MUTOOLS

sl23 · Post by **sl23** » Fri Mar 24, 2017 10:15 pm

After hearing his story, I'm kinda wondering if this is all getting a bit too much for him!

I mean, look at how many FR's there must be on that fabled long wishlist!

I can't see most of it ever seeing light of day.

Some are silly little things, some are workflow reducing problems, but all are required for us users.

I think you need to expand somehow Jo if you intend to keep this up.

Believe me, I love MuLab and Mux and am promoting it through SyMenu repository for you.

But you're gonna need to seriously think about you're roadmap to give your apps a fighting chance.

Remember, I'm on your side, as we all are...

imstre · Post by **imstre** » Fri Mar 24, 2017 10:18 pm

But I was actually asking Jo a question, and it would be nice to hear what he says about it![/quote]

wave plugin works all for mee

you girl?..spring

like Jo

my name also Jo (Lithuaniai Jonas )

ghettosynth · Post by **ghettosynth** » Sat Mar 25, 2017 3:51 am

Grizzellda wrote:
imstre wrote: Why work for me waves?
I do not need waves because good mux Effects
you with mac? for mac logic its ok
Alright, I'm not quite sure what you're point is here, but I am fairly confident that the MUX, at least in it's current state of development & support is not going to replace alot of Waves plugs...

But I was actually asking Jo a question, and it would be nice to hear what he says about it!

Agreed, and I'm not trying to be difficult either. I would like both Mux and Mulab to work with my Waves plugins. In order for both solutions to be more general for me, that needs to happen.

heks · Post by **heks** » Sat Mar 25, 2017 8:24 am

I do think Waves themselves have a roll to play, I my be naive with this, but surly there must be code that enables hosts to run their plugins and wouldn't it would be in Waves interests to supply it to enable all hosts to run their plugins natively?
You have a point sI23

After hearing his story, I'm kinda wondering if this is all getting a bit too much for him!

but the reality is that as MuLab becomes more successfully there will be more users requesting "their" own features. More sales, more users, more preference's, more bug/compatiblity fix's and so on. But, that just proves how successfully MuLab is becoming and it's Jo's own preference/business plan, his choice to remain a "boutique" host/DAW or relinquish control over certain developments to grow bigger, faster, stronger

I don't think its an easy choice, its relinquishing complete control over your "baby", so to speak... .

pljones · Post by **pljones** » Sat Mar 25, 2017 8:37 am

heks wrote:I do think Waves themselves have a roll to play, I my be naive with this, but surly there must be code that enables hosts to run their plugins and wouldn't it would be in Waves interests to supply it to enable all hosts to run their plugins natively?

They could do something very simple and provide a VST wrapper for them allowing any host to use them. Or they could start using VST natively. Waves could save a lot of duplicated development effort by DAW developers. Apple dropping AU would also help. How many people have to ask for either of those to happen, I wonder, before their respective (larger) development teams take action?

mutools · Post by **mutools** » Sat Mar 25, 2017 8:58 am

heks wrote:I don't think its an easy choice, its relinquishing complete control over your "baby", so to speak... .

Indeed not an easy choice. I regularly think about that. Some long time ago, in a previous DAW project, i did choose to team up. As an indirect consequence that project died. So it's not only a matter of my personal choice whether i want to team up or not, it's certainly also a matter of finding the right partner(s). Until then ie as long as i'm a solo dev, whatever i do, many users will be disappointed that i can't immediately realize their FRs. If i would stop current R&D on the FRs i'm working on now and switch to eg shell plugins (which is only for a single company's plugins

) then other users will get disappointed. And so on.

The bottom line is this: About feature requests.

I'm sorry about my limitations. But doing my best to make new versions that are more user friendly and more inspiring and more productional.

NB: I made an exception here to reply to some questions about why certain FRs are implemented and why others are not (yet). Pls note that it's an exception, i will not constantly discuss why FR x is implemented and FR y not. That would slow down R&D, cfr this info. Thx for your understanding.

Grizzellda · Post by **Grizzellda** » Fri Apr 21, 2017 10:25 pm

mutools wrote:I made an exception here to reply to some questions about why certain FRs are implemented

Well thank you for talking about this one, it is always nice to hear your developer view.

mutools wrote:If i would stop current R&D on the FRs i'm working on now and switch to eg shell plugins (which is only for a single company's plugins )

It's not about stopping what you are working on and fix this...did anyone say that? How about for the next paid upgrade?

Also, sure Waves is a single company, but one of the older companies around...they helped build the plug-in industry that you are currently doing business in!

Furthermore, many of those plug-ins may be older, but they are tried and tested in professional settings - they can be used to make professional recordings, and I think that is meaningful enough for you to consider.

mutools wrote:I'm sorry about my limitations.

Don't be silly

...you put out a very nice product.

runaudio · Post by **runaudio** » Sat Jun 10, 2017 10:08 am

Try this http://www.vst4free.com/free_vst.php?pl ... ost&id=898

heks · Post by **heks** » Sat Jun 10, 2017 12:23 pm

runaudio wrote:Try this http://www.vst4free.com/free_vst.php?pl ... ost&id=898

Isn't it just a free standing host?

runaudio · Post by **runaudio** » Sat Jun 10, 2017 2:14 pm

Think your right

heks · Post by **heks** » Sat Jun 10, 2017 4:26 pm

I've been looking for a solution for awhile, DDMF meta plugin is the cheapest and quite stable, just a pain having to use it and waves just load in Studio One (but that's not as quick and easy to work with as MuLab

) . That vst shell thingy is free, but doesn't seem to work for me any more for some reason ? I'll just be patent............. MuLab 8 possibly?

pekbro · Post by **pekbro** » Thu Jun 29, 2017 12:34 pm

Incidentally, there is now another company using a shell and bundle format
for their plugins, Black Rooster Audio. These are also incompatible with MuLab.
Supposedly, they can provide regular .dll files, but I haven't gotten that to work
as they describe.

Anyway, not a complaint. Just a report...

-Cheers

Scrubbing Monkeys · Post by **Scrubbing Monkeys** » Tue Feb 13, 2018 9:38 pm

I found this thread because I too would like to use some Waves plugins with MuLab.

Having been A one man operation myself, I can understand the choice argument. It Jo's vision that we have come to appreciate.

Given the choice I would rather have MuLab the way it is verses MuLab with Waves support but missing the step seguencer or the resonator or Muvie or Mudrum or ........

Maybe in time either Waves will do away with the shells or MuLab will work with them.

In the mean time enjoy making music.

Scrubbing Monkeys · Post by **Scrubbing Monkeys** » Fri Apr 06, 2018 8:02 pm

I was able to get my Waves plugins to work. Happy camper!!!. I used Shell2Vst in Win 7 and 10. Its a little quircky to set up but if interested and you experience problems. I can share some tips. Biggest being... make sure shell2vst has admin privileges and is wearing the windows sheild.

bbreakz · Post by **bbreakz** » Mon May 06, 2019 8:49 pm

How do I get my waves plugins to show up on Mac?
shell2vst is PC only?

MUTOOLS

KVR Audio

Waves Plugins