Potential customer questions

4 posts / 0 new
Last post
m127
m127's picture
Joined: September 30, 2010

Hey all,

I have been giving AM a try for the 3rd time.
I must say I am impressed with the added flexibility compared to the very old versions I tried. This is a program for me and most likely will buy it soon; however, I have a few questions.

I have a decently powerful PC computer: w7 64, i7 760, 12GB Mushkin Redline, Nvidia 9800GT. I am very surprised that a few instances of plugins can produced harsh digital noise, and the only fix here is to raise the samples per buffer (increase latency), which leads me to believe that AM does not support multicore systems. Is that right?

2. Any plans to port it to a VST version? The more I see it's structure, the more adequate it seems to be to port it to a VST version. That would be very cool.

3. MIDI outs? Any plans on this?

4. MIDI filters? Any plans? This would be especially usefull for VSTs with multi-channel MIDI outputs. Probably a MIDI filter contraption could be useful, by which you can filter out certain MIDI channels. That way, for one example, Maschine could control up to 16 other VST instruments.

I know those are like feature requests, so don't pay too much attention if they don't seem realistic. What concerns me the most is the "crackling" sound when using AM at low latencies. I am very surprised about this.

m127
m127's picture
Joined: September 30, 2010

allow me add a 5th>

Would be great if there was a bypass AND a turn on/off button on the contraptions and the VST wrapper contraption :) Saving CPU and dynamically controlling the bypass would be awesome.

thanks!

EDIT, sorry, I should have mentioned that I was referring to a bypass button and a power button, on the title bar of the contraption wrapper GUI. I see that you can by pass by right-clicking

EDIT 2> There's a channel filter for VST MIDI outs. Disregard item 4 above :)

m127
m127's picture
Joined: September 30, 2010

sorry, I am having kind of like a crazy self dialog here, I just don't want to forget stuff.

How about multi-metasurfaces? Has that been discussed?

Would be pretty cool to have dedicated meta-surfaces for certain plugins, etc.

control different things in one and others in a second one, etc.

Ross B.
Ross B.'s picture
Joined: April 11, 2009

Hi

Check out the threads in the Feature Requests forum, you will find many of your questions answered:
http://www.audiomulch.com/forum/6

there is the old roadmap that's currently being updated, but some of your items already are on it:
http://www.audiomulch.com/audiomulch-roadmap-2009-2010

I've tried to put quick answers below...

> which leads me to believe that AM does not support multicore systems. Is that right?

That's correct (but it's planned) - depending on how you connected your plugins, multicore may not help though.

The fact that the distortion goes away when you use a bigger buffer size/higher latency indicates that something else is wrong -- how low did you have the buffer size set?

>Any plans to port it to a VST version? The more I see it's structure, the more adequate it seems to be to port it to a VST version. That would be very cool.

It's being investigated along with Rewire. In the end the choice will be guided by technical feasibility. Some users want this and others want me to continue to focus on making AM a better stand-alone environment.

> MIDI outs? Any plans on this?

Yes. That's coming soon.

> MIDI filters? Any plans?

Yes. For now there are a number of VST plugins that can do this.

> What concerns me the most is the "crackling" sound when using AM at low latencies. I am very surprised about this.

Yes, it's surprising. I assume you are using ASIO drivers? Your buffer size must be set to a multiple of 256 samples (lower than this is also planned but not currently well supported which might be the source of your crackling). So: support for low latency buffer sizes < 256 samples: coming soon.

> Would be great if there was a bypass AND a turn on/off button on the contraptions and the VST wrapper contraption :)

That's also been requested. Not as high priority as some other things though.

> How about multi-metasurfaces? Has that been discussed?

It's been discussed. It's not in the immediate future.

Thanks!
Ross.