Why is Ableton Live's transient detection so bad?

[digivitis]

Why is Ableton Live's transient detection so bad? Programs like ReCycle have been able to do this for over a decade, with great precision.

Ableton's auto-warp:


ReCycle's auto-warp:

[pencilrocket]

mmm maybe PH coded harder?

[chelemasty]

mmm maybe PH coded harder?

LOL ^^^ THIS!!! maybe...

[leisuremuffin]

looks like it detected the transient just fine, see the marker where the transient starts? why live decided to put the one where it does in your picture is another question. auto warp seems pretty unreliable, to the point where i rarely even try to use it.

[3osc]

^^^ beat me to it!


It's interesting that there's a pseudo-warp marker in the right place, but that's not where it's warping from. So, the transient was properly detected, but the warping is off. Setting somewhere?

[digivitis]

looks like it detected the transient just fine, see the marker where the transient starts? why live decided to put the one where it does in your picture is another question. auto warp seems pretty unreliable, to the point where i rarely even try to use it.

Good point - why on earth would Live select that point as the start of the one-count? I've used other programs, and they usually accomplish both tasks (transient detection and marker position) quite reliably.

[massenmedium]

Not a full answer but they are different cases aren't they.

That is to say that Recycle isn't concerned with *where* in the bar the transients are supposed to be, just that they are there. It's a much simpler thing it needs to do.

I never use auto-warp though, I can usually do it quick enough by hand in chunks of 32 bars or so. Bosh bosh bosh.

[LithiuMind]

THIS! I have always wondered this too... I always just set 1.1.1 manually and then try to warp at the original BPM to save myself the hassle of having to correct the whole way through.

But why would Ableton's engine mark the transient correctly and then put 1.1.1 50-200 samples off? Bizarre.

Oh great Abes, please chime in!

[H20nly]

*bookmark*

[massenmedium]

THIS! I have always wondered this too... I always just set 1.1.1 manually and then try to warp at the original BPM to save myself the hassle of having to correct the whole way through.

Yep, that's a great way to do it. Also once you've added a second marker you can see what's usually a more accurate BPM and it's useful to whack a marker in right at the end at that tempo to minimize the need to adjust even more, I find.

But yes none of this answers the question.

[panten]

I'd really like to know some answers to this also. I started a post in the feature wish list section hoping for more control over transient detection.

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=190098

If any of you have ever used Geist Sampler it has a transient threshold knob which gives you more initial control in real-time to fine tune what it will catch. Would be pretty useful if Abes worked on this area of Live a bit more, especially with Push just over the horizon.

[Pettro]

I´d like to see Ableton´s reply as well.

[ark]

Maybe it thought the two transients close together were a flam, in which case it would make sense to put 1.1.1 on the louder of the two.

[proaudio]

Why wont Ableton implement some sort of control over transient detection process?
More accurate, less accurate kind of basic control.
All major DAWs have it and it definitely helps a lot.

[H20nly]

no better in 9.1?