Luigi Castelli

I am a fan of Meyer Sound’s SpaceMap multichannel panning software and I was really glad to see that in 2014-2015 Zachary Seldess did a port of it to Max/MSP. The package I am referring to is called MIAP (Manifold-Interface Amplitude Panning) and it includes a handful of objects designed for map authoring and multichannel sound distribution. Unfortunately I have never been able to use those externals in my projects mainly due to the fact that they are not open source, nor they are inclusive of any support or warranty.

Now I noticed that MIAP hasn’t seen an update in almost 6 years and it seems that the project is no longer developed nor maintained. I find that particularly unfortunate because I think MIAP is a pretty neat package, but basically unusable in any professional settings.

About a month ago I tried to get in touch with the author but I never got a reply back.

I am wondering if anybody knows anything about it and if Zachary is reading this forum maybe he could chime in directly. I would like to ask if the project could be resumed and made open source so that the community could eventually contribute to it. There are a few bugs that could be fixed and many features that could be implemented. I think it could benefit the whole Max/MSP community.

Any thoughts or comments are highly appreciated.

Now I noticed that MIAP hasn’t seen an update in almost 6 years and it seems that the project is no longer developed nor maintained. I find that particularly unfortunate  because I think MIAP is a pretty neat package, but basically unusable in any professional settings.

Any thoughts or comments are highly appreciated.
Thanks.

Hi folks,
I am a fan of Meyer Sound’s SpaceMap multichannel panning software and I was really glad to see that in 2014-2015 Zachary Seldess 

current-status-of-miap-manifold-interface-amplitude-panning

I must have missed your email, will go back and search for it and respond as appropriate there. Glad I found this post.

You mention "a few bugs", and indicate that the project is unsupported, but you've never sent me a bug report. Please please do so, and I will definitely look into it! Also, I haven't received any feature requests from you (at least via direct communication, you may have posted something on this forum that I missed). If you have some ideas, I'd love for you to send them along via email.

It is true that I've let a long time pass without updates, but this is largely because I haven't received a single bug report on the software since it's last release (again, unless I missed something on the forum that didn't make it to me), and honestly it is quite rare to hear from people who use the tool, so I haven't felt the need to update publicly (I've made several incremental changes over the years and shared with collaborators).

Regarding open sourcing the project, I do eventually plan to do just that, but first I must make sure the code is clean and represents myself well, considering the scope of the project and personal time and effort invested (no small effort, done exclusively on nights and weekends after work over a period of a few years, etc.). My professional and personal life (even without the current zombie apocalypse!) have made finishing key features that I personally want finished before open sourcing really slow going (slow is an understatement, I know)... most important of which is Max-native UI-based map authoring (at long last!). That's my own goal. The only other significant request I've received is a Windows port, and that's finally done!

Luigi, you've emailed me only twice these past six years, and both times you've asked for source code, siting the issue that this free package comes without warranty, and you therefore can't use it. Open sourcing the code solely for the purpose that you don't want to use this free gift to the community without warranty (I've not had a single other request of this nature), especially when I've received no bug reports or feature request, seems a bit overkill to me at this time.

Having said all this, I would love for you and everyone else to use and enjoy the package, and let me know how it goes. I need some beta testers to help quickly vet the Windows (and Mac) builds before official release, so anyone who's interested, please join the mailing list, and I'll reach out there. Finding time to do the Windows port (and also optimize the UI performance, btw) was top priority for me. Now that it's done, assuming I haven't introduced any bugs, I'll finally be able to tackle UI-based authoring. Please join the (very inactive) mailing list if you're interested... I'll send a request for beta testers very soon: 

http://www.zacharyseldess.com/miap/contact/

Thanks Luigi and all you other badass Maxers out there.

You mention "a few bugs", and indicate that the project is unsupported, but you've never sent me a bug report. Please please do so, and I will definitely look into it! Also, I haven't received any feature requests from you (at least via direct communication, you may have posted something on this forum that I missed). If you have some ideas, I'd love for you to send them along via email. 

It is true that I've let a long time pass without updates, but this is largely because I haven't received a single bug report on the software since it's last release (again, unless I missed something on the forum that didn't make it to me), and honestly it is quite rare to hear from people who use the tool, so I haven't felt the need to update publicly (I've made several incremental changes over the years and shared with collaborators).

Regarding open sourcing the project, I do eventually plan to do just that, but first I must make sure the code is clean and represents myself well, considering the scope of the project and personal time and effort invested (no small effort, done exclusively on nights and weekends after work over a period of a few years, etc.). My professional and personal life (even without the current zombie apocalypse!) have made finishing key features that I personally want finished before open sourcing really slow going (slow is an understatement, I know)... most important of which is Max-native UI-based map authoring (at long last!). That's my own goal. The only other significant request I've received is a Windows port, and that's finally done!

Luigi, you've emailed me only twice these past six years, and both times you've asked for source code, siting the issue that this free package comes without warranty, and you therefore can't use it. Open sourcing the code solely for the purpose that you don't want to use this free gift to the community without warranty (I've not had a single other request of this nature), especially when I've received no bug reports or feature request, seems a bit overkill to me at this time. 

Having said all this, I would love for you and everyone else to use and enjoy the package, and let me know how it goes. I need some beta testers to help quickly vet the Windows (and Mac) builds before official release, so anyone who's interested, please join the mailing list, and I'll reach out there. Finding time to do the Windows port (and also optimize the UI performance, btw) was top priority for me. Now that it's done, assuming I haven't introduced any bugs, I'll finally be able to tackle UI-based authoring. Please join the (very inactive) mailing list if you're interested... I'll send a request for beta testers very soon: http://www.zacharyseldess.com/miap/contact/

Thanks Luigi and all you other badass Maxers out there.

that is why i hardly release any of my work: it just doesnt represent me well enough.^^

I am very glad you found this thread and replied to it.

In all honesty I was starting to lose hope, but I am stoked to hear the project is not dead.

In 2015 I wrote to your personal email address and at the time you told me you were not ready to open source the project. You also added that in the [MIAP.meyer] external you were using some proprietary libraries from Meyer Sound that prevented you from open sourcing it without renegotiating licensing terms. You ended your email saying that was low on your priority list.

I am sorry to hear that “you rarely have heard from people who use the tool” and haven’t received many bug reports or feature requests from people in general, but frankly it doesn’t surprise me. I am not saying this because I don’t think MIAP is a good tool. To the contrary - as I said - I think MIAP is a neat package, still in its infancy, but a neat package nevertheless.

However, you cannot expect to “release” closed source software, totally unsupported and bereft of any warranty and have users flood you with bug reports and feature requests. A Max external is not even standalone, it is an extension to another piece of software. Why would any reasonable Max user be willing to setup his/her own patches with a set of externals that doesn’t give any guarantee as to what would happen in case of a problem? Updates to the OS, new Max versions, simple bugs, could all potentially break 3rd party externals. People would spend many hours working on a patch that could break at any moment and - without source code - they would be left absolutely helpless.

Where would be the incentive for potential users to spend their own time and energy to test software they really have no control over?

It doesn’t matter if at the present time you are willing - out of interest and/or generosity - to address bug reports and feature requests. You have no obligation to do so. You could stop tomorrow and tell all MIAP users that the project is no longer supported and you would have every right to do so. It’s all very clearly stated in the MIAP license.

So, I didn’t send you any bug report or feature request simply because I chose not to use MIAP in any professional setting for the reasons mentioned above. And - I might add - it was a very reluctant choice… I work extensively with multichannel setups and spatialization algorithms. I would have been more than happy to send you bug reports and feature requests for something that I could safely use without making my projects entirely dependent on you, your life circumstances or your development schedule. Just because something comes free and there is good intention behind, it doesn’t mean it is suitable or convenient to use. I explicitly said all of this in my second email to you. (which I suspect you never read)

I mean, you said it took six years to finish the Windows port. I am very familiar with the Max SDK. It is perfectly cross platform. The same code running on Mac should compile on Windows. Assuming that you have setup your project correctly, it doesn’t take six years to make a Windows port of four externals. I don’t mean to sound harsh, but it is easy to see how inefficient this model is.

I am kindly asking you, Zachary, to reconsider your approach for the benefit of your own project and the Max community. It really is a win-win situation. A project like MIAP would be the perfect candidate for the open source world. There is no new technology being created. You don’t have to expose any of your own ideas, algorithms or designs. By open sourcing MIAP, you would actively encourage users to send you bug reports, feature requests and - most importantly - to directly contribute to the project, either by testing or coding. You have already done a great job in creating an initial port of the SpaceMap algorithm to Max/MSP. That’s a significant stepping stone. Even if at the moment your code is not 100% clean and you feel “it doesn’t represent yourself well”, I think people will understand and still appreciate the time and efforts you put into it. At least I do… There are some very talented and experienced folks in the Max/MSP world, who would be able to help you speed up the development process.

I hope what I am saying makes sense to you and to everybody else reading this.

Thanks for listening and I am open to any comment…

I am very glad you found this thread and replied to it.
In all honesty I was starting to lose hope, but I am stoked to hear the project is not dead.

In 2015 I wrote to your personal email address and at the time you told me you were not ready to open source the project. You also added that in the [MIAP.meyer] external you were using some proprietary libraries from Meyer Sound that prevented you from open sourcing it without renegotiating licensing terms. You ended your email saying that was low on your priority list. 

However, you cannot expect to “release” closed source software, totally unsupported and bereft of any warranty and have users flood you with bug reports and feature requests. A Max external is not even standalone, it is an extension to another piece of software. Why would any reasonable Max user be willing to setup his/her own patches with a set of externals that doesn’t give any guarantee as to what would happen in case of a problem? Updates to the OS, new Max versions, simple bugs, could all potentially break 3rd party externals. People would spend many hours working on a patch that could break at any moment and - without source code - they would be left absolutely helpless.
Where would be the incentive for potential users to spend their own time and energy to test software they really have no control over?

I hope what I am saying makes sense to you and to everybody else reading this.
Thanks for listening and I am open to any comment…

I disagree with some (but not all) of what you write, unfortunately. But for the sake of civility and time, rather than get into value judgements, etc., I'll try to stick to some facts:

I can't release the object that convert Meyer projects files to MIAP JSON map and trajectory files. All the other code is entirely my own and written from the ground up (miap, miap~, miap.map). I'd never release Meyer code without approval, of course. I've already asked Meyer to take over maintenance of the miap.meyer external codebase, if they would like to. We'll see if they do that.

RE: my comment that I rarely hear from people, that needs to be contextualized a bit. I've heard from many, many people over the years, and the tool has been used in plenty of projects, installations, and is taught in a few universities (to my knowledge). So it's been used a lot actually (I also see regular downloads from the site, etc.) and not only in a private, low pressure, informal setting. I can't argue with your own choice to not use the package in a professional setting. That is your own choice, and I respect it. But others have made different choices.

Aside from people reaching out for assistance (which I've largely provided), I haven't received any bug reports since the last version was released, including from the various people over the years that have used the package for performances/installations/etc. I am not saying bugs don't exist (in fact I have a few fixed for the next version), but for whatever reason (not necessarily the reasons you state) people haven't either seen them, cared about them or felt the need to communicate them. And that is absolutely fine with me. Anyways, considering all this, I might get a few emails a year on it... so it's relatively rare. This is not a complaint at all... just a fact.

I hear you, Luigi, but I won't be open sourcing it just yet. I'm happy to continue further discussion via email.

RE: my comment that I rarely hear from people, that needs to be contextualized a bit. I've heard from many, many people over the years, and the tool has been used in plenty of projects, installations, and is taught in a few universities (to my knowledge). So it's been used a lot actually (I also see regular downloads from the site, etc.) and not only in a private, low pressure, informal setting. I can't argue with your own choice to not use the package in a professional setting. That is your own choice, and I respect it. But others have made different choices. 

Current status of MIAP (Manifold-Interface Amplitude Panning)