why dont you understand me? is it the words i choose? i dont understand why you dont understand me. others seem to understand what i write perfectly well. how can i make it even more simple?

FYI: If you think this kind of vibe is increasing my software work efficiency, you're wrong. So i ask politly: If you care about MuTools development, please balance your phrases some more.

this is a vibe that youre responding to? perhaps you feel the vibe is negative so you refuse to engage the logic i put forth? thats all i can figure.

by the way, why dont you think that many people would use mux vst the way i propose? i think if you make it work the way i suggest then it may become regarded as revolutionary. to graft the mulab mux environment onto an unrelated DAW host as its primary tone generation environment is unprecedented. to integrate on such a level as suggested would mean the ultimate in flexibility, surpassing rewire in simplicity and customization possibility (its not a separate host, but a plugin). why not make it work as closely to the mux hosted in mulab as possible? multiple midi and audio ins and outs, as many as needed in fact. the possibility to use multiple multitimbral noisemakers in a single instance with special routing possibilities and etc would simply negate the need to load any other vst outside of a single instance of mux vst, and open up any DAW to ultimate flexibility weather or not there is already internal support for fancy midi and audio routing. in essence it would be the bang i think mux vst would benefit from on the world plugin stage.

why not make mux vst a true audio swiss army knife capable of satisfying any need? i would be proud to claim that i have a solution to the limitations of my chosen vst environment. mux vst could enter the realm of highly regarded ergonomic software solutions you only find once in a while!

or perhaps it really is too much work. i dont know. im ignorant of these things. my apologies if its simply too far fetched. my bad.

[Caps]

Also, I can't get my head around the delay times. Why are they in 24ths, not 16ths/8ths etc?

Because this give you more rythmical options, while 16ths (=6/24ths) and 8ths (=12/24ths) are still possible.

I haven't played with the echo much yet, but that labeling would not be musically correct. Even though there's no such thing as 24th notes, they would be called 16th note triplets. That yields 24 notes in a measure.

Any effect would be not determined by the instrument it would influenced be less by the instrument and to a greater extent by the ambiance properties of the environment. So reverb or delay would be the properties of the room not correct note values. The baffle or reflection responses could be 24ths.

The 24th gives more control over how the effects will respond according to the room or hall. However if the effects were to be rhythmic then the effect would need to sync, thus conforming to musical notation or correct note values. Effects like stereo ping pong are not natural in real life.

[robenestobenz]

Re. the VST2.4 1 MIDI out limitation and workarounds...

My feeling is that stuff like audio/midi patching plugs is pretty esoteric and not something that'd get a lot of use out of a lot of users.

That said, I think these kind of plugins are great companions to modular environments; I use them a lot myself, mainly for audio / MIDI feedback loops.

Windows only, but:

Tobybear's Mixbox (audio)
Zarko Asenov's jthalamus & soundbus (jthalamus does MIDI, I prefer MixBus to Soundbus for audio)

[> DiGiT <]

do you relish using mux vst with a single midi input? why wouldnt anyone want to use mux vst the way you can use mux in mulab--with no restrictions?

those are interesting plugins