I think so, the GUI panels would need to be changed to consider the altered modules different ones suitable to be included in the library…
If gui design is the only issue I’m sure there are people who would happily create alternative panels for you, these being some of the most used modules out there. I’d offer to make them but too busy right now, hope someone picks this up sooner, we need them in the library for sure!
Either way, just wanted to say thanks to both of you! Needed these upgrades since v1!
1 Like
Think about the future a bit. Wouldn’t it be a bit silly if you spend all this time designing new panels and then I one day decide to add polyphony to Audible Instruments? What would the point of your fork be?
Reviews of PRs to plugins don’t take a lot of my time. They take a lot of your time due to my strict reviews. If you have the time, submit a PR and see what happens.
Honestly now that I think about it, this is a good reason to not accept these to the VCV Library at all. It’ll go obsolete at any moment, and it’ll still confuse VCV Library users because the name will match. I can’t imagine the number of emails I’ll get asking “I searched for Mutable Clouds on the VCV Library and I got Audible Instruments Texture Synthesizer, Grayscale Supercell, and Poly Audible Instruments… but the two first ones are polyphonic as well. This is such a mess!” So I suppose you can say I’ve changed my mind. I don’t want it on the VCV Library at all. It will do more harm than good to the users.
Does the addition of separate controls for the LPG have no bearing? Maybe a name change would help to clarify that it is more than just a polyphonic Audible Instruments? It’s rather like Supercell.
1 Like
that’s not about just polyphony but controls for LPG color & decay actually…
Okay, so you’re wanting to take the Mutable code under your wing and creatively expand it? Okay, I can be happy with putting that on the VCV Library depending on how you do it. So let me clarify: When you say “the GUI panels would need to be changed”, are you planning on taking the SVG file and butchering it with Inkscape to make something like https://library.vcvrack.com/ArableInstruments/Joni just to make it “different enough”, or are you (or a designer) going to invest some time into making it your own well-designed module like https://grayscale.info/supercell/? I’d love to play with a module based on Mutable Instruments modules with creative features, but I want to be completely disassociated with the Mutable DIY “race to the bottom” trash Eurorack modules on this platform.
Let me explain the hardware situation a bit better if you’re not familiar, since it’s a good analogy. I’m probably putting words into Emilie’s mouth, so I apologize in advance, but here’s my interpretation after being in the Eurorack world since before Mutable started. When Mutable entered the synth scene with Shruthi and Ambika, everyone loved them, and as an added benefit, they were open hardware so that other people could research improvements and make expansions, which people did, with new cases, new firmwares, etc. After Mutable released Braids, Clouds, Rings, Elements, etc, their popularity exploded. This attracted a lot of people who saw the open hardware license plus Mutable’s success as the perfect formula for an easy business opportunity. They made trash clones, undercut Mutable’s own products, and most importantly, didn’t improve the products in any way other than price. This flooded the market with clones of Braids, Clouds, Rings, Elements, etc. It isn’t even about money, it’s about being forced to see people take advantage, rather than improve, her hardware/software that she gifted the world.
Okay, some clones are less HP which add some benefit for people with small Eurorack cases. But what same-HP clones of modules still in production by Mutable Instruments? I see no reason whatsoever for a customer to prefer those over Mutable Instruments modules other than price, so these are a textbook examples of exploiting open-source hardware/software to be on the receiving end of some profit with minimal effort (the schematics, BOM, and PCB Eagle files are freely available, so just order from the cheapest PCB fab house you can find and you can now sell a “DIY kit” that will be immediately popular).
Emilie is well aware of this clone market (https://forum.mutable-instruments.net/t/is-this-legit-mutable-gear/15073/3). Why do you think she doesn’t release the source code of her modules until 6 months after her modules are on the market but provides VCV with the module’s code for the closed-source Audible Instruments Preview? To avoid “opportunistic clones” that undercut her designs the moment they’re released. How many emails do you think she gets saying “My Peaks doesn’t work, please help me fix it.” and then after 6 emails finding out it’s a clone. I experience the same multiple times a week, and it sucks.
So what does this have to do with VCV? It’s not about undercutting prices of course, since we’re both just making free/open-source software. It’s about merely cloning vs improving. Will thousands of YouTube videos featuring VCV Rack in the future contain a bunch of awkward/butchered Mutable Instruments panels that don’t really offer any new features? Or will they offer new DSP algorithms, parameters, firmwares, concepts, etc? I won’t allow the VCV Library to look like the Eurorack clone landscape.
If you’re attempting to clone Mutable Instruments (like I am with Audible Instruments), then the appearance and functionality should respect the hardware as closely as possible. But for making “extended clones”, here are some examples for what I feel is appropriate of any Eurorack hardware (not just Mutable Instruments).
- Grayscale Supercell adds new parameters and features to Mutable Clouds while making it look like an entirely new module. Grayscale improved instead of merely cloning Clouds. It looks nothing like the original hardware, but it looks great in its own design.
- Prism Rainbow, based on 4ms SMR, adds several extra features/parameters but looks entirely different from hardware. I think this is the best example to follow if you’re thinking about going crazy with extra features.
- VCV Spectra can be compared with the Buchla 296e, but we decided to go an entirely different direction with it. We don’t advertise it as a “clone of Buchla”. It’s just a spectral resonator, and it’s a good module in its own right.
Overall, if you design a Rack plugin that clones hardware, you should either respect the features and design as closely as possible, OR you should add your own features and steer clear from a panel design that falls in the uncanny valley of resembling the cloned hardware. The panel design in your post is directly in the uncanny valley, so it would be unacceptable.
12 Likes
So, basically you are saying “completely redesign the GUIs and change the names of the plugin and modules?” That’s fine by me. I am not interested as such in making any clones that cause confusion for the users. It was just the fastest route at this point to use the existing GUI designs, since I am not a GUI designer myself. (I am also bad at inventing names, that’s why the plugin name has the “Audible Instruments” in it and the modules are named the same.)
2 Likes
That’s correct. Even for hardware manufacturers who have made their panel graphics “open” with CC-BY-SA or whatever, it’s still a good idea to not butcher the design with numerous clones. I’m setting a precedent for future issues when they arise, so it’s important that I explained my decision above in great detail.
6 Likes
Thank you for the detailed explanation. I understand a desire to set a standard in the library in order to avoid a deep sea of similar-looking or plainly low-effort panels.
I would like to clarify that in this case permission was sought and received directly from Émilie, rather than relying only on the included license, and my uncanny valley design contribution was conditional upon that approval. If I’ve made anyone uncomfortable, I sincerely apologize.
4 Likes
Whether it’s in the library or not I’m pulling & building it as soon as there’s a separate LPG control, I’d use this so often. Thanks for working on this!
You know, I feel Braids could stand to be re-imagined for the digital world further. HP, knobs and jacks can be spent without any monetary consideration. I’m thinking about navigation in particular. I’m always using right-click to pick the mode, because it’s hard to remember what the 16 icons (that are too small on my standard dpi display to distinguish) do. What if there was an easier to use list of modes, letting us change the model by sending trigs and using individual pushbuttons?
Just one random frustration I have with the original. I think the best way to distinguish expanded clones is to rethink them as virtual-first modules, to acknowledge what a mouse pointer makes harder to do, while embracing the absence of budgetary limitations.
@vortico would Joni still be accepted in the library as-is today, or is it grandfathered in?
3 Likes
Is there still something missing in the LPG controls in the Poly fork of the “Plaits/Macro Oscillator 2”? (I think me and xandermogue already exposed those all into the front panel…) What do you mean by “LPG control” exactly? Separate input port that can be used as the LPG control signal instead of the internal generator?
I think you also meant “Plaits” in the second paragraph? But your post prompted me to look also into “Braids” closer and it looks like the Audible Instruments port is missing various features compared to hardware version at the moment…(Granted, maybe those are not so interesting to enable in Rack context because other modules could probably also be used for those…)
Ah, the LPG thingie in the screenshot is in the repo already? My bad, thought it was just a concept right now. Will try it!
Yeah, always mistaking them both haha.
Yeah, the screenshot with the extra LPG controls was just a mockup at one point, but they are now in the module itself! 
(Mostly thanks to xandermogue, also to Yeager who first proposed the new knobs should fit into the current module panel.)
1 Like
The way forward is to redesign the GUIs, in order to eventually get these into the Rack library. I can’t really estimate how long that will take. If I need to do it myself, could be weeks-months and it still might not look that pretty in the end. If I can get some help with the panel redesigns, things might go faster and look better. (As far as I understood from Andrew’s posts, the new designs should not be just “skin” changes, though, the knobs and CV ports layouts should be new too…)
I would also be interested in proposals for new names for the modules (Braids, Plaits, Marbles) and the plugin itself. (I think “Mutable”, “Audible” and “Instruments” should not appear in the name.)
One of the reasons I’d like to have these in the library is to get binary builds for Mac Os (and Linux) in the future. My current Mac is getting old and might fail any day soon. When that happens, I won’t be able to release binary builds for Mac anymore. (That might also happen once Apple updates the OS to a point where plugins built on 10.13/Xcode 9 just won’t work anymore…Maybe they already don’t work on Catalina at this point anyway…?)
3 Likes
I hope you and @xandra-max go forward with the “Poly Plaits” and “Poly Braids”. I use them and find them to add a lush sound that isn’t in the the mono version. From my personal observation, Eurorack seems to be primarily a monophonic world. VCV opened up polyphonic possibilities with the release of v1 and I see a great value to extending monophonic modules into a polyphonic space. Hopefully the original developer will welcome and appreciate your improvements.
1 Like
you could ask one of the resident designers such as @pyer or @steve if they are interested in taking on this project.
as for the naming, i could brainstorm that and come up with some suggestions. or you could announce a contest or something.
3 Likes
Looking forward to vcp naming challenge using one of the polyphonic modules and give the patch a name dedicated to the module. The amount of people regularly participating might drop something usefull, who knows.
The problem with a naming a polyphonic Plaits is that plaits themselves are already multistranded. You’d need an even more interlocking hairstyle. Cornrows is obviously taken by Southpole.
1 Like
Dreadlocks?
6 Likes