unless I have missed some deep hidden folder why isn't the API stuff represented with the default presets?
I mean if there's one unique thing about MFL its the API related stuff..
also the most difficult material to get into so very important for newcomers to have some prefab devices to play around with..
not even a stock LFO (top 5 request!) or some sort of alternative follow action device, etc..?
is there a relation to the 3 Live main categories? Instrument/MIDI/Audio?
because API stuff would not fit any of those categories.. (shouldn't there be one?)
anyway.. I think MFL is very much undersold by not showcasing its full potential and providing a API jumpstart..
unless I missed that magic folder.. (other than the .maxpat folder)..
poor API showcase?
poor API showcase?
Last edited by Poster on Wed Mar 24, 2010 12:13 am, edited 2 times in total.
Re: poor API showcase?
I understand that API stuff is much more user needs dependent as for instance some audio effects,
but still there are a lot of 'general purpose' API devices thinkable no?
but still there are a lot of 'general purpose' API devices thinkable no?
Re: poor API showcase?
Have you found the selectnexttrack.maxpat etc? Have a look in one of the top menus for M4L Abstractions if not....
Cheers
D
Cheers
D
Re: poor API showcase?
yup.. I found all the .maxpat's..S4racen wrote:Have you found the selectnexttrack.maxpat etc? Have a look in one of the top menus for M4L Abstractions if not....
Cheers
D
implementing those is what my post is all about: hardly any API .amxd's to be found..
Re: poor API showcase?
- a sequencer to randomly trigger Locators in the Arranger..S4racen wrote:What is it you want to implement?
- a sequencer to trigger clips simultaneously on multiple tracks and modulate their pitch..
but that isn't really my issue here.. its the lack of some (awesome) prefab API devices in general..
I mean if a native LFO is one of the most requested features, then not even program one for MFL?
sure, there are a lot to be found on the web, but those came after the release..
you would have thought there would've been a lot of such devices to come standard with MFL..
Re: poor API showcase?
God forbid they forget the LFO!Poster wrote:- a sequencer to randomly trigger Locators in the Arranger..S4racen wrote:What is it you want to implement?
- a sequencer to trigger clips simultaneously on multiple tracks and modulate their pitch..
but that isn't really my issue here.. its the lack of some (awesome) prefab API devices in general..
I mean if a native LFO is one of the most requested features, then not even program one for MFL?
sure, there are a lot to be found on the web, but those came after the release..
you would have thought there would've been a lot of such devices to come standard with MFL..
I think the reason behind that is a 7-part series of tutorials on Cyclings site on how to create an MFL LFO. Along with example downloads.
They also ported all the pluggo's which wasn't a small feat.
Then there's a folder full of API examples and a few API devices like the CS sequencer.
Sure there should be more, but you can hardly claim there's "not one" example.
Re: poor API showcase?
Yes, I think there should be another category for "Control Devices", i.e., devices without midi/audio input/output.Poster wrote:is there a relation to the 3 Live main categories? Instrument/MIDI/Audio?
because API stuff would not fit any of those categories.. (shouldn't there be one?)
Or, even better there shouldn't be any device/track categorization as shown in modern DAWs like Reaper..
Re: poor API showcase?
sure.. but why not include it with the default package?hoffman2k wrote:God forbid they forget the LFO!
I think the reason behind that is a 7-part series of tutorials on Cyclings site on how to create an MFL LFO. Along with example downloads.
and not only a LFO but even more outstanding and unique devices that use the API..
I mean come on, I didn't get MFL for 30 flangerdelaychorusbitcrusher pluggos..
well, the pluggos don't really use any API stuff, which was my point really..They also ported all the pluggo's which wasn't a small feat.
API .maxpat's which don't do anything before you wire them up.. so they don't showcase anything right out of the box..Then there's a folder full of API examples and a few API devices like the CS sequencer.
The CS seq is hidden somewhere inside a tutorial folder and is only really useful for APC/LP users..
not a great example of showcasing API stuff..
not claiming there aren't any, its just that I'am surprised, little disappointed actually,Sure there should be more, but you can hardly claim there's "not one" example.
that the default .amxd package is just really about MIDI/Audio processing..
Re: poor API showcase?
I think I would even prefer a new, 4th, MFL category.. so Instruments/ MIDI/ Audio/ MFLbroc wrote:Yes, I think there should be another category for "Control Devices", i.e., devices without midi/audio input/output.Poster wrote:is there a relation to the 3 Live main categories? Instrument/MIDI/Audio?
because API stuff would not fit any of those categories.. (shouldn't there be one?)
Or, even better there shouldn't be any device/track categorization as shown in modern DAWs like Reaper..
MFL is just too diverse to squeeze into the 3 Live catagories.. could be addressed with a browser overhaul..
Re: poor API showcase?
But the question remains how the MFL category would relate to the track categories?
Re: poor API showcase?
what do you mean with track category?
Re: poor API showcase?
Well, midi vs. audio, in particular regarding the placement of 'generic' MFL devices in different types of processing chains.Poster wrote:what do you mean with track category?
Re: poor API showcase?
The lack of any example API stuff (in the beta) partly led to my decision not to buy M4L.
I was required to learn a lot of max before being asked to construct my own tests to find out if what I wanted to do was even possible. It would be far better to provide examples which show what is possible.
From reading the forum since I have found out that what I assumed was possible actually wasn't, so I dodged a bullet there! Note: I already have a different app for creating audio/midi toys, I was only really interested in the API stuff.
Of course, there isn't even a demo for M4L, so I have no idea how the app currently stands.
I understand that in version 1 it was bound to be undernourished, but it does seem very thin from an outside perspective. Again, I can only go on forum posts, because I can't demo it.
I was required to learn a lot of max before being asked to construct my own tests to find out if what I wanted to do was even possible. It would be far better to provide examples which show what is possible.
From reading the forum since I have found out that what I assumed was possible actually wasn't, so I dodged a bullet there! Note: I already have a different app for creating audio/midi toys, I was only really interested in the API stuff.
Of course, there isn't even a demo for M4L, so I have no idea how the app currently stands.
I understand that in version 1 it was bound to be undernourished, but it does seem very thin from an outside perspective. Again, I can only go on forum posts, because I can't demo it.
Re: poor API showcase?
yep..Angstrom wrote: Note: I already have a different app for creating audio/midi toys, I was only really interested in the API stuff.
I have all my synthesis/sampling needs covered with Reaktor, so all I want is access to the API..
to me that is the core of MFL; the API.. that's the big selling point, and should've been complemented with a large amount of devices showing of the possibilities..
I think it's strange that they decided to let the sharing community take care of this aspect of MFL..
because thats what basically has happened..