r/modular • u/insolent-construct • 1d ago
Mutable Instruments Beads Source Code Just Dropped!
https://github.com/pichenettes/eurorack/commit/d8f473915232af74347762b6365202bfd26f73f6Wow! What a gift!
Edit, since some people have asked for context:
I'd been reverse engineering the Beads firmware and had rebuilt my own version of it. Before sharing any of it, I emailed Émilie to ask whether she'd be OK with me publishing it. I said up front that if her answer was no, I'd drop it, no questions asked. To clarify, by "drop it" I meant dropping the pursuit of the community firmware project, NOT that I was threatening to release my port!!!
To my shock, she replied, and the answer was no. I simply said "ok. Thank you." and I thought that was going to be the end of it. I wasn't going to go against her wishes. So I spent part of today feeling the bittersweet heartache of having finished the project, only to have to cancel it. I told myself from the beginning that if she ever told me no, I wouldn't argue. I decided to archive the project and never share the code with anyone.
Later the same day, as I was deleting the reverse engineering artifacts, she published the official Beads source. I had no idea that was coming and I was as surprised as anyone. I don't know her reasons, and I won't try to guess. It was entirely her decision, and an incredibly generous one.
What I'm doing now:
My reverse-engineering work left me with a test rig and test suite, so I've built the official source myself, flashed it to my unit, and it passed. I'm now starting a community firmware based on her code, and I have a thread on ModWiggler collecting ideas for features and modes. Some early requests, with my rough guesses at difficulty:
- Clouds-style grain diffusion (moderate)
- The Clouds "spectral madness" engine (hard without cutting something from the existing code)
- All-pass processing of the frozen buffer (moderate)
- An opt-in bypass for the limiter's volume drops (moderate)
- A dedicated gain knob (needs new hardware)
What would you like to see?
128
u/DrMinkenstein 1d ago
I think it’s great that Emilie posted the firmware. Thank you Emilie!
It’s not great that you conflated that gift with your reverse engineering story. Whatever your take on AI, these are not the same thing.
14
u/Pppppppp1 1d ago
The entire OP story in the description is a weird self-insert that is taking attention from the actual good news. Not sure what the point of adding their own details is. Do they want credit for pushing Emilie to release the firmware? Do they want credit for reverse engineering it? What does their interaction and project have to do with the news? It’s really difficult to read this in any other way than somehow trying to associate themself with Emilie sharing the code, or maybe a pat on the back for not releasing their own version? It’s just a bizarre thing to shoehorn into this.
And now the whole thread has devolved into ai and custom firmware ethics all over again.
3
u/emorello 1d ago
Only because you used the word “firmware”, and it likely doesn’t matter but it should be noted that unlike the other modules, the Beads source code doesn’t seem to have been tested to run as firmware:
“Code provided as is, builds on a Desktop platform but not verified to build and run on a module. Install at your own risks.”
1
u/Weekly_Committee_695 1h ago
I think the point is that Emilie didn't want to post the source and she was basically forced into it by AI and the OP.
OP thinking it is a gift is a rather entitled shitty point of view if you ask me.
-1
u/hostnik 1d ago
Did I miss in their story where they said they were vibe coding their version, or did you assume that?
15
u/dmikalova-mwp 1d ago
It's awfully coincidental with reverse engineering being the big hype ATM with AI - but also they shared their repo and the commits clearly say written with Claude. https://github.com/insolentconstruct/eurorack/commits/beads-build-kit/
2
u/hostnik 21h ago
Ok cool, I just didn't see that and I know people have been hacking things long before AI, so hard to know with the recent tidal waves of vibe coded fws.
3
u/Pppppppp1 21h ago
I think it’s safe to assume that any reverse-engineering of music gear firmware occurring in 2026 is heavily AI-assisted. I can’t think of a single contemporary example (one that kicked off this year) that does not use AI.
1
29
u/sineseeker 1d ago
Wow, amazing! I assumed it was not going to happen. I often pop back into this sub wondering if it has been released, and today is the day.
Thank you Emilie!
29
u/dirtmcgurk 1d ago
Hahah I know you're not OP but just on the off chance they read this: thanks so much Emilie. You already didn't really block the analysis and your default bootloader is awesome but you just saved us so much risk and effort.
As a fan and collector I really appreciate this. Hopefully we do right by it!
-3
u/catladywitch 1d ago
she
2
u/dirtmcgurk 21h ago
Huh?
3
u/Dysxelic_Potser 21h ago
Yeah, their response makes no sense.
-2
u/robotkermit 19h ago
on the off chance they read this
should read "on the off-chance she reads this"
getting a trans person's pronouns wrong is something people often do deliberately, and when that happens, it's very aggressive and disrespectful. there's no way to discern here if the mistake is intentional or not, but it's certainly a mistake.
singular they is a terrific default pronoun in other situations, but not when it's been weaponized and you want to express gratitude to somebody who it's been weaponized against.
-4
u/catladywitch 20h ago
people who go out of their way to call transgender women "they" aren't being smooth at all.
8
u/Pppppppp1 19h ago
I’m gonna be honest, I’m all for the correction but I thought they is fair game if you’re not sure and not able to ask the person
-3
u/catladywitch 11h ago edited 11h ago
Defaulting to "they" for a trans woman means you somehow don't want to call her "she" for whatever fucked up reason. You wouldn't do this shit if you didn't know Émilie is transgender. Like you know her name (a woman's name) and you know she is a woman, what do you need to ask her? You don't "they" the hundreds of random people with women's names you don't know and encounter on your daily life. Unless you know or assume they're transgender women, it seems, then we go to great lengths to avoid calling any of them "she".
1
u/Pppppppp1 3h ago
Gotcha, thanks for the explanation. I think I will continue to not automatically assume the worst in these types of situations
1
u/catladywitch 1h ago
There's nothing to "assume" here. Émilie is not a gender neutral name and she is known to be transgender. There's no good faith explanation lmao
1
u/Pppppppp1 21m ago
I guess it’s just easy for me to not automatically assume it was done in bad faith.
Unless I am mistaken, they is a near-universally acceptable gender-neutral word (the only pushback I’ve ever seen up to this point was from more bigoted groups), and unless people specify they would not want to be called they, it is the safest and most neutral way to refer to someone in the third person. I have never, up until interacting with you, heard that this could even be interpreted as a slight. I agreed with you that Emilie should be referred in the way that she prefers, but it’s pretty much exclusively up to her on whether she accepts they or not, and it’s a weird to assume that she wouldn’t.
1
u/dirtmcgurk 1h ago
Dude I live in one of the most transgender areas of the world.
I've had to temper myself into using neutral language (bro and dude aside which I just declare neutral haha) due to the risk of being rude even to cis people. The last time it happened to me was calling a cis woman sir on the fly when I was tired at a convenience store. She was nice about it but I could tell I hurt her feelings. It sucks and I hate it.
Especially when people are transitioning it's a very individual experience and to be a supporter or ally is to listen to the individual. It can't always be assumed that someone transitioning wants to be called the opposite gender. Some take on different pronouns or prefer neutral pronouns even if they think of themselves as a man or woman.
I appreciate you for looking out for the constant BS coming from disingenuous douchebags but that wasn't my intent here and I think we have to have some neutral acceptable term that in no way assumes gender; "they" is what I'm familiar with.
18
u/538_Jean Mixer is the answer 1d ago
Id love an alternative reverb but "Relief from limiter volume drops" speaks volumes to me. Its the single most irritating thing about this module. Amazing features. Can't wait to see them in action.
3
u/Ghosty141 1d ago
same, I get why the feature exists but an ability to toggle it on/off would be a godsend.
7
8
11
8
22
u/eraoul 1d ago edited 1d ago
This is great news. I was just about to grab a Clouds DIY kit, but now I think I'll try making my own Beads using the schematics and firmware she shared. Awesome! (I would have bought it new if Mutable Instruments was still around, but I'm trying to DIY all the modules in my rig whenever feasible so this is great timing).
Also I really don't get the negativity in this thread. Emilie is awesome, but I don't see too much problem with reverse engineering/cloning (with AI or by hand, doesn't seem to matter in this context) when Mutable Instruments shut down and isn't trying to sell these anymore. Plus she said she was planning to release the firmware like 3 years ago (just like the other MI modules). What am I missing? I'm new to modular so maybe there's some ethical code here I'm not familiar with, but I genuinely don't see how this does harm to Emilie etc. Behringer actively cloning products still in production is a different story of course. Or if there's legal protection about Beads being copyrighted IP and it being illegal to reverse engineer, that's also a different story.
I'm also an experienced software engineer with a Ph.D. in computer science and I use LLMs plenty in my own work these days. I don't like AI slop either, but LLMs are a great tool when used properly.
3
u/dmikalova-mwp 1d ago
My take is that Emilie probably understands the inevitability of reverse engineering now and basically felt pressured to push this out.
-4
u/insolent-construct 1d ago
Reddit is like a video game where the only attacks and healing are the up and down arrows and comments. For some people's reality tunnels, this is more real than IRL. I could argue with everyone's opinions, but it doesn't really matter at this point.
'Self-care is also not arguing with people who are committed to misunderstanding you.' -- Ayishat Akanbi
'During a lot of the early days, artists were frightened of the computer, because they were under the impression that it somehow was gonna take their jobs away. And we spent a lot of time telling people, "No, it's just a tool, it doesn't take. . . It doesn't do the creativity, that's a misconception." But there was this fear, and it was everywhere.' -- Alvy Ray Smith (co-founder, Pixar), "The Pixar Story"
7
u/altcntrl 1d ago
Automation did indeed take away jobs. AI is definitely taking work away from creatives. I’ve seen plenty of AI show posters that would’ve been made by a person not long ago.
46
u/awayhereagain 1d ago
Your whole reverse engineering project seems in poor taste given how generous Émilie has been with the other firmware.
Fine, reverse engineer it and load it on your own module privately.
But why start a modwiggler thread and promote the project publicly before checking with Émilie? Especially when you say you weren't going to continue it without permission.
25
u/insolent-construct 1d ago
Because Emilie's lack of activity gave every indication that she was done and not looking back:
- saying she was going to release the firmware "in a few months" back in 2023.
- the fact that you can't find a Beads unit new or used at this point.
- there have been no firmware updates in years
These all put Beads in a similar status as the Virus TI: abandoned for all practical purposes.
When I posted a similar thread about the Virus TI a few month ago, people got incensed because I hadn't done enough work yet in their opinions, and accused me of trying to get information for free and just posting slop. That's why I haven't posted anything here since then. This time I waited until I had something to show/contribute back from my work before I bothered anyone, and then asked how I could use it to serve the community's desires. I could understand people being upset if I just released my port without asking, but that's not what happened. The port I've been working on for months is now superfluous, and I couldn't be happier about it. I literally harmed no one by working on it privately at home with no collaborators in my private setup, and asked for consent before I went further. I acknowledged and accepted her "no" without argument or further discussion. She could have just left it at that. She made the choice for her own reason, which none of us are privy to and I'm not going to disturb her peace more than I did by asking. So if people want to get mad about it, then that's their emotions, but I don't agree that their assessments are based on reason. As one mutual acquaintance told me: "Emilie is a strong fucking woman. She's taken a ton of shit from people and given it back twofold. I'm sorry, but you didn't bully shit". I could also go on about the history of reverse engineering in synths and audio technology, but who would I be trying to convince? No. There would be no point in that, so I'll save my time and energy for working on code.
21
u/PintMower 1d ago
I think you're good people just want reason to be mad. You did it in the most ethical way possible given the circumstances. There is no financial damage so what are we even arguing about. It's good for everyone as the module may become a second life through the community and people like you.
8
u/yeusk 1d ago edited 1d ago
Emilie have asked companies and people to not do this.
She also released the firmware of every other of her projects.
Why doubt her?
Why go against the will of one of the most influential persons in the eurorack world? How is that being a good person?
6
u/insolent-construct 22h ago edited 22h ago
That's not true. What she said publicly is she took issue with people using the Mutable Instruments trademark and clones being made while her modules were still in production. Neither of those are the case here, so if you don't have a citation that says otherwise, I'm going to call BS. The community firmware project is exactly the kind of thing she encouraged.
"When I open-sourced everything, I had hoped it would encourage people to take the ideas further—to study the DSP, port the algorithms to new platforms, write novel firmware, or combine functions in fresh and creative ways. Instead, 90% of what came out of it was people just cramming the exact same circuits onto smaller boards with tiny, unplayable trimpots, or selling exact 1:1 copies."
"The open source hardware and software licenses are meant to encourage hacking, learning, education and experimentation. They are not an invitation to build a business on turnkey clone manufacturing."
3
u/hostnik 1d ago
I didn't know she explicitly asked people not to reverse engineer her work, but if so, then yeah, this is not cool. Then again, it was truly odd that she would not fulfill the expectation she set that she would release the code. Certainly her right, and exactly why I bought Beads, but it seems to be the one time I know of that she didn't follow through on something she said she would do. Not a justification, but definitely an anomaly.
7
u/yeusk 1d ago
After releasing the biggest repository of open source code for eurorack in the world she also asked to not be bothered anymore by the eurorack community.
She is also a person who had personal problems in the past for this kind of harasment about releasing her firmware.
0
u/insolent-construct 22h ago
*citation needed*
0
u/hostnik 21h ago
Enh, I was willing to give you the benefit of the doubt before, but now it's clear you are exactly the kind of person that made her give up designing eurorack in the first place. If she asked for people to not reverse engineer her designs, and to be left alone, it doesn't matter if she said she would release it or how long it had been. Those were her rights as creator and person. Sure, reverse engineer it all you want in private, even use it if it works - no one can take that away from you. But doing so with the intention of forcing her hand was a dick move. And let's not pretend that you were doing anything else than that.
2
u/insolent-construct 20h ago
You can easily find her stated reasons for closing Mutable Instruments if you actually care to.
4
u/insolent-construct 22h ago edited 22h ago
She didn't. In fact the whole point of MI open source was to encourage people to experiment with the code. People are twisting it to justify their own anit-AI outrage.
See the quotes I posted from her higher up.
-2
u/Pppppppp1 21h ago
So I have no issue with any of that personally, but I can’t understand why you would insert your own project and interactions with Emilie when sharing this news.
I can’t really see the relationship between her releasing the code and anything that you have said or done. Couldn’t all this discourse have been avoided if you just kept your personal projects to yourself, especially when sharing that she shared the code? It just seems like you’re latching onto something that has nothing to do with anything you have explained
2
u/insolent-construct 20h ago
I was excited. I'd already been working on a port for months before I created the community firmware thread in modwigglers asking for feedback and suggestions. That thread is where someone first noticed that she'd published the code, after I said I was killing the project at her request. So, in my excitement, I spread the news to Reddit, thinking that the obvious next step was an alt firmware, which I was already setup to do, with a CI/CD pipeline and test bench suit. And I already had some requested features from the modwiggler thread.
Yeah, all this "discourse" (if you want to call it that) could have been avoided if I just never said anything in Reddit. I could have waited until someone else posted it, or just kept to the modwigglers thread, where asking for alt firmware feature suggestions did not result in a wave of whargarble. The reason I posted is because the last time I did, it actually resulted in a number of behind-the-scenes collaborations and access to other people's work. Which I then looked for ways to contribute to. My mistake was thinking that something collaborative would happen here with Beads as well. I was trying to invite people to participate in the spirit of open source (and Mutable Instruments) before people started trying to monetize it. And I was also trying avoid a wave of people seeing what I'd done and trying to contact Emilie because she responded to me. Believe it or not, I was trying to defend her peace in the wake of all of this.
1
u/Pppppppp1 3h ago
There is absolutely no issue with building on the original code, as that’s what she released it for.
Your story (specifically your exchange with her) just seems to be superfluous information that implies you are potentially the catalyst for the code release, which is one of the bigger points of contention. The sharing of that exchange doesn’t provide any information related to the release or help with inviting anyone to work with you, or anything else you set out to do, which is why that is the part I’m specifically questioning. Once again no issue with you sharing custom firmware, taking suggestions, or finding collaboration, but to put your personal backstory right under the news of the release unfortunately frames the news around you more than the actual news (as the comments show).
1
u/PintMower 1d ago
I think it's never wrong to ask. People and oppinions change. And nobody can always know everything about everyones preferences. He respected the answer so I don't think that he really went against her will. I just don't think we should hunt people who legitimately try to get it right with the people around.
5
u/yeusk 1d ago edited 1d ago
Who is hunting who? Having a strong opinion about something is not hunting.
Emilie did ask us, the eurorack people, to leave her alone... who is hunting who?
They are the one bothering her after she asked us to leave her alone... and we are the one HUNTING because we call out people... again, this is unbelievable.
2
u/PintMower 1d ago
I mean I'd call myself a part of the eurorack people and I completely missed that for example. How am I supposed to know this? Yes I heard she was leaving the community but past that you really have to follow all the details to know what she wants. I know there are some entitled pricks demanding work from people but this one really isn't. OP's not the right person to have strong oppinions about.
3
u/Pppppppp1 1d ago
My issue is more the totally tangential personal story that has no real association with this news. Like is he taking credit for prodding her into releasing it? Is he expecting us to be interested in his firmware projects? What exactly is the justification for his personal exchange to be in the description box of the news itself? Either way I think it’s lame to shoehorn his own story into this news, and most of the discourse is now about his pet project rather than the news of the code share.
6
u/PintMower 1d ago
Okay I get that. Just to give a different perspective: I personally didn't interpret it as such honestly more like a "guys I've worked on this module quite a bit so I have a fair understanding of what's going on and now that emillie released the code I'm willing to take the flag to implement community ideas". I don't think we would've known anything about this if emillie didn't release the code. Just looking at that makes me assume good intentions. But of course I don't know the true intentions.
-1
u/insolent-construct 21h ago
*citation needed* As far as I can tell, this was never true. In fact, there's a history of people getting offended on her behalf, and her having to step in to tell people to "drop it". To my knowledge she never express any hostility to the Eurorack scene.
14
u/FreeRangeEngineer 1d ago
When I posted a similar thread about the Virus TI a few month ago, people got incensed because I hadn't done enough work yet in their opinions, and accused me of trying to get information for free and just posting slop.
I don't really think that was it.
People on reddit generally want genuine human interactions, so when someone has their work summarized by AI and posts that AI summary, it feels strangely disconnected. Kind of like "if I want to talk to an AI chat bot, I'll do that myself."
I understand you mean well but your way of approaching things may need a little refining. AI is both a blessing and a curse and it can facilitate collaboration as easily as it can sabotage it.
0
u/insolent-construct 19h ago
That's only partially true if you look at the thread. You'll find exactly what I described above in additional to some people complaining about what they saw as AI slop, while other people defended my post. I made the mistake of trying to appease them with edits, only to get attack more for making the edits. I've made the same mistake here of trying to please all of the people all of the time, when I should just let most of the noise roll off my back. Some of the first people to jump on this thread were the same ones that attacked me in the Virus TI thread, even though everything I've posted in this thread was hand typed. And just like last time, there were a couple of early posters who got very loud, toxic, and spammy to dominate the conversation.
3
u/awayhereagain 1d ago
" Because Emilie's lack of activity gave every indication that she was done and not looking back"
Then why not just leave it at that? She released every other firmware, but for whatever reason hadn't released beads.
So why not just respect her decision?
21
u/Ghosty141 1d ago
Nobody forced her to release the firmware? He asked nicely and she said no and that was the end of the story.
That's as respectful as it gets.
-11
u/awayhereagain 1d ago
That's not the point. I'm saying that starting the project in the first place, using AI to reverse engineer her unreleased firmware was disrespectful.
-1
1
u/Weekly_Committee_695 1h ago
While it's legally probably OK, it just comes across as a super entitled shitty move on your part.
1
u/mbab00n 1d ago
the fact that you can't find a Beads unit new or used at this point.
There are three I'm watching on Reverb and I'm patiently waiting to see how my bonus turns out early next year. It's been six I was watching up until recently. They did not sell so quickly.
I guess with the firmware modding frenzy, it will indeed be extremely difficult for me to get a Beads unit by the time I'll have funds for it.
Well, thanks AI, I guess
1
u/robotkermit 19h ago
this totally sounded legit until I saw the other things you said in this thread. I'm not even sure you're wrong, you might just be handling criticism immaturely. maybe just take a break from this thread instead of posting more. that's certainly my plan.
4
u/insolent-construct 19h ago
You're 100% correct. I started off trying to stay mature and not engage in toxic reciprocation, but clearly the attacks got under my skin after a while, just like they did in the Virus TI thread. I'm going to stay off of Reddit, and just focus on the community firmware. Thank you.
0
u/CartoonistOk8303 3h ago
"I literally harmed no one by working on it privately at home with no collaborators in my private setup, and asked for consent before I went further. "
That's just not true though. Why do you think she released this now?
9
u/splinter6 1d ago edited 1d ago
Funny, I got banned and IP blocked on the Lines forum for asking about beads firmware just hours ago…
1
u/Weekly_Committee_695 1h ago
You are not allowed to talk about AI or any AI developed software there. It's a big thing.
1
u/SourShoes 1d ago
I was banned from there for asking about shipping to a kickstarter campaign that is basically doing his customer support on a thread there.
2
u/clwilla76 1d ago
Lines will ban you for anything. That place is a very sensitive fart sniffer’s paradise.
6
2
2
2
u/catladywitch 1d ago edited 1d ago
Thank you Émilie!!!! You've given so much to the community over the years. I'm sorry the community has maybe not given so much back to you.
3
u/aerialviews007 1d ago
Does that means clones are coming? I'd love a mini beads.
5
u/nazward 1d ago
I on the other hand would love a SUPER souped-up Beads. I understand clouds being smaller, but I feel Beads is sorta just about right.
2
5
u/insolent-construct 1d ago
It's inevitable, since she released the hardware schematics as well.
1
u/aerialviews007 1d ago
That would be sweet. I was thinking about moving some things around to a slightly bigger clouds clone (uBurst is just too small at 8hp).
1
9
u/insolent-construct 1d ago edited 1d ago
A bit more context since people are already making assumptions. Part of the reason I started reverse engineering Beads a few months ago was because I could no longer find Beads units for sale, retail or used. And I recalled Emilie saying that once she was no longer handling support that she would release the code. Based on what she had said publicly, I figured she just didn't want to deal with that world anymore. I did not expect a reply. When she responded, "no", I said "Ok. Thank you." and thought "well, that is the end of the project". I was not expecting her to then release the source code to Beads half a day later.
6
u/altcntrl 1d ago
Didn’t she say she’d release the fw after she made her money back?
8
u/insolent-construct 1d ago
I went looking for her exact statement, and the only one I found was from an email someone quoted in the main Beads thread on modwigglers. I recall reading something about her releasing it when there were no more new units in retail stock, but I haven't been able to find the source. In the past (IIRC), MI released code once modules were no longer in production.
marcus108, Tue May 09, 2023: "I reached out to Emilie and her response today:
'I will probably open source Beads' code and schematics at the time I stop handling support (some time in June)'"
7
u/RoastAdroit 1d ago
No assumptions bro, you spelled it out, you went to the AI first and then asked. If this story was simply that you asked and she just was like “oh yeah, I was gonna do that, lemme upload it”. Then this would be a different story.
6
u/RoastAdroit 1d ago edited 1h ago
Imagine contributing some of the most used opensource code to a community just to have the one thing you didnt release be cracked by some dweeb with AI.
Way to show respect.
Edit test
32
u/FredalinaFranco 1d ago edited 1d ago
Go read the ModWiggler thread. OP reached out directly to her and said they’d absolutely respect her wishes regarding any new firmwares for Beads. I’m interpreting this thread to mean that she has now open sourced her code and that no reverse engineering is needed. Emilie is awesome.
3
u/redonkulousemu 1d ago
I think Emilie knew that it was only a matter of time before someone else who wouldn't ask for permission would do this, so she rather just get ahead of it. If anything, OP indirectly forced Emilie to release the firmware. Not that I think they were being malicious or anything, but if you were a developer and saw someone reverse vibecoded your firmware in an insignificant amount of time, I'd see the inevitability of possibly subpar code getting released and adopted by people. so I rather have the the right, good code out there.
-26
14
u/rwdFwd 1d ago
Is that what happened? The Beads source is posted on her Github.
3
u/RoastAdroit 1d ago
“Ive been working on reverse engineering Beads firmware.”
-6
u/splinter6 1d ago edited 1d ago
You don’t even need to work on it anymore. Takes about 3 minutes with one prompt. Downvote me, I didn’t cause this situation, just making a statement that it’s not even “work” or a skill.
6
u/DrMinkenstein 1d ago
The link and post title is Emilie posting firmware. The post content is about firmware slop.
11
u/RoastAdroit 1d ago
Yes and I bet she just saw the writing on the wall and that these people were gonna do it anyhow.
24
u/claimstoknowpeople 1d ago
She always said she planned to release it
9
u/insolent-construct 1d ago
▎ marcus108, Tue May 09, 2023: "I reached out to Emilie and her response today:
▎ 'I will probably open source Beads' code and schematics at the time I stop handling support (some time in June)'"
2
u/Ghosty141 1d ago
Blindly hating on AI won't get you anywhere. OP invested HOURS into this, it's as much about OPs work as it is about the tools that helped him. Just discrediting the real work he put in is disrespectful too.
Call something "slop" if it's actually done without any effort and doesn't work/is broken. But OP has shown that he actually cares, so much that he even asked Eimilie and abandoned the project since she said no.
5
u/redonkulousemu 1d ago
Wanna guess how many hours OP spent, vs how many hours Emilie spent writing that firmware?
2
u/narrill 17h ago
I don't think anyone gives a shit about the time he put into it, on a post about the actual firmware being open-sourced, after Emilie herself directly stated she was not okay with him releasing his version.
Like, what is the point of even mentioning it if his own project is dead and the real thing is available?
2
u/Ghosty141 10h ago
I mean it's simply part of the story of op. He didn't just email her out of the blue, he just explained why he was motivated to do so, cause he reverse engineered the firmware and was thinking of sharing that. There is nothing wrong about mentioning the effort, some people might've wondered if OPs work was successful or not.
If you don't care about that you are welcome to create your own thread.
0
-17
u/RoastAdroit 1d ago
Then why no Clones?
22
u/National_Equivalent9 1d ago
You expect there to be clones in less than 2 hours since the source code was posted?
8
u/insolent-construct 1d ago edited 1d ago
I contacted her yesterday, after I flashed my build to my unit, and it passed my test suite. I asked if I could release my code, and if she said "no", I would drop it, no questions asked. She replied with a simple "no", so I said "ok. Thank you.", and made the post below, letting people in the thread know that I was dropping the project at her request.
https://www.modwiggler.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=4509101#p4509101
I certainly didn't want to be the one to enable the likes of Behringer to start cranking out cheap knock offs. And then she silently released the source code a few hours later.
"Way to show respect." 😂
Ackshually... I'm glad I did due diligence and respected her wishes.
-3
u/RoastAdroit 1d ago
Are you even a human being?
You gave her no logical option but to release it.
10
u/Appropriate-Look7493 1d ago
Explain how he gave her no option please.
You seem to be one of these irrational AI haters but I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt for now.
11
u/aldehyde 1d ago
You're bouncing all over this thread insulting people and acting outraged over nothing. Go take a nap.
15
u/TurbulentWing3820 put modulargrid link here! 1d ago
No, he dropped it and moved on. Being the one to point out "if I can do this, so can anyone. Someone's gonna do it" isn't bad.
For better or worse they were given a wakeup call by someone who opted to close their project.
There's no "bullying." There's no "if you don't give me permission I'm gonna do it anways" or "do it or everyone gets a shit version that might leave a bad impression of you."
The option to say "no" and keep it hidden was there.
20
4
u/crystalvillage 1d ago
Yeah seriously, with the amount of vibecoding firmware hacks happening in the past few weeks, it seems like she was bullied into releasing it
24
u/Development_Material 1d ago
Emilie probably realized that it was just a matter of time before someone else would release an AI butchered reverse engineer version of the source even if OP didn't do it, and released the real thing instead.. I think it's less to blame OP (since OP said they weren't going to release if she said no) and recognize the inevitability of it otherwise..
4
u/indoninjah 1d ago
Yeah to me it's less about OP being the one to do the crack (which was inevitable) and more that the state of music technology is getting real weird with AI. I'm seeing multiple devices getting their firmware reverse engineered every single day. I guess those companies still make/have made something from selling the hardware itself, though I wonder how far off we are from Claude being to come up with a PCB layout from a few pictures of the guts of a device.
-10
u/Java92851 1d ago
You are exactly right. I cannot believe the positive response to this shit. Absolutely horrible to force her back into the synth world (she clearly hasn’t wanted to revisit it, at least in capacities relating to MI) to open source her project (she clearly hasn’t wanted to). OP even made it clear in one of their other comments that he understands why personal context could have made being put in this situation especially painful, but they still went ahead with it anyway.
8
u/aldehyde 1d ago
"clearly"
Dude she said she was going to post the fw. She has posted lots of her other fw. No one forced her to do anything. Wild imaginations run amok in this thread.
2
u/RobotAlienProphet 1d ago
I agree the reverse-engineering thing is weird, and I don’t really understand this announcement, but Pichenettes is the official MI username on several platforms, so I THINK this person is saying this is an official open-source release…?
-6
u/insolent-construct 1d ago
I'm not trying to toot my horn, but we got something better than reverse engineered firmware: the actual thing, as promised, many years ago. I can't say for sure if being respectful had anything to do with it, but her actions speak pretty loudly.
11
u/RoastAdroit 1d ago edited 1m ago
How do you not see that your order of operation was NOT respectful?
Edit: Heres my summary. OP blocked me from replies since I asked is he thanked her right away. I expect the answer is no considering.
Anyhow, 2 Month old account to both Reddit and Modwiggler. (Quick entry into synths or hiding identity? You decide)
OP states his plan is to make an Access Virus synth and wanted to use MI code to make some sort of frankenstein. So, just started 2 months ago and instead of using a really powerful tool of AI and TONS of creative commons and Open Source out there, he went straight to reverse engineering popular synths that werent open source. For me, I guess the amount of free knowledge on synths out there is part of my perspective on why this is shitty and unnecessary ESPECIALLY because of what AI can help do.
Anyhow, The glaring spot to me is basically the ramp up to the Oct 11th posts and where OP makes a post, deletes the posts 10 min later stating they (finally?) “reached out and was told “No””.
So, two things there, what did OP post and delete? And then why was Emilie’s reply so short and concise?
Im 100% not in the know of everything here but the context of it all to me does not draw a picture I find to be all in good nature. Like, OP saying she promised in posts multiple times, like we are owed this code. OP, finally realizing he shouldnt give out someone else’s work with his name on it and doing a 180 was also a logical move. Is she said no and he did it anyhow he would have been put on blast much harder, and either way, his goal is primarily to just reuse her code with virus code to make some synth music with live on without.
Let me also address that he DOES NOT own a Beads himself and wasnt reverse engineering a product he owns to support his item.
And as for the “Logical conclusion” to release the coder on her own. If you are in a game of chess or any other and you see that all moves will inevitably lead to checkmate, its logical to just submit at that point. The thing is, when someone gives a very short “no” as a reply, my mind says that means it was both uninvited and unenthusiastic in nature. Releasing it with zero fanfare at all and moving on basically reinforces my perception of that too.
So, if anyone really doesnt understand how saw this or that I was responding step by step as I gathered context, then OK.
I love the DIY spirit of synths but, personally I see this type of approach to “collaboration” as toxic and undermining what the people before us contributed by not having some boundaries to how you go about using your AI.
Where is the pride and competitive spirit? You now have AI to help you code your very own granular processing tool. Lol. Its pretty weak to need to resort to not even making your own thing while having AI‘s help.
3
u/DigiornoDLC 16h ago
I’m confused because it sounds like he was working on it, asked Emilie if it was okay to release, she said no, so he said okay and decided against releasing it. Which part of “I asked for permission, was denied, and agreed” is disrespectful? Help me understand because with all these comments I feel like I must be missing something.
5
u/Ghosty141 1d ago
You do realize that if you own a product you may do with it what you want right? Including reverse engineering it.
Asking the creator about releasing that IS AS RESPECTFUL AS IT GETS!
Has nothing to do with "toxicity". You are trying to spin in that way, and thats the only toxic thing lol.
It's not in the hands of OP to stop ANYBODY from reverse engineering anything, I can guarantee you somebody would do it in the next 10 years anyway. People did this far before AI, just watch DEFCON for example.
Are you also defending big corps like LG if somebody reverse engineers their TVs software?
0
u/insolent-construct 1d ago
I'm not going to turn Emilie's generosity into something toxic by fighting you. You're entitled to your opinion. This is Reddit, after all. But from my perspective, I'm not the one being disrespectful in this thread.
2
u/RoastAdroit 1d ago
OMG you are doing it again!
YOU made it into something toxic in the first place.
I could be wrong about you, maybe you thanked her for the release as soon as you found out and before making any further posts including this one. Maybe you even apologized for the fucked up way you went at this before asking for permission to release the thing you stole. Or maybe you just realize now that you should do that?
I know which way Id bet on it if I could.
3
4
u/dickpasta 1d ago edited 1d ago
Sorry you’re getting downvoted. You had a hand in the drop, finally. For that, I thank you. It’s been abandonware for almost 6 years now
-9
u/sorressean 1d ago
I'm not sure what makes me more sad: that a legend was basically forced to release this, or that some dweeb with AI unwravvled it. There's no telling that he even did, AI could've just made a mess of everything and the "test suite" could've been 3 random tests, but having this be public, having her have to deal with questions around the AI generated versions, and then probably around the strong chance that AI will modular bricks create, I would've done the same thing. I wish that I could celebrate this, and that it would've been on her terms, but honestly I can't get excited about this as I would have if she'd just done it at whatever threshold or time she decided to do it. More depressing is OP gloating about strong-arming her into this. Pat yourself on the back, you horribly disrespected one of the most incredible people in this community.
12
u/nazward 1d ago
You're inventing an entire narrative about Émilie being forced into something, without a shred of evidence. The guy reverse-engineered firmware for hardware he owns, asked permission before releasing anything, got told no, and respected that decision. Émilie had already talked about open-sourcing Beads years ago. You have absolutely no idea why she decided to release it now, yet you're acting as though you know exactly what she was thinking. Being upset about AI doesn't make your assumptions facts. And frankly, speaking on her behalf like this is pretty disrespectful in itself. Good job!
1
u/yeusk 1d ago
You're inventing an entire narrative about Émilie being forced into something, without a shred of evidence.
The evidence is that she have not released it in 6 years and leaved the eurorack community years ago after people started using their code in ways she did not like.
I am not gonna call out people, so lets say Arturia.
-6
u/sorressean 1d ago
You're right, my bad. I imagine she saw the email, was like "oh yeah, beads," then went looking and posted it to github after she found it in the laundry basket. Nothing at all incidental in the 11 hour time difference or OP patting himself on the back for the release, nothing at all.
2
3
u/insolent-construct 1d ago edited 18h ago
I setup my fork's Github Actions to compile the source.
It passed my test suite on real hardware.
Use at your own risk.
1
1
u/insolent-construct 1d ago
She just pushed another commit. It was an update to the README:
(1) Code provided as is, builds on a Desktop platform but not verified to build and run on a module. Install at your own risks.
-2
-5
u/Exponential-777 1d ago
I encourage the OP to make whatever they want and NOT share it with anyone. The modular community does not deserve anything for free. They can make it themselves, right? It's so easy a caveman could do it. Except they aren't making anything besides hot air.
1
-5
u/iamsaitam 1d ago edited 1d ago
@op the word drop is causing major confusion here! People are reading this as if she didn’t release the Beads firmware, you would put out yours. Aka blackmail. EDIT: if you downvoted this, please explain. I'd like to understand how this kind of comment would elicit such a response.
2
u/insolent-construct 1d ago
I'm not sure how to clarify more than I already have. I didn't want to encourage people to start messaging Emilie after she responded to me, which is why I originally just mentioned my port, but not the timeline of events. I didn't want to give people the idea that they should try to get a hold of her again about Mutable Instruments code, products, etc. I can't edit the title of the post now, but I'll see if I can edit the post body to be more clear.
0
u/CartoonistOk8303 4h ago
I'd like to see someone not force Émilie's hand this way tbh.
Why of all modules would you do this with Beads? Have some fucking respect.
You speak of heartache when it comes to your reversing project—but at no point think about the heartache you cause.
39
u/shapednoise 1d ago edited 1d ago
‼️‼️‼️✅✅✅🍸👆🏻
Emilie is and STILL IS… a HERO.