six_o_clock_crow wrote:Which goes back to my earlier point: within this thread, there seems to be an arguement that Ableton need to drop their prices in order to compete with other software. However, this just isn't the case. There is software out there which will allow you to do SOME of what Live lets you do, but there is nothing out there that compares to session view. There is no competition, ergo Ableton do not have to compete.
you actually use session view when writing music.
not everyone does.
surely to capture the 'floating voters' - those who like Live's environment, or enjoy its workflow benefits, but don't really use Session view - Ableton do
need to 'compete'?
particularly once you take into account the gradual shift towards fully-fledged DAWdom. MAX aside, the past few iterations of Live have been about introducing more regular sequencer features. and i think part of that is about trying to capture a particular segment of the market, people (like me) who liked Live but wanted more traditional / basic features.
Obviously, we would all like things to be cheaper, or for moe content to be included. What I am saying is, there is no incentive for Ableton to do this all the time their unique live performance angle goes unchallenged.
an idea i floated in the Feature Requests forum awhile back was a 'Live' version of Live. less traditional sequencer functionality, less full-studio-in-a-box stuff, just a straightforward, stripped back, session-view-orientated version. this could work for the DJs, it could work for producers who use more than one software suite and don't need another DAW, and it could work for the live performers who want a basic, small, stable, fast program for shows.
You hear stories of people defecting between Cubase/Logic/Sonar all the time because the feature sets are so similar. People vote with their wallets when they get hacked off at the way development of their sequencer is going. Don't seem to hear many of those stories from Live users.
well, we are in the Live forum.
Which brings me to an obvious question: if all these other package are so great then go get 'em. Sell your Live licence. But I bet you wont, because you know that you couldn't work without Live, because there is nothing comparable out there.
i think you're missing two other points here.
firstly, lots of producers use multiple apps. i've got Live and REAPER and i collaborate with someone who's running Cubase. being fluent in more than one language is always a good thing - it only opens new doors.
secondly, you may think there is nothing comparable to session view out there, but then playlists in Cubase are pretty neat. REAPER's per-part and per-item FX are cool, and the routing map is incredible. FLStudio's peak follower predated any other cross-channel-modulation system. Cubase's Offline Processing is fucking essential.
and (forgive me if i'm wrong), i think all of these functions were, at some time or another, exclusive to their particular program.
which by your reckoning means that Steinberg, Cockos, and Imageline could have charged whatever they wanted for their products, because there would have been nothing 'comparable', so they wouldn't have to 'compete'.