I noticed that since 5.1.7, when sending "mute 0 1" to mute all voices and then "mute 1 0" to unmute the first voice to a poly object, signal processing inside the first voice (instance) isn't running even though the thispoly object reports the voice is not muted.

Only sending "mute 0 0" makes signal processing resume in the instance.

See the below patches, open polymaster.maxpat.

poly-mute-behaviour-changed-in-5-1-7-if-not-bug-found

Actually, this is expected behavior. Global mute (mute 0 1) takes over, in a sense, the ability to mute/un-mute unique instances. So once you've globally muted, you can't go and un-mute one of the instances until you've shut off global muting (mute 0 0).

In what version was it behaving differently?

Actually, this is expected behavior. Global mute (mute 0 1) takes over, in a sense, the ability to mute/un-mute unique instances. So once you've globally muted, you can't go and un-mute one of the instances until you've shut off global muting (mute 0 0). 

In what version was it behaving differently?


In a version before 5.1.5 it was differently I believe. I don't know the exact version, i just noticed because I fired up an older patch which now doesn't work anymore.

This would warrant an extra line or two in the help file of poly, don't you think? The discrepancy in the mute status being unmuted but still no signal processing going on makes it very confusing now.

 is kind of the master of muting. If you mute the 

 none of the voice will ever have anything to process. You need to unmute the 

It has always been the case, since Max 4.x AFAIR. The reference has been updated to clarify this. Thanks for mentioning.

mute 0 is kind of the master of muting. If you mute the poly~ with mute 0 1 none of the voice will ever have anything to process. You need to unmute the poly~ with mute 0 0 before the other mute messages (e.g. mute 1 1/0) will be functional.

It has always been the case, since Max 4.x AFAIR. The reference has been updated to clarify this. Thanks for mentioning.


Poly mute behaviour changed in 5.1.7? (if not: bug found)