All times are UTC

 
 



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 102 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: APC40 v.s PUSH
PostPosted: Sat Oct 27, 2012 12:24 am 

Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 2:27 pm
Posts: 636
OzWozEre wrote:
humnumb wrote:
Like I was saying, you can say that about most other tools that are missing certain features, and opportunities for theoretical possibilities without anything else to support it does not in any way mean that it can or will happen.

Sure, but "most other tools" don't have *any* option for any "theoretical possibilities" whatsoever, I think that's the difference

Have your heard of the lua-based tools for Renoise? Do you know about controller templates that utilize scripts and Lemur patches for Maschine? Those are not theoretical. They already exist. :smile:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: APC40 v.s PUSH
PostPosted: Sat Oct 27, 2012 12:31 am 

Joined: Fri Jun 02, 2006 4:32 pm
Posts: 1547
JuanSOLO wrote:
I know exactly what it is.
Yet it's just slightly different than recording automation they way I described with PUSH, granted step automation is very precise/specific.
I'm trying to tell you something like that CAN be added, and most certainly someone will by remote scripting, if not Ableton.
And I'm pretty sure scripts like that will be available for download on the web.

PUSH, Maschine and all of those controllers only do what they do "out of the box" based on the coding.
I may not be able to modify the code, you may not be able to, but others are proficient at it and more times than not, generous.

based on that, I dont see it as a missing feature.


All that may not be necessary... Step automation is just low resolution automation (like drawing in Live with the grid turned on)

Step automation is limited and useful for drums, not so much for melodies and continuous sounds...

_________________
Musings - A Diva soundset


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: APC40 v.s PUSH
PostPosted: Sat Oct 27, 2012 12:33 am 

Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2012 12:47 am
Posts: 168
humnumb wrote:
Have your heard of the lua-based tools for Renoise? Do you know about controller templates that utilize scripts and Lemur patches for Maschine? Those are not theoretical. They already exist. :smile:

Haha! I see what you did there :)

_________________
Macbook Pro (2.5 Dual, 4gb) / 30" Cinema Display (I don't give a fuck about no multi-monitor support)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: APC40 v.s PUSH
PostPosted: Sat Oct 27, 2012 1:18 am 

Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 8:28 pm
Posts: 1320
deva wrote:
Step automation is limited and useful for drums, not so much for melodies and continuous sounds...

Not at all. It's incredibly useful for any kind of automation that requires precision which is not limited to just drums. If you're familar with multi-effects step sequencer like The Finger or Sugar Bytes Effectrix, Maschine's built-in step sequencer allows you to do exactly that "out of the box" with both native sampler/effects, or third party plugins.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: APC40 v.s PUSH
PostPosted: Sat Oct 27, 2012 1:39 am 

Joined: Fri Jun 02, 2006 4:32 pm
Posts: 1547
delicioso wrote:
deva wrote:
Step automation is limited and useful for drums, not so much for melodies and continuous sounds...

Not at all. It's incredibly useful for any kind of automation that requires precision which is not limited to just drums. If you're familar with multi-effects step sequencer like The Finger or Sugar Bytes Effectrix, Maschine's built-in step sequencer allows you to do exactly that "out of the box" with both native sampler/effects, or third party plugins.



It is not precise, it is crude... it is low resolution and only moves in discrete steps which can be heard as stepping... if you want a smooth parameter adjustment, no can do... if you want to make a parameter adjustment not on the step beat, no can do...

_________________
Musings - A Diva soundset


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: APC40 v.s PUSH
PostPosted: Sat Oct 27, 2012 2:05 am 

Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 8:28 pm
Posts: 1320
deva wrote:
delicioso wrote:
deva wrote:
Step automation is limited and useful for drums, not so much for melodies and continuous sounds...

Not at all. It's incredibly useful for any kind of automation that requires precision which is not limited to just drums. If you're familar with multi-effects step sequencer like The Finger or Sugar Bytes Effectrix, Maschine's built-in step sequencer allows you to do exactly that "out of the box" with both native sampler/effects, or third party plugins.

It is not precise, it is crude... it is low resolution and only moves in discrete steps which can be heard as stepping... if you want a smooth parameter adjustment, no can do... if you want to make a parameter adjustment not on the step beat, no can do...

Huh? You do realize that Maschine has always had the ability to record automation into clips, which Live still can't do (until Live 9 is released), which is all about smooth parameter adjustments and has nothing to do with step automation, right?

And you didn't get what I meant by 'precise' regarding step automation. It's about automating the step(s) of a pattern when you know precisely which steps (along any musical divisions of the sequencer's grid) you want to automate. So yes, it's about using "discrete steps" which is why it's called step automation and it has its uses and advantages over recording knob movements (which Live can't even do). So for example, you hold a pad representing the step you want to automate and tweak a knob to apply automation to the desired step(s). It's funny you say "low resolution" which makes it obvious that you're not that familar with Maschine. The Maschine hardware has a much higher-than-MIDI resolution (even higher than Kore's higher-than-MIDI resolution) regardless of whether you're recording knob tweaks over a continuous source or applying it to a step.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: APC40 v.s PUSH
PostPosted: Sat Oct 27, 2012 2:30 am 

Joined: Fri Jun 02, 2006 4:32 pm
Posts: 1547
delicioso wrote:
deva wrote:
delicioso wrote:
Not at all. It's incredibly useful for any kind of automation that requires precision which is not limited to just drums. If you're familar with multi-effects step sequencer like The Finger or Sugar Bytes Effectrix, Maschine's built-in step sequencer allows you to do exactly that "out of the box" with both native sampler/effects, or third party plugins.

It is not precise, it is crude... it is low resolution and only moves in discrete steps which can be heard as stepping... if you want a smooth parameter adjustment, no can do... if you want to make a parameter adjustment not on the step beat, no can do...

Huh? You do realize that Maschine has always had the ability to record automation into clips, which Live still can't do (until Live 9 is released), which is all about smooth parameter adjustments and has nothing to do with step automation, right?

And you didn't get what I meant by 'precise' regarding step automation. It's about automating the step(s) of a pattern when you know precisely which steps (along any musical divisions of the sequencer's grid) you want to automate. So yes, it's about using "discrete steps" which is why it's called step automation and it has its uses and advantages over recording knob movements (which Live can't even do). So for example, you hold a pad representing the step you want to automate and tweak a knob to apply automation to the desired step(s). It's funny you say "low resolution" which makes it obvious that you're not that familar with Maschine. The Maschine hardware has a much higher-than-MIDI resolution (even higher than Kore's higher-than-MIDI resolution) regardless of whether you're recording knob tweaks over a continuous source or applying it to a step.


I agree step automation has its uses... and it is also quite limited as I described... if you do a lot of quantized step sequencing and don't play by hand in realtime, that will skew how much you value one over the other... personally, I don't find step automation very important. Most of the time I want smooth parameter adjustment. And of course, smooth parameter adjustment can be stepped just like step automation.

_________________
Musings - A Diva soundset


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: APC40 v.s PUSH
PostPosted: Sat Oct 27, 2012 3:51 am 

Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2012 12:52 am
Posts: 435
,


Last edited by krizgainz on Fri Apr 26, 2013 8:55 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: APC40 v.s PUSH
PostPosted: Sat Oct 27, 2012 6:28 am 

Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 4:47 pm
Posts: 325
JuanSOLO wrote:
It's just lacking Faders

Hopefully the touchstrip might be able to function as a high resolution fader too as in the Akai Max49. Instead of just for pitch bending and scrolling the drum racks, it would me more useful if it can be used for an expressive modulation controller. Is it pressure sensitive too? Or may be as a cross fader with a shorter range setup.

_________________
Kaossilatron - Voicillator
Station: Ableton Live 9 Suite, Push, Ultranova


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: APC40 v.s PUSH
PostPosted: Sat Oct 27, 2012 10:24 am 

Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 10:26 pm
Posts: 3461
Location: Wageningen, Netherlands
apalomba wrote:
Saw the new announcement for Live 9, very exciting! Push looks likes an
intriguing device. I was actually about to look into getting an APC40...

So the question is, which is better, an APC40 or Push? Can any APC40
users out there chime in with your thoughts.

I'm not too sure about one being better than the other. Push is being introduced as an instrument which you can use to play your Live setup whereas the APC has always been the Live controller.

However, I have no doubt that Push can fully support an APC40's functionality. Although it has no faders it has plenty of knobs which can be used as such, for example.

Having said that I do think that if you're already going to jump on the Live 9 bandwagon so to speak it would make a lot of sense to pick up Push instead of an APC40. If you can afford it then I'd say go for it.

The way I see it: The APC40 was the de-facto MIDI controller for Live 8. Push is the de-facto MIDI controller for Live 9.

In a way I think the whole thing makes perfect sense.

_________________
With kind regards,

Peter

Using the Big Trio: Live 9 Suite, Max (for Live) and Reason 6.5.
Blog: SynthFan.info.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: APC40 v.s PUSH
PostPosted: Sat Oct 27, 2012 11:48 am 

Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 10:26 pm
Posts: 3461
Location: Wageningen, Netherlands
I didn't edit my previous post because it seems I made some false assumptions up there, so rather than edit I prefer to do a new post in order to avoid confusion...

ShelLuser wrote:
The way I see it: The APC40 was the de-facto MIDI controller for Live 8. Push is the de-facto MIDI controller for Live 9.

I did some more studying on the Push today because I think its a very interesting piece of hardware. I can now also safely say that what I said above is wrong.

The APC40 is a Live controller, Push is a Live instrument.

Two different devices, two different purposes. You can't compare them one on one because both devices do totally different things. The APC controls Live whereas the Push plays Live.

I don't think the OP should ask himself which one is better in order to decide which to buy. I think the better question is; "which should I buy first?".

Now, I do wonder how much extra you could do with Push when you throw M4l into the setup :twisted:

_________________
With kind regards,

Peter

Using the Big Trio: Live 9 Suite, Max (for Live) and Reason 6.5.
Blog: SynthFan.info.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: APC40 v.s PUSH
PostPosted: Tue Jan 01, 2013 10:25 pm 

Joined: Sat Dec 21, 2002 3:52 am
Posts: 720
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
I agree. I have an APC40, a padKontrol, and an LPK25 (a Korg microArranger for a bigger keyboard).
If I decide to make the jump (a BIG if, since the above combination works very well for most things), I imagine that Push will replace the padKontrol on my desk. But I imagine I would use Push more for instrument control as a complement to the APC40 anyway......

But I will make a very strong effort to fight the GAS. (I'll probably lose...:-)

ShelLuser wrote:
I did some more studying on the Push today because I think its a very interesting piece of hardware. I can now also safely say that what I said above is wrong.

The APC40 is a Live controller, Push is a Live instrument.

Two different devices, two different purposes. You can't compare them one on one because both devices do totally different things. The APC controls Live whereas the Push plays Live.

I don't think the OP should ask himself which one is better in order to decide which to buy. I think the better question is; "which should I buy first?".

Now, I do wonder how much extra you could do with Push when you throw M4l into the setup :twisted:

_________________
http://www.flamencochuck.com

Scales and chords: viewtopic.php?f=55&t=202364


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 102 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7

All times are UTC

 
 

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group