Chris Muir

https://cycling74.com/?op=displaystory;sid=2007/9/28/105551/882

Now that David Z. has posted his "Max 5: What It Is (and Isn't)" 

article on Max 5, I can talk about it a little.

Over the last couple months, I've been seeing feature requests for 

Max 5, and complaints with Max 4 here on the list, and I keep wanting 

to reply with something like "You're going to like Max 5." Rather 

than reply in a bunch of different threads, I'm going to try and 

Presentation mode - this can _really_ clean up UI patches. You can 

place UI objects where they make sense from the code point of view, 

then mark them as part of the presentation view. When you switch to 

the presentation view, you can move them around and changes size, 

Zoomable windows. I don't know about you, but my eyesight isn't what 

it used to be. The ability to zoom in is really great. There can be 

different views onto the same patch, at different zoom levels. There 

is the ability to snap objects to a (user-definable) grid now, too.

The Max window is greatly improved. Single lines, or arbitrary 

sections, can be copied or cleared. From a message in the Max window, 

there is a way to highlight the object in the patcher that wrote that 

The new textual representation is human readable! The old #keyword 

stuff was convenient as a way to share stuff on the list, but not for 

much more. The new representation is more verbose, but much nicer, 

The new file browser lets you navigate your whole Max world from one location.

A _host_ of little things that make life easier. Many of the requests 

that have come across the list in the last few months are in Max 5. 

Max 5 represents a new foundation for future development.

I don't want to inflate my role in any way. I've not been doing 

development work on Max 5, I've only been beating on it for the last 

couple of months. All kudos go to David Z. and the whole Max 5 team 

at Cycling74 who have been toiling for a long time on this.

Chris Muir | "There are many futures and only one status quo.

cbm@well.com | This is why conservatives mostly agree,

 | and radicals always argue." - Brian Eno

Now that David Z. has posted his "Max 5: What It Is (and Isn't)" 
article on Max 5, I can talk about it a little.

Over the last couple months, I've been seeing feature requests for 
Max 5, and complaints with Max 4 here on the list, and I keep wanting 
to reply with something like "You're going to like Max 5."  Rather 
than reply in a bunch of different threads, I'm going to try and 
gather some responses here.

Presentation mode - this can _really_ clean up UI patches. You can 
place UI objects where they make sense from the code point of view, 
then mark them as part of the presentation view. When you switch to 
the presentation view, you can move them around and changes size, 
etc. so that they make sense for the UI.

Zoomable windows. I don't know about you, but my eyesight isn't what 
it used to be. The ability to zoom in is really great. There can be 
different views onto the same patch, at different zoom levels. There 
is the ability to snap objects to a (user-definable) grid now, too.

The Max window is greatly improved. Single lines, or arbitrary 
sections, can be copied or cleared. From a message in the Max window, 
there is a way to highlight the object in the patcher that wrote that 
message into the Max window.

The new textual representation is human readable! The old #keyword 
stuff was convenient as a way to share stuff on the list, but not for 
much more. The new representation is more verbose, but much nicer, 
IMO.

A _host_ of little things that make life easier. Many of the requests 
that have come across the list in the last few months are in Max 5. 
Max 5 represents a new foundation for future development.

p.s.
I don't want to inflate my role in any way. I've not been doing 
development work on Max 5, I've only been beating on it for the last 
couple of months. All kudos go to David Z. and the whole Max 5 team 
at Cycling74 who have been toiling for a long time on this.

-- 
Chris Muir           | "There are many futures and only one status quo.
cbm@well.com         |  This is why conservatives mostly agree,
http://www.xfade.com |  and radicals always argue." - Brian Eno


max-5-what-it-is-and-isnt

Hah, I saw this a few minutes earlier. It sounds amazing and great, 

and I cannot wait to see/read more. Any chance for a screenshot or 

two for those of us who are more visually um, oriented?

Indeed, this sounds like an amazing update. I cannot wait to get my 

On Sep 28, 2007, at 4:35 PM, Chris Muir wrote:

> Now that David Z. has posted his "Max 5: What It Is (and Isn't)" 

> article on Max 5, I can talk about it a little.

> Over the last couple months, I've been seeing feature requests for 

> Max 5, and complaints with Max 4 here on the list, and I keep 

> wanting to reply with something like "You're going to like Max 5." 

> Rather than reply in a bunch of different threads, I'm going to try 

> Presentation mode - this can _really_ clean up UI patches. You can 

> place UI objects where they make sense from the code point of view, 

> then mark them as part of the presentation view. When you switch to 

> the presentation view, you can move them around and changes size, 

> etc. so that they make sense for the UI.

> Zoomable windows. I don't know about you, but my eyesight isn't 

> what it used to be. The ability to zoom in is really great. There 

> can be different views onto the same patch, at different zoom 

> levels. There is the ability to snap objects to a (user-definable) 

> The Max window is greatly improved. Single lines, or arbitrary 

> sections, can be copied or cleared. From a message in the Max 

> window, there is a way to highlight the object in the patcher that 

> wrote that message into the Max window.

> The new textual representation is human readable! The old #keyword 

> stuff was convenient as a way to share stuff on the list, but not 

> for much more. The new representation is more verbose, but much 

> The new file browser lets you navigate your whole Max world from 

> A _host_ of little things that make life easier. Many of the 

> requests that have come across the list in the last few months are 

> in Max 5. Max 5 represents a new foundation for future development.

> I don't want to inflate my role in any way. I've not been doing 

> development work on Max 5, I've only been beating on it for the 

> last couple of months. All kudos go to David Z. and the whole Max 5 

> team at Cycling74 who have been toiling for a long time on this.

Hah, I saw this a few minutes earlier. It sounds amazing and great,  
and I cannot wait to see/read more. Any chance for a screenshot or  
two for those of us who are more visually um, oriented?

Indeed, this sounds like an amazing update. I cannot wait to get my  
hands on it!

>
> https://cycling74.com/?op=displaystory;sid=2007/9/28/105551/882
>
> Now that David Z. has posted his "Max 5: What It Is (and Isn't)"  
> article on Max 5, I can talk about it a little.
>
> Over the last couple months, I've been seeing feature requests for  
> Max 5, and complaints with Max 4 here on the list, and I keep  
> wanting to reply with something like "You're going to like Max 5."   
> Rather than reply in a bunch of different threads, I'm going to try  
> and gather some responses here.
>
> Presentation mode - this can _really_ clean up UI patches. You can  
> place UI objects where they make sense from the code point of view,  
> then mark them as part of the presentation view. When you switch to  
> the presentation view, you can move them around and changes size,  
> etc. so that they make sense for the UI.
>
> Zoomable windows. I don't know about you, but my eyesight isn't  
> what it used to be. The ability to zoom in is really great. There  
> can be different views onto the same patch, at different zoom  
> levels. There is the ability to snap objects to a (user-definable)  
> grid now, too.
>
> The Max window is greatly improved. Single lines, or arbitrary  
> sections, can be copied or cleared. From a message in the Max  
> window, there is a way to highlight the object in the patcher that  
> wrote that message into the Max window.
>
> The new textual representation is human readable! The old #keyword  
> stuff was convenient as a way to share stuff on the list, but not  
> for much more. The new representation is more verbose, but much  
> nicer, IMO.
>
> The new file browser lets you navigate your whole Max world from  
> one location.
>
> A _host_ of little things that make life easier. Many of the  
> requests that have come across the list in the last few months are  
> in Max 5. Max 5 represents a new foundation for future development.
>
> -C
>
> p.s.
> I don't want to inflate my role in any way. I've not been doing  
> development work on Max 5, I've only been beating on it for the  
> last couple of months. All kudos go to David Z. and the whole Max 5  
> team at Cycling74 who have been toiling for a long time on this.
>
> -- 
> Chris Muir           | "There are many futures and only one status  
> quo.
> cbm@well.com         |  This is why conservatives mostly agree,
> http://www.xfade.com |  and radicals always argue." - Brian Eno

Some of the stuff in David's article, and the things you mention 

below Chris, really, really are exciting! (Presentation mode in 

particular will likely save me hours of time on my big projects!).

At 1:35 PM -0700 9/28/07, Chris Muir wrote:

202 Hack / PC-1600 User / VSTi Host / OMS Convert / Jack OS X / Major 

Some of the stuff in David's article, and the things you mention 
below Chris, really, really are exciting!  (Presentation mode in 
particular will likely save me hours of time on my big projects!).

At 1:35 PM -0700 9/28/07, Chris Muir wrote:
>https://cycling74.com/?op=displaystory;sid=2007/9/28/105551/882

-- 
Dan Nigrin
Defective Records
202 Hack / PC-1600 User / VSTi Host / OMS Convert / Jack OS X / Major 
Malfunction
http://www.defectiverecords.com
http://www.jackosx.com


From seeing several preliminary features, I concur. It looks great, 

On a slightly unrelated note, I just got forced into playing with 

vvvv recently, and one really nice feature it has is called 

"boygrouping". Basically, you network several machines, run a patch 

on one of them, and then select the objects that you want mirrored on 

the rest of the computers. It transmits that patch information to 

the other machines...so you modify a single patch and it updates all 

the computers. It's kind of like a poly, for patches, across 

Thats not really a feature request, but it is pretty nice. That 

being said, vvvv is less flexible in a lot of ways than Max/Jitter, 

IMO. And what few interface advantages it has are completely 

On Sep 28, 2007, at 1:35 PM, Chris Muir wrote:

From seeing several preliminary features, I concur.  It looks great,  
and I think most people will be happy.

On a slightly unrelated note, I just got forced into playing with  
vvvv recently, and one really nice feature it has is called  
"boygrouping".  Basically, you network several machines, run a patch  
on one of them, and then select the objects that you want mirrored on  
the rest of the computers.  It transmits that patch information to  
the other machines...so you modify a single patch and it updates all  
the computers.  It's kind of like a poly, for patches, across  
multiple machines.

Thats not really a feature request, but it is pretty nice.  That  
being said, vvvv is less flexible in a lot of ways than Max/Jitter,  
IMO.  And what few interface advantages it has are completely  
rectified by Max Force Five.

San Francisco, CA Work: 857-544-3967
Email: bthrew@gmail.com
IM: captogreadmore (AIM)
http:/www.barrythrew.com


ok. that wins. I am now on referring to Max 5 as Max Force Five. Well 

On Sep 28, 2007, at 5:43 PM, barry threw wrote:

ok. that wins. I am now on referring to Max 5 as Max Force Five. Well  
played.

[quote]Perhaps you have memorized how everything in Max works. I have not ? I am constantly consulting the help files and documentation, and I feel that every moment I spend looking for the PDF or deciphering a help patch takes my concentration away from the problem at hand. We tried to look at every "moment" in the life of the Max programmer, and want to make the information that applied to that situation immediately available.

That's my favorite paragraph from the article. Most of my work as a composer these days involves Max, but I (like many of us) wear multiple hats, and work regularly in multiple environments. It can be difficult for me to remember what's what in Max/MSP/Jitter, especially when I've spent 1-2 weeks away from it, bringing myself up to speed on what's different in the new Pro Tools/Logic/Waves/whatever, so that my recording engineer or producer hats still fit. The idea that when I'm working in Max, I can spend less time hunting through multiple PDF manuals and more time actually composing/programming/creating is really appealing to me.

Plus, I'm stoked about zoomable windows and multiple undos.

[quote]Perhaps you have memorized how everything in Max works. I have not ? I am constantly consulting the help files and documentation, and I feel that every moment I spend looking for the PDF or deciphering a help patch takes my concentration away from the problem at hand. We tried to look at every "moment" in the life of the Max programmer, and want to make the information that applied to that situation immediately available.
[/quote]

That's my favorite paragraph from the article.  Most of my work as a composer these days involves Max, but I (like many of us) wear multiple hats, and work regularly in multiple environments.  It can be difficult for me to remember what's what in Max/MSP/Jitter, especially when I've spent 1-2 weeks away from it, bringing myself up to speed on what's different in the new Pro Tools/Logic/Waves/whatever, so that my recording engineer or producer hats still fit.  The idea that when I'm working in Max, I can spend less time hunting through multiple PDF manuals and more time actually composing/programming/creating is really appealing to me.

Can we have several poly~'s and choose the cpu core for each one?

Thanks for your time and your fantastic work!

Like many, I am refraining LOADS of questions on features, and 

definitely look forward to read Mr Z's next insights...

Like many, I am refraining LOADS of questions on features, and  
definitely look forward to read Mr Z's next insights...

Quote: Rui Caldas wrote on Sat, 29 September 2007 05:28

----------------------------------------------------

> Can we have several poly~'s and choose the cpu core for each one?

Well, this wouldn't make sense since the OS automatically distributes different threads over different cpus. Rui, you shouldn't worry which thread is where. The only important thing is to have separate threads, the OS will take it from there.

Btw, poly~ splitting patches in separate threads is by far the best improvement for me. Great work!

Oh and I am particularly excited about the statement [quote] In order to work toward those goals, we've put a lot of effort into creating a more modern graphical user interface for interactive real-time graphical programmers [/qoute].

Note the term [i]real-time programming[/i]. I don't know for sure whether David refers to 'programming real-time operations' or to 'programming while the program runs', but since the context is the graphical user interface, my guess is the second.

This is a new train of thought in software development and one of the main reasons I use max. I really love to see the CEO of the company of our beloved programming environment explicitly stating this as a core quality. GO Cyling!

Quote: Rui Caldas wrote on Sat, 29 September 2007 05:28
----------------------------------------------------

> poly~
>
> Can we have several poly~'s and choose the cpu core for each one?

Oh and I am particularly excited about the statement [quote] In order to work toward those goals, we've put a lot of effort into creating a more modern graphical user interface for interactive real-time graphical programmers [/qoute]. 

Note the term [i]real-time programming[/i]. I don't know for sure whether David refers to 'programming real-time operations' or to 'programming while the program runs', but since the context is the graphical user interface, my guess is the second. 

Subject: Re: [maxmsp] Max 5: What It Is (and Isn't)

> Some of the stuff in David's article, and the things you mention 

> below Chris, really, really are exciting! (Presentation mode in 

> particular will likely save me hours of time on my big projects!).

> At 1:35 PM -0700 9/28/07, Chris Muir wrote:

> 202 Hack / PC-1600 User / VSTi Host / OMS Convert / Jack OS X / Major 

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Dan Nigrin" 
To: 
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2007 3:53 PM
Subject: Re: [maxmsp] Max 5: What It Is (and Isn't)

> Some of the stuff in David's article, and the things you mention 
> below Chris, really, really are exciting!  (Presentation mode in 
> particular will likely save me hours of time on my big projects!).
>
> Oh, and... drum roll please:
>
> "vst~ provides host sync to plug-ins"
>
> !!!!!!!!
>
> Dan
>
> At 1:35 PM -0700 9/28/07, Chris Muir wrote:
> >https://cycling74.com/?op=displaystory;sid=2007/9/28/105551/882
>
>
> -- 
> Dan Nigrin
> Defective Records
> 202 Hack / PC-1600 User / VSTi Host / OMS Convert / Jack OS X / Major 
> Malfunction
> http://www.defectiverecords.com
> http://www.jackosx.com
>


Max, therefore, is more of a concept editor than a media editor.

DZ wrote:
Max, therefore, is more of a concept editor than a media editor.

On 1 oct. 07, at 12:27, Stephane Letz wrote:

> What about multi-core machines support?

"poly~ distributes its subpatchers onto multiple processors, 

resulting in a substantial performance improvement in many cases"

"poly~ distributes its subpatchers onto multiple processors,  
resulting in a substantial performance improvement in many cases"

Wow. This sounds great. I'm pretty new to Max (just started earlier this year), so having not "grown up" with the program, I was always a little baffled as to why the overall interface had not been updated. I feel the same way about Pro Tools.

Anyway, I'm a student, and my 9 month license expires in December. I would certainly like to and can probably afford to wait until 5 is released to buy the full license. Does anyone have any idea as to what Cycling's free upgrade window for recent buyers has been in the past?

Wow.  This sounds great.  I'm pretty new to Max (just started earlier this year), so having not "grown up" with the program, I was always a little baffled as to why the overall interface had not been updated.  I feel the same way about Pro Tools.
Anyway, I'm a student, and my 9 month license expires in December.  I would certainly like to and can probably afford to wait until 5 is released to buy the full license.  Does anyone have any idea as to what Cycling's free upgrade window for recent buyers has been in the past?


Improvements on the sound engine ? That's for me a main issue and task for max5.

Quote: zonemark wrote on Wed, 03 October 2007 10:27

> Improvements on the sound engine ? That's for me a main issue and task for max5.

Ehm.. what kind of improvements, can you be more specific?

Quote: zonemark wrote on Wed, 03 October 2007 10:27
----------------------------------------------------
> Improvements on the sound engine ? That's for me a main issue and task for max5.
----------------------------------------------------

I agree, what about the improvements of the sound engine ?

For example I'd like to see a way to not stop audio when you change the patch.

And what about the scheduler timing issue ?

In comparison with supercollider, it's clear (I think and friends of mine too). And it's still 16-bit (isn't it?), I need more overhead. I hear still too much distortion on patches even from experienced programmers (including from some well-known institutions).

Quote: zonemark wrote on Wed, 03 October 2007 11:59

> In comparison with supercollider, it's clear (I think and friends of mine too). And it's still 16-bit (isn't it?), I need more overhead. I hear still too much distortion on patches even from experienced programmers (including from some well-known institutions).

With the risk of getting completely off topic; I use max' sound engine in serious commercial projects. If the sound engine's inherent quality would've been anything less than Logic Pro or Pro Tools I would definitly not have been able to make any money.

I don't want to say you (or your friends) didn't experience a problem but I do think that it is not the way Max is made that caused them. It's more likely that there are a few in-depth things you need to know about the way max is programmed in order to get it working correctly.

I do agree that the documentation is not sufficient for people that are not dsp programmers.. but on the other hand the documentation would in fact have to be a software engineering / dsp programming course in order to be complete.

And that's where we get back to the topic of Max 5. I am very curious how the new documentation system will address some of these fundamental issues (another notorious one of which is the understanding of the timing/threading system).

Quote: zonemark wrote on Wed, 03 October 2007 11:59
----------------------------------------------------
> In comparison with supercollider, it's clear (I think and friends of mine too). And it's still 16-bit (isn't it?), I need more overhead. I hear still too much distortion on patches even from experienced programmers (including from some well-known institutions).
----------------------------------------------------

With the risk of getting completely off topic; I use max' sound engine in serious commercial projects. If the sound engine's inherent quality would've been anything less than Logic Pro or Pro Tools I would definitly not have been able to make any money. 

I don't want to say you (or your friends) didn't experience a problem but I do think that it is not the way Max is made that caused them. It's more likely that there are a few in-depth things you need to know about the way max is programmed in order to get it working correctly. 

I do agree that the documentation is not sufficient for people that are not dsp programmers.. but on the other hand the documentation would in fact have to be a software engineering / dsp programming course in order to be complete. 

On 3 oct. 07, at 11:59, hubert machnik wrote:

it's 32 bit floating point since the first version of MSP. Although, 

most of the objects performs internal calculation in 64 bits floating 

it's 32 bit floating point since the first version of MSP. Although,  
most of the objects performs internal calculation in 64 bits floating  
point (double).

> In comparison with supercollider, it's clear

I like this kind of sentence... CSound sounds better than them all as 

So since I use the 3 of them now, I can tell you that the sound 

play a 24-bit sound file at native sampling rate

Then if you hear a difference from the original, you are very good! 

So the problem is not in the audio engine.

Now if you start to compare some oscillators, filters or other signal 

processing, then you can have preference. But what is great with Max 

is that you can steal code from the 2 others: they are open source, 

I like this kind of sentence... CSound sounds better than them all as  
well ;-)

So since I use the 3 of them now, I can tell you that the sound  
difference is inexistent in this case:

play a 24-bit sound file at native sampling rate
multiply by 0.5 then by 2.
record the output on a 24 bit file.

Then if you hear a difference from the original, you are very good!   
So the problem is not in the audio engine.

Now if you start to compare some oscillators, filters or other signal  
processing, then you can have preference.  But what is great with Max  
is that you can steal code from the 2 others: they are open source,  
so just code them in a Max external!

Quote: Emmanuel Jourdan wrote on Wed, 03 October 2007 13:59

---------------------------------------------------- 

> it's 32 bit floating point since the first version of MSP. Although, 

> most of the objects performs internal calculation in 64 bits floating 

Is it (somebody told me recently that it is 16-bit), but if it is 32-bit float, then it's a question of taste and maybe skills. I don't use MSP to much because I hear it (MSP) somehow. For my next project I'll try to use it again and improve my skills, cause of your comments. I use Max a lot to control all kind of media, soft- and hardware, in shows worldwide, there was a reason not using MSP too much in the past ....

Quote: Emmanuel Jourdan wrote on Wed, 03 October 2007 13:59
---------------------------------------------------- 
> it's 32 bit floating point since the first version of MSP. Although,  
> most of the objects performs internal calculation in 64 bits floating  
> point (double).
----------------------------------------
Is it (somebody told me recently that it is 16-bit), but if it is 32-bit float, then it's a question of taste and maybe skills. I don't use MSP to much because I hear it (MSP) somehow. For my next project I'll try to use it again and improve my skills, cause of your comments. I use Max a lot to control all kind of media, soft- and hardware, in shows worldwide, there was a reason not using MSP too much in the past ....


I only use Music III, it had the best sound EVAR.

On Oct 3, 2007, at 5:27 AM, Pierre Alexandre Tremblay wrote:

>> In comparison with supercollider, it's clear

> I like this kind of sentence... CSound sounds better than them all 

> So since I use the 3 of them now, I can tell you that the sound 

> play a 24-bit sound file at native sampling rate

> Then if you hear a difference from the original, you are very 