MuLab 9...Where's The Outpouring Of Love?

[BrokenTrance]

Just have a look into how one can create simple sample and hold modulation in Mux...
I simply cannot imagine how to make this even more complicated... instead of providing a simple module like a random and S/H LFO you basically have to build up your own

The philosophy behind it is the RISC philosophy.
A rather small set of basic modules that allow you to build more complex modules, which can be saved and reused in other patches. If there would be a dedicated module for each and every case things will easily bloat. I'm not saying that i don't take parts of your criticism, i'll keep on searching for the best balance between good simplicity and necessary complexity. MuLab's evolution has not finished!

About VST3 and CLAP: It's being researched.
It will not yet be part of MuLab 9.0, which really needs an official release soon, but extending the plugin system beyond VST2 is at the top of the wishlist for M9.x.

[pljones]

Um, the love would be over on the MuTools forum...

For example: viewtopic.php?p=8548949#p8548949 - although, that's the plugin

[syntonica]

Um, the love would be over on the MuTools forum...

For example: viewtopic.php?p=8548949#p8548949 - although, that's the plugin

More this one:
viewtopic.php?t=573827
Eh, it's a living...

[pdxindy]

Where's the outpouring of love?

I haven't even tried Mulab 9... I'm busy making music with another DAW and am happy with it so have no interest in others. Some interesting looking stuff in MuLab9, but I just don't need it.

[Vortifex]

Edited

[simmo75]

Lack of VST3 support and MPE are two reasons for me, if that helps with your puzzlement.

The only possible downside for VST2 for me, would be CPU issues(but I don't imagine that would be the case, inside MuLab.)
Quoted from MUTOOL's website, regarding version 9; "More robust VST 2 engine wrt VST 2 plugins that don't follow the VST 2 rules."

So missing out on every new plugin that’s made going forward isn’t a downside?
VST2 is dead, you have to use VST3 now, CLAP or AU.

What in the hell are you talking about? First of all, most software companies have both VST2 & VST3 and secondly...for those VST3-only companies, you can just use your secondary DAW...I mean...who in the hell, only uses ONE brand of DAW?
32-bit plugins are nearly dead and yet, there are cheap & even free daws that have built-in bit-bridging.
A good example of this is a free VST called Alieno.....why would I want to miss out on having the pleasure of using this magnificent plugin, just because I feel that 32-bit is "dead"...or obsolete if you will...heh?
There's no reason why anyone couldn't have a second DAW(as Cakewalk Bandlab supports all VST's(VST2, VST3 and 32 bit VST)...and this is a FREE DAW.Also...by no means, is Cakewalk a dead DAW, as Bandlab continues to provide updates and user support.

[xbitz]

Just have a look into how one can create simple sample and hold modulation in Mux...
I simply cannot imagine how to make this even more complicated... instead of providing a simple module like a random and S/H LFO you basically have to build up your own

The philosophy behind it is the RISC philosophy.
A rather small set of basic modules that allow you to build more complex modules, which can be saved and reused in other patches. If there would be a dedicated module for each and every case things will easily bloat. I'm not saying that i don't take parts of your criticism, i'll keep on searching for the best balance between good simplicity and necessary complexity. MuLab's evolution has not finished!

About VST3 and CLAP: It's being researched.
It will not yet be part of MuLab 9.0, which really needs an official release soon, but extending the plugin system beyond VST2 is at the top of the wishlist for M9.x.

VST modulation should work as works in Mulab itself so should use basevalue + offset. at this moment VST controls can't be used anymore after the modulation assigning
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vdQ43YCI6qk
I've recreated it in Reason which uses the same method in itself and with VSTs (Bitwig too) so the modulated VST controls remain usable/changeable ones

+1 for evolution basically this is my only bigger design issue at this moment

ps. and as I see only composer has host syncing all other modules can be only note triggered/free running mode (lfo, MSEG, sequence player etc.) so still have to use LFOTool from xferrecords

[Kross2]

So you find the most simple DAW ever created(MuLab) to be complicated, with a steep learning curve?
...

Oh boy... stop to assume that everybody thinks the same way like you...

Mulab is after the last 2 updates for sure not the simplest and easiest to use DAW outside... at least not for me...

I was a very heavy at least Mux user but honestely... I tried but I do not find my way around in Mulab anymore especially with the newly implemented stuff...
This is all done in such a nerdy way that you must be really think in a special way to get your head around that...
Just have a look into how one can create simple sample and hold modulation in Mux...
I simply cannot imagine how to make this even more complicated... instead of providing a simple module like a random and S/H LFO you basically have to build up your own and save it cumbersome into it´s own MUX whose usage and editing is then 20 times more complicated than it would be in a specialized module...
So don´t tell me it would be the easiest to learn DAW when people have to build up their own modules for being able to even use basic stuff what others provide out of the box and easy to use...
Jo is a genius but this is the problem too... he tends to overcomplicate stuff in many cases.

On top of that the documentation of all Mulab stuff is more than limited, there are barely any (good) tutorials out there ... so including me I can completely understand that people having trouble to learn this stuff.

Allow me to explain myself....from my perspective(as a new user), MuLab is beautifully simple in terms of the layout and regarding recording tracks, the workflow is exponentially more rapid than most other DAW's I've used.
Also....not having to use an installer, coupled with effortless hardware setup(gives the impression that everything in MuLab is intuitive to some degree.)
I have yet to dive into the modular aspect of MuLab and have not tinkered with building my own synth presets(& the idea of creating such, would indeed...be a learning for me)...but MuLab claims to have made the process intuitive.
However...if you claim it's overly complicated, then I'll take your word for it(since you are an experienced MuLab user.

[Kross2]

Where's the outpouring of love?

I haven't even tried Mulab 9... I'm busy making music with another DAW and am happy with it so have no interest in others. Some interesting looking stuff in MuLab9, but I just don't need it.

Understood....but for myself(& I am sure there are plenty of others with this issue)...is that big names in DAW software, eventually & inevitably...pack in far too many features & balloon them into bloatware.
Reason is a prime example of this, as in Reason 4....I was running it with a single-core $400 PC with only 256mb of RAM & it ran fine.
I now have a stout quad-core gaming PC with 16GB of RAM and it struggles with Reason 10. It's still much better to work with than Cakewalk Bandlab(mainly because Cakewalk is the most crowded DAW I've used(which is overwhelmed with a plethora of adjustable window configurations) and I was constantly manually resizing this, that & the other thing!
I really like Mixcraft 9, but their copy & paste method for clips is clunky & can become tedious and the plugins that are included, are nothing special.
Years ago, I had tried to integrate my Yamaha Motif MOXF to Cubase LE and it was an incoherent cluster-f**k.
Studio One is fairly intuitive...but their lower-tier native instruments are crap for the most part and S1 has become denser with features I don't need.
S1 Prime would be a good option(if there was 3rd party support.) I found Ableton to be a convoluted mess and the upgrades are obscenely expensive.
FL Studio has some really interesting native plugins...but again...yet another DAW that is crowded and I don't think the $500 price tag for the suite, is worthwhile.

[kritikon]

So you find the most simple DAW ever created(MuLab) to be complicated, with a steep learning curve?

Any and every new DAW is a steep learning curve. I find it not worth it. YMMV

If anything, sticking to only one DAW can be severely limiting, in terms of inspiration and growth as a musician & composer.

I'd find using multiple DAWs limiting. See above. Personally I find it easier just knowing how my single DAW works and I can get on with music rather than dicking around with another DAW that takes forever to learn how to use. YMMV

An awful lot of people use only one DAW...really? Perhaps this is the case among the people you know.

Yes really, that's why I wrote it. The people you know who use multiple DAWs are not everyone in the world, you might be amazed to hear. YMMV

Professional engineers typically use one DAW and producers/beatmakers who can't be bothered learning how to install their own plugins, will choose something like FL Studio Suite(where all the instruments/modules/effects are included.)

So these professional engineers must be right idiots, obviously. No YMMV this time because you don't seem to understand other peoples' mileage.

[Trancit]

The philosophy behind it is the RISC philosophy.
A rather small set of basic modules that allow you to build more complex modules, which can be saved and reused in other patches. If there would be a dedicated module for each and every case things will easily bloat. I'm not saying that i don't take parts of your criticism, i'll keep on searching for the best balance between good simplicity and necessary complexity. MuLab's evolution has not finished!

Send mail...

[Trancit]

If anything, sticking to only one DAW can be severely limiting, in terms of inspiration and growth as a musician & composer.

I'd find using multiple DAWs limiting. See above. Personally I find it easier just knowing how my single DAW works and I can get on with music rather than dicking around with another DAW that takes forever to learn how to use. YMMV

Same for me... I don´t like to use multiple DAWs and would rather like to have one for everything as much as possible...

An awful lot of people use only one DAW...really? Perhaps this is the case among the people you know.

Yes really, that's why I wrote it. The people you know who use multiple DAWs are not everyone in the world, you might be amazed to hear. YMMV

And on top of that I highly doubt that anybody switches DAWs in the creative process of a single song, renders everything out to port it to a second DAW because the first one cannot load a plugin I need in this moment to eventually switching then with the same project back to the first DAW...
To do so you must have either too much time or you have a very nerdy approach to music creation which for sure is more rare than common!

Professional engineers typically use one DAW and producers/beatmakers who can't be bothered learning how to install their own plugins, will choose something like FL Studio Suite(where all the instruments/modules/effects are included.)

So these professional engineers must be right idiots, obviously. No YMMV this time because you don't seem to understand other peoples' mileage.

I love these preconceptions from people who don´t know what they are talking about...
It´s every time too funny again

[Kross2]

If anything, sticking to only one DAW can be severely limiting, in terms of inspiration and growth as a musician & composer.

I'd find using multiple DAWs limiting. See above. Personally I find it easier just knowing how my single DAW works and I can get on with music rather than dicking around with another DAW that takes forever to learn how to use. YMMV

Same for me... I don´t like to use multiple DAWs and would rather like to have one for everything as much as possible...

An awful lot of people use only one DAW...really? Perhaps this is the case among the people you know.

Yes really, that's why I wrote it. The people you know who use multiple DAWs are not everyone in the world, you might be amazed to hear. YMMV

And on top of that I highly doubt that anybody switches DAWs in the creative process of a single song, renders everything out to port it to a second DAW because the first one cannot load a plugin I need in this moment to eventually switching then with the same project back to the first DAW...
To do so you must have either too much time or you have a very nerdy approach to music creation which for sure is more rare than common!

Professional engineers typically use one DAW and producers/beatmakers who can't be bothered learning how to install their own plugins, will choose something like FL Studio Suite(where all the instruments/modules/effects are included.)

So these professional engineers must be right idiots, obviously. No YMMV this time because you don't seem to understand other peoples' mileage.

I love these preconceptions from people who don´t know what they are talking about...
It´s every time too funny again

Speaking of preconceptions & not having an understanding....how can anyone think that having more than one DAW would be prohibitive in fully learning their main DAW? Do some people not have the capacity to be proficient in 2 DAW's? I think some folks need to upgrade the RAM in their brain(perhaps via Lumosity.com , Ginko Biloba pills,fish oil..etc.,.) After a fish does one lap in an aquarium tank, it has forgotten everything that took place in its mini journey & it has to start from scratch.
That said, individuals with fish brains need to limit themselves to one DAW.

[Trancit]

Professional engineers typically use one DAW and producers/beatmakers who can't be bothered learning how to install their own plugins, will choose something like FL Studio Suite(where all the instruments/modules/effects are included.)

So these professional engineers must be right idiots, obviously. No YMMV this time because you don't seem to understand other peoples' mileage.

I love these preconceptions from people who don´t know what they are talking about...
It´s every time too funny again

Speaking of preconceptions & not having an understanding....how can anyone think that having more than one DAW would be prohibitive in fully learning their main DAW? Do some people not have the capacity to be proficient in 2 DAW's? I think some folks need to upgrade the RAM in their brain(perhaps via Lumosity.com , Ginko Biloba pills,fish oil..etc.,.) After a fish does one lap in an aquarium tank, it has forgotten everything that took place in its mini journey & it has to start from scratch....

I don´t know what this has in common with preconceptions!

I made my comment because you tried to diss people using FL Studio to be to silly to install and use other stuff...
and now you try to convert this into your Multi DAW theory??

Nobody said it would prohibitive to use multiple DAWs and knowing/learning multiple DAWs but initially you used it as an excuse for Mulab not supporting VST3 plugins and think it would be common for everybody to use multiple DAWs... and that´s plain wrong and finally stop dissing people just because they might think, act or feel different than you!
There are many people out there for whom using a single full featured DAW is more than enough to create their music and this has nothing to do with having to upgrade their "Brain RAM"

That said, individuals with fish brains need to limit themselves to one DAW.

You know nowadays it seems to be more and more the strategy to accuse other people for the own shortcomings... i hope you are able to understand this complicated sentence!

Oh...and welcome to my foe list!!
So don´t wonder if I do not reply anymore to your nonsense as I will not see it anymore!

[Saffran]

I await an official release of Mulab 9.
I paid for Reaper when it started the version 6 and was ready to pay for Mulab when it switched to version 9. Takes a bit longer than i anticipated.
The rest of the post seem to be about patience.
Don't expect swift solutions when learning any Daw.
Cakewalk have useful key shortcuts and i think that's the way to handle modern Daws with lots of functions. It takes time to learn and to be used to, for example, key shortcuts. Cakewalk starts with an inspector window to the left and a track window in the middle and a browser+help window to the right. Press the "i" key and then the "b" key and Abracadabra you'll see only a big track window.
Experiment more.
I installed Reaper just to test it out. I like it but already had Cakewalk and was focused on that but could not see any negative side of having two Daws on the same machine.
I use Reaper mostly to doublecheck installed plugins that misbehave in Cakewalk. When the Daws is on the same machine they have access to the same plugins. Which also means that you have the same plugins and moving over tracks isn't that cumbersome that someone mentioned.
Don't give up on other Daws than the one you started with too soon.