MuTools

jonljacobi · Post by **jonljacobi** » Sat Mar 30, 2013 2:06 am

They finally posted it. Let me know what you think, without yelling at me please.

sl23 · Post by **sl23** » Sat Mar 30, 2013 9:58 am

jonljacobi wrote:You must scan for VSTs manually, but I find this approach appealing as you don't waste time automatically scanning each time the program boots as other DAWs (Digital Audio Workstations) do.

This implies that you need to scan for EACH VST manually, you should've stated how it works.

Also, I'm pretty sure the UL has no 32track limit that you stated?

But great review overall. Hopefully Jo will get some more customers from that

pljones · Post by **pljones** » Sat Mar 30, 2013 12:25 pm

jonljacobi wrote:They finally posted it. Let me know what you think, without yelling at me please.

Ah, long publishing lead times -- they're a thing of the past with this new-fangled "Internet" thing, I hear...

sl23 wrote:This implies that you need to scan for EACH VST manually, you should've stated how it works.

Read to me like it was an option you could take at whatever time you liked -- "unlike other DAWs" where it's done each time you run the program, regardless. This is entirely true. If you install a new VST, MuLab doesn't know anything about it and won't go looking until you tell it (either by scanning or drag-n-drop). Given that most times you run the program, you won't have, this is a good idea. I know I get irritated waiting for Ohm Studio to check through its checksums...

sl23 wrote:Also, I'm pretty sure the UL has no 32track limit that you stated?

Yup, that's wrong -- the UL has no track limit.

sl23 wrote:But great review overall. Hopefully Jo will get some more customers from that

+1

sl23 · Post by **sl23** » Sat Mar 30, 2013 1:03 pm

About the VST's, yeah I agree, all I meant was that it COULD be taken the wrong way. But then surely if someone's interested they'll take time to check it out anyway.

jonljacobi · Post by **jonljacobi** » Sat Mar 30, 2013 3:33 pm

Hmm. I could've sworn I took those track limits right off the web site. I'll check and correct if necessary.

jonljacobi · Post by **jonljacobi** » Sat Mar 30, 2013 4:55 pm

You're correct about the tracks. Fixed. If you see anything else, let me know. You can email me directly at jjacobi@pcworld.com

-Jon

fluffy_little_something · Sat Mar 30, 2013 5:48 pm

No link to the article?!

DaveL60 · Post by **DaveL60** » Sat Mar 30, 2013 6:02 pm

Here's a link: Mulab: little known gem. Was easy to find.

DaveL

Nielzie · Post by **Nielzie** » Sat Mar 30, 2013 6:19 pm

I think it's called "MuLab" now and not "Mu.Lab" anymore

It would also be nice if you'd make a reference in the article to the power of the Modular interface of MuLab a.k.a. the MUX (not to be mistaken with the session mux), where you can build your own instruments and effects, which imho is quite an essential feature, if not the very core of MuLab.

MuTools has even made a vst version of the same MUX available as a separate product. So that people are able to use many of MuLabs instruments, effects and functionality in other DAWS!

Other than that, nice review

fluffy_little_something · Sat Mar 30, 2013 6:21 pm

Thanks. Call me lazy, but when someone opens a thread on their own review, I expect them to link to it.

I think the included modular synth should have been described as it is an integral part of Mulab.

The 4-track limit of the free version as a con? Um, how can a track limit be a con when a DAW is free? How many tracks does free FL or Cubase offer? Oh, right, there is no free version to begin with

jonljacobi · Post by **jonljacobi** » Sat Mar 30, 2013 6:58 pm

http://www.pcworld.com/article/2031476/ ... ation.html

Sorry, I sent it to the author, but forgot to paste it here.

jonljacobi · Post by **jonljacobi** » Sat Mar 30, 2013 7:09 pm

Just a couple of notes:

I went over word count as it was (I don't get much for download reviews) and to cover every feature would've taken 5000 words. If I can get people to download it, they'll discover the rest on their own.

I kind of went with Mu.Lab as that's the way it is on the splash screen and it connotes object.method

I didn't post to toot my own horn or generate clicks, just to show that the program got some good press. Keep in mind that the vast majority of viewers will know nothing about it.

pljones · Post by **pljones** » Sat Mar 30, 2013 7:13 pm

fluffy_little_something wrote:I think the included modular synth should have been described as it is an integral part of Mulab.

Think of it this way: there's still space for a review on the separate product MUX.

fluffy_little_something wrote:The 4-track limit of the free version as a con? Um, how can a track limit be a con when a DAW is free? How many tracks does free FL or Cubase offer? Oh, right, there is no free version to begin with

Think of it this way: if you're comparing free software and pick up Reaper (no limits, nag screen) and MuLab (goes SHH if you go over its limits), which one has a con? Neither or both?

fluffy_little_something · Sat Mar 30, 2013 7:22 pm

Sure, they can do a separate review of the Mux. But I think it should be been mentioned here as well as it turns Mulab into a complete studio so to speak, without any need for external plugins.

I don't think any limitation on a free version is a con. It's like saying thanks with a slap in the face

pljones · Post by **pljones** » Sun Mar 31, 2013 7:13 am

I think you must be understanding the word "con" differently from me, then. To me, "con" (a negative, "against"; "pro" being a positive, "in favour") is anything that could be seen as causing someone a problem. I'd actually call the four track limit a bigger con than a nag screen, even though it's only a soft limit. It's got nothing to do with the software being free or not, really. It doesn't mean you're being conned (fooled) about something - that's a different word. I really can't see how stating a fact can be interpreted as a slap in the face.

MuTools

KVR Audio

PCWorld review