All times are UTC

 
 



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 102 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: APC40 v.s PUSH
PostPosted: Fri Oct 26, 2012 7:39 pm 

Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 2:27 pm
Posts: 636
OzWozEre wrote:
humnumb wrote:
OzWozEre wrote:
Machine < -- > (Drums software) --> ??? (Where's the DAW?)

Sorry but Maschine's software is far from a mere "drum software" even if it's not a full-on DAW. It's a fully featured sampling workstation/host instrument.


I hear ya, what I'm trying to say is that Maschine will only take you so far, you will still need to dump-to-daw at some point, whereas with Push you are "already there" -- at least this is my understanding...

If Live is your daw of choice. I prefer to drag my arrangement from Maschine into Logic for mixdowns. Also, it's not true that you "need" to dump to a DAW at some point. You can take it all the way within Maschine from mixing to mastering. It's all a matter of preference. What it doesn't have is a linear arrange view with audio tracks that span across scenes and all the tools associated with that you expected from a full-on DAW. And I prefer Logic for that because it's far superior to Live in that department.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: APC40 v.s PUSH
PostPosted: Fri Oct 26, 2012 7:55 pm 

Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2007 8:21 am
Posts: 3119
Location: Shreveport LA, sometimes Dallas/Ft Worth TX
True, I am citing a lot of workarounds, yet a lot is already possible with workarounds.

Not sure the importance of opening and closing plug ins is, when it seems like the point is to focus on the hardware, not the laptop. Yet for those who use that feature in Maschine is that a deal breaker when considering PUSH? I'd say unlikely.

Pending on how I hold my hand, I can block the view above the knobs or below, you can only look at one thing at a time anyways, and if your just dead set on knowing the parameter value visually move thy fucking hand so you can see it? I dont need Push to figure this out, im not dumb.

Not sure if you are familiar with Hanz Pertovs APC40 script but it provides "built-in" features to the APC40.

Someone like Stray, will no doubt modify the script if they want to add step automation, like "build it in"

Automapping in Maschine is only valuable to me if I customize it, which takes about as long as it does to configure a VST rack in Ableton and get 8 banks of 8 parameters via Shift+device button on my APC40.

Seems to me people are so eager to be spoon fed rather than learning the program and what it does and doesnt do.

_________________
soundcloud
vimeo


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: APC40 v.s PUSH
PostPosted: Fri Oct 26, 2012 7:59 pm 

Joined: Fri Jun 02, 2006 4:32 pm
Posts: 1547
JuanSOLO wrote:
Pending on how I hold my hand, I can block the view above the knobs or below, you can only look at one thing at a time anyways, and if your just dead set on knowing the parameter value visually move thy fucking hand so you can see it?


I find the display in front of the knob is more visible... My guess is that I will prefer it that way on Push

_________________
Musings - A Diva soundset


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: APC40 v.s PUSH
PostPosted: Fri Oct 26, 2012 8:01 pm 

Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 2:27 pm
Posts: 636
JuanSOLO wrote:
True, I am citing a lot of workarounds, yet a lot is already possible with workarounds.

And a lot of people don't want to bother with hacks and workarounds, which is why they might be interested to know about the built-in "out of the box" capabilities of Push and its limitations compared to already existing solutions like Maschine.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: APC40 v.s PUSH
PostPosted: Fri Oct 26, 2012 8:13 pm 

Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2007 8:21 am
Posts: 3119
Location: Shreveport LA, sometimes Dallas/Ft Worth TX
um, copy/paste modified remote script you downloaded from internet and choose it in Live control surface selector.
thats a bother?

let me put it this way.
PUSH will inevitably offer step automation, even though you can achieve the same basic results with recording the automation using the knob.

Maschine will never offer 4x4 drum pads on the left, 4x4 extra pads? on the right, sitting under 2 rows of 8 steps (32 steps), ALL on DECK right in front of you for editing, all seamlessly incorporated into Live.
That alone squashes Maschine for step sequencing.
In fact, it's the most robust solution for step sequencing available, unless you build your own.

_________________
soundcloud
vimeo


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: APC40 v.s PUSH
PostPosted: Fri Oct 26, 2012 8:16 pm 

Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 2:27 pm
Posts: 636
JuanSOLO wrote:
2 rows of 8 steps (32 steps)

That's 16 steps, not 32.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: APC40 v.s PUSH
PostPosted: Fri Oct 26, 2012 8:22 pm 

Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2007 8:21 am
Posts: 3119
Location: Shreveport LA, sometimes Dallas/Ft Worth TX
I ment 4 rows of 8 steps, sorry.
but yeah thats 32 steps.

_________________
soundcloud
vimeo


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: APC40 v.s PUSH
PostPosted: Fri Oct 26, 2012 8:39 pm 

Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 8:28 pm
Posts: 1320
JuanSOLO wrote:
Maschine will never offer 4x4 drum pads on the left, 4x4 extra pads? on the right, sitting under 2 rows of 8 steps (32 steps), ALL on DECK right in front of you for editing, all seamlessly incorporated into Live.
That alone squashes Maschine for step sequencing.

It doesn't if the ability to have step automation built-in like Maschine is important to what you do, or any of the other Maschine features that Live/Push doesn't have, as someone already mentioned above.

The Push controller could never replace Maschine for me because I'm one of those people who doesn't like to use the mouse or stare at the computer screen constantly to make music. Live and Maschine are two different beasts that work well together and compliment each other nicely for what each lacks.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: APC40 v.s PUSH
PostPosted: Fri Oct 26, 2012 8:59 pm 

Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2007 8:21 am
Posts: 3119
Location: Shreveport LA, sometimes Dallas/Ft Worth TX
I'm still puzzled by what you think PUSH is missing in step automation.
for example
your step sequencing a beat, maybe the snare, on 1 snare hit you want reverb, enable "automation" turn the reverb knob on that hit.

thats pretty much it, never had to leave the drumpad mode, sequence mode, or engadge any other mode like you would in Maschine or and APC40 or Launchpad etc.

_________________
soundcloud
vimeo


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: APC40 v.s PUSH
PostPosted: Fri Oct 26, 2012 9:49 pm 

Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 2:27 pm
Posts: 636
JuanSOLO wrote:
I'm still puzzled by what you think PUSH is missing in step automation.
for example
your step sequencing a beat, maybe the snare, on 1 snare hit you want reverb, enable "automation" turn the reverb knob on that hit.

thats pretty much it, never had to leave the drumpad mode, sequence mode, or engadge any other mode like you would in Maschine or and APC40 or Launchpad etc.

Are you sure you understand what is meant by "step automation"? It's not at all the same as turning a knob and recording that movement (even though it's great that Live 9 will finally be able to record that into clips, which is something Maschine has always been able to do). Ableton has already admitted here that Push can't do step automation.

Step automation, also known as 'step parameter lock' in Elektron-speak, allows you to make precise automation to individual steps, like this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UdJh4FMNhNE&t=05m20s


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: APC40 v.s PUSH
PostPosted: Fri Oct 26, 2012 10:05 pm 

Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2007 8:21 am
Posts: 3119
Location: Shreveport LA, sometimes Dallas/Ft Worth TX
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.

_________________
soundcloud
vimeo


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: APC40 v.s PUSH
PostPosted: Fri Oct 26, 2012 10:29 pm 

Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 2:27 pm
Posts: 636
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.

Wow. You do realize you're talking about non-existing hacks that theoretically "CAN be added" that "someone" could make that you're pretty sure "will be available for download on the web", right?

Well then, why bother discussing missing features in any gear at all when we can just speculate on what could possibly be added by someone in the indefinite future?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: APC40 v.s PUSH
PostPosted: Fri Oct 26, 2012 10:49 pm 

Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2012 12:47 am
Posts: 168
Theoreticals aside I think we shouldn't underestimate what having M4L will mean for Live once it becomes more pervasive -- this gets to the heart of Abe's decision to bundle M4L in Live 9 for free -- it's strategic.

Can you imagine what kind of ecosystem that could grow? Think App Store for iPhone, App Store for Shopify etc... an App Store for Live! =D

There is a very fine line (or should I say large overlap?) between designers/programmers/producers when it comes to Ableton. It's very "hacker friendly" IMO, I think we will see alot of interesting developments in this area -- I know I will be thinking of programming with it for example...

So yeah, there maybe some features that might not be baked in on the "factory level", but we have an opportunity to get *alot* more out of it as time progresses == WIN IMO.

_________________
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: Fri Oct 26, 2012 11:42 pm 

Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 2:27 pm
Posts: 636
OzWozEre wrote:
Theoreticals aside I think we shouldn't underestimate what having M4L will mean for Live once it becomes more pervasive -- this gets to the heart of Abe's decision to bundle M4L in Live 9 for free -- it's strategic.

M4L is not bundled in Live 9 for free. It's only included as part of Live 9 Suite, which costs extra.

OzWozEre wrote:
So yeah, there maybe some features that might not be baked in on the "factory level", but we have an opportunity to get *alot* more out of it as time progresses == WIN IMO.

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.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: APC40 v.s PUSH
PostPosted: Sat Oct 27, 2012 12:13 am 

Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2012 12:47 am
Posts: 168
humnumb wrote:
M4L is not bundled in Live 9 for free. It's only included as part of Live 9 Suite, which costs extra.


Sure, I meant Suite -- what a difference a word makes :)

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 :)

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


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  Next

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