Live 9 browser NIGHTMARE !!!

Discussion of music production, audio, equipment and any related topics, either with or without Ableton Live
skatr2
Posts: 450
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 11:38 pm

Re: Live 9 browser NIGHTMARE !!!

Post by skatr2 » Tue Mar 19, 2013 5:45 pm

Angstrom wrote:
skatr2 wrote:I haven't read everything through this thread, but I think a lot of whats happening with these moves is how hard it is to deal with how things are changing. One of my hardest sells on iTunes and similar programs when it first came out was "where the hell is it stored"? It was a hard transition going to mac as well; the thought of using a program to access content rather than directly looking for the content first. I got so used to knowing what folder held which song and navigating via that method that I said "I don't need a program to organize for me, I have my own organization".

As computers and the like evolve, they are moving away from our own forms of organization and going with the computer doing the task while we focus on what we need to focus on. Once your stuff is integrated, you can narrow down your search easier. The tough part is the integration process...which will likely be a hiccup in any system. Now I use iTunes to simply sort by genre, then artist and I just narrowed things down just as well as if I was navigating folders. Point being these changes are adaptable and so long as you take a moment to incorporate them, you will be infinitely more up to the change. If you are that locked into your original method, why bother upgrading in the first place? You clearly didn't need the change.

As I have played with live9 trial, I have liked the browser so far, albeit I have not attempted to throw in extended libraries into the mix...and likely won't on the scale that the original posters of this thread are stating. If anything I want to consolidate my library at this point.
I disagree. There are two issues.

#1 the indexing system currently has some issues so that large directories, removable drives, etc. are added too slowly
#2 the categorisation does not match user expectations

regarding issue #2 , you say that it's something that the user must get used to . That the chosen categorisations are something which should be accepted. I would say that every user thinks of every item of content differently, and differently dependent on context of requirement.

An example I've used before is shown in the categorisations "Ambient and Evolving" and "Pads". Now, we have a Rack Instrument preset called "All Alone Pad". which category would you say that this should be in? Which of the two?

Answer: it actually resides in "Ambient and Evolving", and I say that this is not wrong, it is obviously correct for whoever put it there. It's simultaneously not right, because that's not where anyone else would look for it.
Categorisations of multi-faceted objects should not be mutually exclusive. However, in this system they are.

A real world object might be defined as having the properties of [flat, hard, shiny, static, reflective, breakable], that's a mirror. I can find it by looking for breakable flat things, or reflective hard things.
Now how about we define an object with one property [Flat] ?
Is that a success?
How about [bass] ?

This system only allows single category parents, an arbitrary hierarchic tree. So you cannot claim that it is better than a file-system derived hierarchic file browser. Because in a file-system hierarchic browser we can use parent folders as taxonomic indicators, and in this system we cannot. It has the same tree-like restrictions of an OS file system, but the only benefit delivered is "fast text filtering". Actually browsing is less functional.
I won't claim the new system as better or worse. With large file directories, there may be problems which I have not had to deal with...but even ITunes has problems in this category that apple hasn't really dealt with realistically. Especially for those of us who had huge libraries of MP3s we've collected over the years before the first Ipods hit the shelf.

I will claim it as different and newer than they used to do. Its not a wrong or right way of doing things. Just different. As technology evolves, some will adapt to it with open minds, others will find it limiting and and will move onto things that work better for them. Just like Maschine's architecture didn't work with MY workflow, I have no criticism of its capabilities to the producer who may better integrate it.

Where ableton's file structure is limited as I have noticed is its ability to incorporate my personal stuff into its own filing system. When I create an instrument rack, I can't specify if its bass, or lead, or any other description. It just shows up at the bottom of those filing areas as a rack. Now this is nice if I want to separate my stuff from the premade stuff...but becomes a problem as I add more racks to the system.

I just noticed the "add folder" in the places area. Can't you add individual folders of your own to here and thus have more direct access to your other file structures?

su
Posts: 194
Joined: Tue Dec 15, 2009 6:09 am

Re: Live 9 browser NIGHTMARE !!!

Post by su » Tue Mar 19, 2013 5:54 pm

skatr2 wrote:I just noticed the "add folder" in the places area. Can't you add individual folders of your own to here and thus have more direct access to your other file structures?
Yes, but you shortcuts in folders added to places aren't recognized as they were in the L8 browser. Being able to access shortcuts in Live's browser allowed a lot of flexibility and consolidation without having to physically move files.

skatr2
Posts: 450
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 11:38 pm

Re: Live 9 browser NIGHTMARE !!!

Post by skatr2 » Tue Mar 19, 2013 6:00 pm

ah. Well I've really got nothing on that. If they incorporate it then great for who it affects. Otherwise ya just move things around the best you can I think.

ezelkow1
Posts: 366
Joined: Thu Oct 08, 2009 6:22 pm

Re: Live 9 browser NIGHTMARE !!!

Post by ezelkow1 » Tue Mar 19, 2013 6:21 pm

I dont think in some of these instances its just a matter of something being new and different and needing to adapt to it or learn it, it just plain doesnt work for certain situations. You cant then expect people who have purchased the software to just move on to something else and learn a whole new suite of software, they have laid down their hard earned cash and expected it to at least work as well as a previous version. To expect someone to show up in a studio environment, and then have to wait 15,30,60min to use an external hard drive full of samples while the studios live installation indexes all of them just wont work.

Then you also now have the issue of that installation of live's database getting gigantic since now it could have who knows how many external drives worth of files indexed. There really just needs to be non-indexed/immediate file system access as an option

Rosko
Posts: 215
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 4:12 pm

Re: Live 9 browser NIGHTMARE !!!

Post by Rosko » Tue Mar 19, 2013 6:29 pm

I will never get get used to having a category 'vintage' as this is useless to me. I will never get used to not being able to sort my m4l plugs into categories as this just takes loner to find stuff, etc etc. these are things we need to put up with rather than get used to.

beatz01
Posts: 361
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 4:09 pm

Re: Live 9 browser NIGHTMARE !!!

Post by beatz01 » Tue Mar 19, 2013 6:48 pm

@Amaury:

What so far has been ignored by Ableton is this:

The general conscencus seems to be

Make an option to switch indexing off

As long as this is not officially adressed, complaints will not stop.

Simple as that.

skatr2
Posts: 450
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 11:38 pm

Re: Live 9 browser NIGHTMARE !!!

Post by skatr2 » Tue Mar 19, 2013 6:54 pm

ezelkow1 wrote:I dont think in some of these instances its just a matter of something being new and different and needing to adapt to it or learn it, it just plain doesnt work for certain situations. You cant then expect people who have purchased the software to just move on to something else and learn a whole new suite of software, they have laid down their hard earned cash and expected it to at least work as well as a previous version.
Actually in some instances, I do expect people to move on....especially since live 9 is offered in a fully function 30day trial before they forked over their "hard earned" cash. If it was so hard earned, they would take the time to fully investigate if the money spent meets their needs or whether they will need to make some adjustments to better incorporate their purchase. If not, you petition Ableton your requirements in hopes of a change. You're bargaining power is before you purchase.

If Ableton came out today and said "works as intended", you no doubt might be disgruntled, but there's got to be SOME personal responsibility to ensure it meets your ideals before you invest. Software that has bugs or doesn't work is destined to be upgraded and adjusted over the lifespan. But to demand features that weren't there as the version was released is kind of like buying a car, knowing it didn't have the premium sound, then demanding they add it for free.

DoubleDub
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2010 8:50 pm

Re: Live 9 browser NIGHTMARE !!!

Post by DoubleDub » Tue Mar 19, 2013 7:15 pm

beatz01 wrote:@Amaury:

What so far has been ignored by Ableton is this:

The general conscencus seems to be

Make an option to switch indexing off

As long as this is not officially adressed, complaints will not stop.

Simple as that.
Yeap, easy as this. Ableton CANNOT say you have to adapt your way of thinking since this is not a direct software feature but a a practical file handling issue for studios with large or changing sample libraries. Otherwise they will exclude them as customers (mmhhh, or Ableton doesn't care of the few may be).
40min of noises in the background now :-/

3dot...
Posts: 9996
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 11:10 pm

Re: Live 9 browser NIGHTMARE !!!

Post by 3dot... » Tue Mar 19, 2013 7:29 pm

DoubleDub wrote: Ableton CANNOT say you have to adapt your way of thinking
session view and m4l say they can...and do :wink:
Image

H20nly
Posts: 15844
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2007 9:15 pm
Location: The Wild West

Re: Live 9 browser NIGHTMARE !!!

Post by H20nly » Tue Mar 19, 2013 8:40 pm

beatz01 wrote:@Amaury:

What so far has been ignored by Ableton is this:

The general conscencus seems to be

Make an option to switch indexing off

As long as this is not officially adressed, complaints will not stop.

Simple as that.
this would provide the shortest path to success IMO. firstly it would allow users to sidestep the loooooong integration process that is the true NIGHTMARE-ish point of focus. it would then buy Ableton time to address why this amazing new feature is not working as amazingly as once hoped... all the while restoring full use of Live and/or large external file libraries from... any where. when we are allowed to tell Live where our samples are it takes the guess work and need for indexing away from the software and puts that power back in the hands of the diverse user base.

Ableton Denver
Posts: 35
Joined: Mon Aug 03, 2009 4:12 pm
Location: Denver
Contact:

Re: Live 9 browser NIGHTMARE !!!

Post by Ableton Denver » Wed Mar 20, 2013 1:52 am

Official User Update, original post : viewtopic.php?f=52&t=190566&start=0

Ableton sent me a link, I did everything they instructed. These foolish and haphazard requests (yes, pointing at you dev team) did deliver a barley usable system. The problem remains but is lessened in severity. Still unacceptable.

After loosing drives I had to get new drives and I was able to create a benchmark. This is the no BS test: 600mb library took 10 minutes to scan and become browsable. Normal conditions, above average machine. I repeated over and over and the performance was too slow to accept.

I am never going to be able to play on another persons computer or access my lib elsewhere. The plan will be to go out to lunch while Ableton pulls the head of the browser out of the, well you know...

Second : I have been able to force read errors, mistakes, and additional lag by modifying libraries (file systems) outside of Ableton.

I suppose the dev team thinks we are all working off of local drive (never use your OS drive for a library - this is bad practice) and also that we never modify file systems outside of Ableton.

This is the typical lack of holistic understanding that is endemic with Ableton, speaking from 3+ years of foolish user group collaboration I have bimonthly stories recorded of correspondence and phone calls that make rational people want to cry. There is a huge disconnect on the true use patterns and via Live9 and absolutely the Push controller there is an additional migration to satisfy the rookie bedroom producers and a solid pattern of ignoring live (stage) performance.

BTW - thanks for the "scene" superclass in the remote scripts. Way to break all of our work.
closed the user group on purpose.

stringtapper
Posts: 6280
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 6:21 pm

Re: Live 9 browser NIGHTMARE !!!

Post by stringtapper » Wed Mar 20, 2013 1:59 am

Ableton Denver wrote:These foolish and haphazard requests (yes, pointing at you dev team) did deliver a barley usable system.
Sounds like the browser is the… yeast of your concerns…?



I'll see myself out…
Unsound Designer

skatr2
Posts: 450
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 11:38 pm

Re: Live 9 browser NIGHTMARE !!!

Post by skatr2 » Wed Mar 20, 2013 2:12 am

Ableton Denver wrote: This is the typical lack of holistic understanding that is endemic with Ableton, speaking from 3+ years of foolish user group collaboration I have bimonthly stories recorded of correspondence and phone calls that make rational people want to cry. There is a huge disconnect on the true use patterns and via Live9 and absolutely the Push controller there is an additional migration to satisfy the rookie bedroom producers and a solid pattern of ignoring live (stage) performance.

BTW - thanks for the "scene" superclass in the remote scripts. Way to break all of our work.
ya know one would think someone with such an extensive negative background experience and opinion of a company as yourself, you would have ran the trial before you bought live 9. I'm honestly shocked you still are taking the time to complain with the level of problems, irritation, and disgruntlement you have shown with the company. If I was at that point, I would seek other venues for my loot than here.

pencilrocket
Posts: 1718
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2010 10:46 am

Re: Live 9 browser NIGHTMARE !!!

Post by pencilrocket » Wed Mar 20, 2013 2:31 am

He said he had a community group. I think he has insight into the software he's been using.
Image

ezelkow1
Posts: 366
Joined: Thu Oct 08, 2009 6:22 pm

Re: Live 9 browser NIGHTMARE !!!

Post by ezelkow1 » Wed Mar 20, 2013 2:56 am

skatr2 wrote:
Ableton Denver wrote: This is the typical lack of holistic understanding that is endemic with Ableton, speaking from 3+ years of foolish user group collaboration I have bimonthly stories recorded of correspondence and phone calls that make rational people want to cry. There is a huge disconnect on the true use patterns and via Live9 and absolutely the Push controller there is an additional migration to satisfy the rookie bedroom producers and a solid pattern of ignoring live (stage) performance.

BTW - thanks for the "scene" superclass in the remote scripts. Way to break all of our work.
ya know one would think someone with such an extensive negative background experience and opinion of a company as yourself, you would have ran the trial before you bought live 9. I'm honestly shocked you still are taking the time to complain with the level of problems, irritation, and disgruntlement you have shown with the company. If I was at that point, I would seek other venues for my loot than here.
I guess Ill just never understand this line of thinking of, ill just take it and not try to offer up suggestions and criticism that could make software that I have used for many years that much better for myself and everyone else that uses it

Im sure many people have demo'd it and decided not to use it because of these changes. Theres also plenty of us who, despite this flaw, still saw value in the upgrade along with the hopes that since so many other people also have issues with this, that it will be fixed in the future. If not, I can deal with it and work around it for the sake of loving the workflow of live and not wanting to have to learn an entire new software package; but do I want to sit back and not try to offer up suggestions and provide examples of problems in order to try to fix it, no, thats just stupid to not try.

Its not just bitching and moaning for the sake of complaining, its an attempt to show the dev team problems that exist and offer solutions to these problems, if no one voiced their opinion along with others then the software could keep heading in a direction that could be opposite what the actual end users want, and then ableton would stop seeing more and more loot and fall behind

Post Reply