one input multiple output

I'm not aware, or cannot think, of such a contraption. One way - probably classified as a workaround - is to have a mixer feeding each effect input/send.

That is, if you have say six sound sources, you have one m6 mixer that combines sends to reverb, one mixer to combine to delay etc., etc.. (Check the example file BBMultiTracker -> rev_send) Probably not so useful for a single sound source you want multieffected, in which case perhaps a metasurface controlled network of MGains may do the job better...

My feeling (as I have suggested to Ross already) is that there are so many different mixing contraptions, that it's time to start thinking abut a generalized, configurable mixer with multiout and/or send capabilities.

Are you trying to do anything in the "sends" contraption that can't be done simply by linking the output from your bassline to multiple contraptions?

Check out the matrix contraptions. That's what it does. You just make presets of your different setup and change'em when needed. Use this in conjunction with the fade time to create smooth changes.

Yes you can :) Audiomulch can do anything as far as signal routing. It all depends if the effect have a wet/dry level. If they do then you set them to wet. (then you can use them has send effects)

Maybe I just didn't understand what you meant.

One thing to remember with AM, is that it's unlimited cables. So you can send anything to anything even to inputs.

@timbralzoom: If I understand your question correctly. Here's how you could do it:

Just drag as many outputs from the output of a contraption (e.g. bassline) to whatever effects you want. Then insert a volume gain (stereo or mono) contraption in the path of each patch cable as send levels.

You could also use a matrix as parradiddle suggests if you want more creative control of the outputs.

I have run into this too. Audiomulch is all about, I believe, simplicity, and the limitless possibilities that that simplicity allows for. As such I think it would be 'simpler' to have a single input to multiple output contraption than to use multiple Mgains or Sgains.

Just some thoughts I would mock up because it's a lazy Sunday:

1. An inverted mixer. A single mono or stereo input with multiple outputs, a master gain and a gain per channel. Just like the mixers now but... inverted!
[IMG]http://i42.tinypic.com/spdraa.png[/IMG]
*Oh balls! I uploaded the version of the mock-up without the title!

2. Matrix with gain per node. When clicking on a node it the knob would control the gain and the amplitude could be shown in the node by the height of the green bar.
[IMG]http://i42.tinypic.com/350j5g8.png[/IMG]

3. Matrix with gain per node without the knob. Perhaps rather than having the knob each node's gain could be controlled by an alt or ctrl click of the mouse then dragging up and down to control the ampliftude.
[IMG]http://i39.tinypic.com/2zsup9z.png[/IMG]

4. A gain 'folder'. The range of mixers could be replaced with 1 mono and 1 stereo mixer that can have between 1 and 12 channels (as is the current range). The number of channels would be selected by a drop-down menu in the contraption itself.
[IMG]http://i43.tinypic.com/25exyti.png[/IMG]

Personally I think the Matrix would benefit from amplitude control and it would open up a lot of oppotunities in live use, and a gain 'folder' would cut down significantly on the number of contraptions in the menu etc. providing more flexibility. It may also be a way to introduce a 'folder' feature as has been requested at other times (and is a feature that I would like to see myself). I'm no programmer though so I don't know if implementing such things is infeasible or simply impractical and ultimately... whether it fits with Ross' vision, which has proved to be pretty fantastic thus far ^_^

Nice ideas. Think Ross has been developing (or at least has spoken in the past about) a 'global' solution in the form of nest-able contraptions. This would mean the ability to create custom interfaces from individual contraptions. Last year he posted a mockup (can't find it now). This would in a way achieve some of your ideas, but with more user control.

> This would mean the ability to create custom interfaces from individual contraptions.

Err.. I never said it would do that. What I posted was a way of grouping contraptions into blocks a bit like folders. Custom interfaces for individual contraptions is a whole other kettle of fish (one I'm not particularly fond of.. but you know, the future is changeable).

>What I posted was a way of grouping contraptions into blocks a bit like folders.

What I meant, but clumsily put.....[my bad]

To the idea of prolapses reply 9#: To me the matrix improvement is a beautyful solution. To open slowly "gates" by having to change one small GUI is a good way live performances could gain depth. You can experiment with the different information streams +delays, circuits and effekts.
I have one opportunity to solve it, because I want to integrate it in my "automateable container" idea. Its to my oppinion useful for performance, too, as yours.
The core is, that the knobs of the various gain contraptions, are not in the properties window- separated- any more, but in the patcher window. So you have the container and in it (named) knobs that shaping the streams in a linear way itself, but in a complex way over their connections and interconnections.
You can build parallelly ordered stereochannels and let them interact
or put a 8-lined master gain over it (has one knob, too).

To the main topic: As the container should have as well multiple inputs as multiple outputs, you can connect a few inputs with more outputs directly and container-intern. Or you added gains in there. All automateable.
But your volume controlling matrix looks much better and is smaller in the patcher field. Maybe both are possible...

The knob of the gains could be substitute by a horizontal bar. It would reduce space, but would be harder to grab, too, in live patching.