sure you can..but only when you fight against its dull sound... pretty similar like mixing with a behringer desk..of cause you can make a good sounding record with it ..with a lot of work and carefull tuning..AceLuby wrote:Who cares? That doesn't make it better, it makes it more popular. You can make good sounding tracks in Live. If you personally can't do it that doesn't mean it isn't possible.3phase wrote:
in relation to the tracks made with cubase thats allmost correct..
buts so much easier with a studer..and when you put effort in the studer mix..whooo..
and than the little performance details like stability.. precision placement of midi and automation events.. a file handling that is able to load 3 year old files without needing to find the ablton dumb search its own folder.. propper timecode handling..sys ex support..multichannel midi tracks and editing.. multiple screen support..load while pay..omf im/export and and and
sure ableton live has also exclusiv features.. but in the end of the day many will return to cubase earlier or later..
when steinberg realizes and corrects their mistake of not having followed opcodes example, and included a meta arrange layer that allows pattern based composition.
I wonder when the others realize that the total abandoning of a pattern concept was a mistake.. The best arrange sequencers are the ones that combine pattern and timeline based sequencing.. and while ableton live is one of the best arange sequencers in this regard..it sucks as daw from the quality side of its audio and midi implementations and stability of operation AND design.. Live 1 was performing better in some regards than the actual version.. its hasnt been really well developed in the last 10 years..
It´s just like a behringer daw. magix musik maker feature wonderland maxed up but shaky and allways a bit duller sounding than the real gear..
beware of B ware