LIVE 9 : PDC IMPROVED OR NOT ?

[Akshara]

Live is overwhelmingly marketed toward electronic music producers. Tempo sync has been a fundamental aspect of electronic music production for so long, I'd have to go dig through the basement to find a piece of gear which doesn't offer it. I'd also have to search for a piece of gear which offers mix automation, yet which allows it to go audibly out of sync, yet which wasn't broken.

It's difficult to understand why someone wouldn't want their return audio and automation to be in sync. To each his own, I guess.

[sdfak1234]

alright folks, it's been real - I'm outta here, tired of the naive fanboys, who talk a lot but know nothing, stupid responses repeating and tired arguments, it's making me feel embarrassed to be involved in this discussion with these people, I'm definitely too cool for this school. Good luck with your music. I hope Ableton get taught a major lesson with this release, don't waste your money on an incomplete product. I will be selling my licenses and bringing the message to every professional I know, I owe this to Ableton.

[andydes]

Correct me if I'm wrong- audio pdc and automation pdc are completely different.

For audio pdc, you only have to worry about the total latency for each track. You add up the values then delay the final output for all the tracks to match the one with the longest. Live has always had a manual track delay. In programming terms this is a variable input point, so to implement pdc, they just had to input the pdc here and add it to the user defined track delay. Fairly straightforward.

Automation pdc is applied to the track being affected by the pluggin's latency. In order to line up, the delay for each line of automation needs to be calculated for the relevant pluggin's position in the chain. Importantly, live needs to be written to accept a timing adjustment at each point in the chain.

To me it looks like live 9 wasn't in fact the big rip up the old code rewrite many were hoping for. The issue is now well known enough for them to have addressed it if it was straightforward.

In the case of session automation, the reason given why it required a rewrite was because live could only handle one relative an one absolute modulation. But of course that's all anyone really asked for and that's what live 9 has.

Ok, that maybe all speculation. Carry on.

[theophilus]

Now place a timing dependent effect after that Liquidsonics reverb (i.e. a synced delay, filter, noise gate, arpeggiator or anything that polls Live's timing clock), and you'll notice that the audio itself gets out of sync as well. This was confirmed by Ableton back in Jan 2011 (see this comment), after the community was pulling its hair out trying to figure out what was going on.

strictly speaking, the audio is in sync, the control signals (automation, midi clock, etc.) are not. at least, that's what i am expecting... sounds like worth some more testing.

anyways thanks to the people who have put the time into lists like the below, the other list of which devices have what latency, etc. which tell what situations you will run into the issues. people say daws today have no limitations to spur creativity, but this might be something i can work inside saves me some time to test these things out anyways.

[Tone Deft]

Live is overwhelmingly marketed toward electronic music producers.

not me. my tracks start with drums then I add bass then guitar then maybe fill things out with a synth. my effects are largely static.

It's difficult to understand why someone wouldn't want their return audio and automation to be in sync. To each his own, I guess.

nobody has said they don't want to see it fixed. I say I don't care and catch shit for saying I don't want it fixed. people read what they want to read.

[H20nly]

Live is overwhelmingly marketed toward electronic music producers.

not me. my tracks start with drums then I add bass then guitar then maybe fill things out with a synth. my effects are largely static.

same here + vocals.

[Akshara]

strictly speaking, the audio is in sync...

The audio being generated by the tempo based effect (when inserted after an effect which introduces latency) is not in sync with the audio from any other tracks, because the effect is polling the transport prior to the PDC kicking in. I've heard it, the audio itself is out of time. Depending on the latency of the first effect, the Plugin Buffer setting and the project tempo, it could be anywhere from a 256th to a 32nd note early.

nobody has said they don't want to see it fixed. I say I don't care and catch shit for saying I don't want it fixed. people read what they want to read.

My comment wasn't directed at you. You have posted on several occasions, in this thread and over the years, how you would like to see it be fixed. Not everyone participating in this thread has said as much, and some have been fairly hostile in their tone, both for and against the subject matter altogether.

Live being marketed as a tool for electronic music production isn't an opinion, anymore than it being marketed toward DJs and for live performance is.

Tone, H20nly... you guys are arguing just to argue now. I've been pretty civil in trying to bring clarity to this discussion, all things considered. Don't confuse me with the tantrum brigade. My concerns and comments are a valid perspective on a complicated issue.

[Tone Deft]

I know I'm going to catch more shit for this.

I'm not trying to argue, it's an interesting topic to discuss. there can be two sides to a conversation, we just need to focus on the topic at hand and not the people involved. there have been some good ideas presented here.

would you like to have a thread where people just toss insults and yell and scream at Ableton or would you like for people to talk about the issue and think it over?

[theophilus]

strictly speaking, the audio is in sync...

The audio being generated by the tempo based effect (when inserted after an effect which introduces latency) is not in sync with the audio from any other tracks, because the effect is polling the transport prior to the PDC kicking in. I've heard it, the audio itself is out of time. Depending on the latency of the first effect, the Plugin Buffer setting and the project tempo, it could be anywhere from a 256th to a 32nd note early.

is this true? are just the wrong parts of the notes effected, or does the whole phrase slide?

ex: let's say you have a 4/4 kickdrum pattern, copy to a new track - should be in time.
add a device with 1/8th note delay after one of them, bypass - should still be in time together.
add a trance gate type device which should silence the 2 and 4 - now, are the two tracks still aligned, but it's chopping off the wrong parts of the notes, or is it actually out of time now with the other track?

[H20nly]

Tone, H20nly... you guys are arguing just to argue now. I've been pretty civil in trying to bring clarity to this discussion, all things considered. Don't confuse me with the tantrum brigade. My concerns and comments are a valid perspective on a complicated issue.

pump your brakes.

i haven't argued at all in this thread. in fact, i've been trying to understand. truthfully i think i've been quite nice despite the stupid shit some of these people have had the audacity to type. in other threads i've been a dick about 64 bit and some of the other things that Ableton never promised or suggested they would offer in the first place that people are up in arms about, but not about this topic.

this is an actual issue, not some "but i want sprinkles on it too" crap. the former i want to learn from, the latter i loathe.

[Akshara]

would you like to have a thread where people just toss insults and yell and scream at Ableton or would you like for people to talk about the issue and think it over?

The latter, obviously. I'd also like that if or when Ableton reads this, that they walk away with a better understanding of why to some, it matters so much. Because for me, it does feel like Ableton doesn't quite get what the problem is - not on the technical side, but on the creative side. Why would someone with so much invested in Ableton, software, hardware and time-wise, switch to another application? Especially when they clearly love Live?

I get why this wouldn't be a priority for those not affected by it. I just wish that those not affected by it wouldn't be so hostile against discussing it, or dismiss those who are affected by it. It's good for everyone if this issue gets addressed.

[Tone Deft]

honestly it feels more like anyone saying it doesn't bother them get attacked.

it does feel like Ableton doesn't quite get what the problem is - not on the technical side, but on the creative side.

that's a great point, especially in light of Ableton employees doing electronic music.

[Cool Character]

I say I don't care and catch shit for saying I don't want it fixed. people read what they want to read.

How can this be interpreted as "I have no personal investment":

how about you got your answer 5 years ago and an update last week? henke's been quoted as saying they made a conscious decision years ago to not go that route.

totally wrong time for your rant-fest. think about it. they just released a new version, this is the WORST time for feature requests, not to mention the wrong forum, not to mention that they've disavowed the forum from their site. their engineers are either taking vacation or wholly fixed on bugs, new features? no way.

they've known that users want this, they've put ZERO effort into putting it into the software. Live will not have PDC, end of story, game over.

Because it seems like you do care, and what you care about is getting unhappy people to shut up.

[Tone Deft]

you should be posting about PDC, not me.

it's just an internet forum, we're not drafting international trade laws. chill out.

[Akshara]

strictly speaking, the audio is in sync...

The audio being generated by the tempo based effect (when inserted after an effect which introduces latency) is not in sync with the audio from any other tracks, because the effect is polling the transport prior to the PDC kicking in. I've heard it, the audio itself is out of time. Depending on the latency of the first effect, the Plugin Buffer setting and the project tempo, it could be anywhere from a 256th to a 32nd note early.

is this true? are just the wrong parts of the notes effected, or does the whole phrase slide?

ex: let's say you have a 4/4 kickdrum pattern, copy to a new track - should be in time.
add a device with 1/8th note delay after one of them, bypass - should still be in time together.
add a trance gate type device which should silence the 2 and 4 - now, are the two tracks still aligned, but it's chopping off the wrong parts of the notes, or is it actually out of time now with the other track?

Yes, it's true. Please reference the first post of this thread. viewtopic.php?f=1&t=157048

And the followup confirmation response. viewtopic.php?p=1247289#p1247289

In your example, if the 1/8 note delay effect was the first effect of the series, and it also introduced latency, then the delay should be in sync when hitting the trance gate, but the trance gate itself would be out of sync with the grid; and in my experience, the entire resulting audio would be out of time with the original track.

In the effects which I use, the dry signal is passed through in sync with the processed signal, not independently. In other words, in the trance gate above, if I set the dry/wet to 100% dry, it would still be out of sync with the original track.


*Edited for focus on the answer