would be quicker to browse modules when adding by type eg, osc, filter, lfo, adsr, vca, etc.
3 Likes
I’d also appreciate that option, it makes more sense to browse by type than developer.
1 Like
thirded. 
Tags, filtering, or searching all plugin modules by type would be great when building patches on MM.
1 Like
+1 and also might be useful to be able to sort by “lowest cpu use first”
4 Likes
+1 this will get even more necessary the more developers release modules. I already have no idea how many oscillators I have to choose from, and no easy way of figuring it out.
3 Likes
Just got my MM, sought out this request – much needed.
2 Likes
Absolutely. This feature would help immensely.
1 Like
after using the MM for a while I find I keep using the same (ie lowest cpu) modules for my patches, so maybe a favourites would be good
4 Likes
This is definitely a good idea +1
1 Like
Yes, still hoping this happens.
I’m still planning to do it!
5 Likes
Came here looking to see if this had already been suggested/requested, so I’m happy to see it’s in the works (hopefully?) at least conceptually? Any updates on when we might expect it?
I’ll also plus one this request. Sorting by developer is cool and all, but it would be much quicker and more useful for browsing if you could do so by module type or feature.
Yes, can’t wait for this feature. An absolute necessity in my opinion.
I think to be useful a MM specific tagging system would need to be developed. In the VCV system many modules have multiple tags. For example the Sapphire Galaxy is tagged in VCV as a Reverb, Filter, Effect, and Distortion. In the MM system should all of the developer’s tags be included, or just it’s “primary” use?
All of them, with the option to add/”mute”/remove them?
I think many here are underestimating the complexities involved in implementing a tagging system that functions on the MM itself. I’m curious as to whether the VCV tags are already embedded in a modules code, or does a tagging system that functions inside the MM need to be developed from scratch? If it is the latter, then that places a big responsibility for implementation on the community that is porting modules for the MM.
Entirely possible, at least in my case. But given a universe of possibilities with no cost included, I’d prefer to have each of the tags. That’d probably also be easier from a MM perspective – no consideration involved in the porting of the tags.
In VCV the tags are stored in a file called plugin.json within the specific plugin folder. There’s an entry in that file for every module within the given plugin and this is where the tags that the VCV browser uses come from. I believe the file also exists within the meta module plugins packages so the tags would also be available within the MM ecosystem.
1 Like