Happy with Live 9?

[Buleriachk]

In general, I am happy with Live 9. My only complaint is that it doesn't allow us to select clips for scene launch (which is a major omission, IMO, and creates real awkwardness that can only be resolved with ClyphX to do very, very simple things....)

Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?...

[aberkow]

I'm really happy with this upgrade. In particular I like the convert to MIDI feature. My primary instruments are clarinet and bass clarinet. My keyboard skills are pretty weak though so to quickly sketch out an idea this feature is a huge benefit.

[timday]

Mostly happy except for the browser which is terrible for me.

[geometrygod]

Live 9 is simply awesome.

I also have been avoiding many of the posts on this forum because of all the bitching and moaning. C'mon guys, show some Love! This is an Excellent program.

Cant wait for my Push to come in the mail!

**rubs hands together**

[monohusche]

...I am.
So far I've had it about a week now and been playing around here and there, and reading this forum.
I must say, it needs a bit of getting used too, if you are used to the older versions. Especially the new Midi arrangement Overdub, the Automation Arm, re-enable automation, and the session record buttons are a bit confusing in the beginning. But after messing around with it for a while it becomes clearer. I must admit I never really missed these functions before, because there was always a way to get to the end result somehow before for my uses. Sure, the new browser also needs some getting used to, but hey, it'll work (even better than before).
My favorites are the new and overdone FX and M4L. Wow, a whole new universe to explore - especially M4L. I guess it's beyond me and I am extremely grateful to those who understand how to program all these new instruments and FX with M4L and what not. I'm just a user. Keep it up. ...and share

What I find sad though, is this continuous nagging and dissing going on in this forum about Live, about Ableton, about what should have been done, the price, the marketing....
What is wrong with these people who can not have constructive arguments or opinions without getting personal and let their anger out about who knows what on this forum? Ableton and their products are great. And they are getting better all the time. Sure, good software costs money. That's the way it is. If you buy it and are unhappy with it then you bought the wrong program. Ableton has over the years always listened to reasonable wishes and constructive advice of users to make it what is now and what was possible. It can always get better, and it does. But for me personally there is no other program out there that makes music making so much fun and has so many (endless) possibilities as Live.

Abletons' service is helpful and (usually) quite fast. The hardware integration is remarkable and easy. Live is a standalone all-in-one more-than-a-studio in a box. For me, it's more than I could have ever wished for in a recording program.

Well, that's it, I just had to get rid of it.
And NO, I don't have any ties to Ableton.

Cheers, keep up the good work.
Rhino

I do agree, for me, not having Live 9 exactly on the release date or not didn't make a major difference, my music (if I get to a decent stage at all) hasn't drastically changed with Live 9, and it wouldn't have if there were even more changes. Live 8 already was a very mature product, so it's hard to have really groudbreaking changes. gear lust seems to be at play here for a lot of us.

But if you just glance through the topic list on the forum, most of the original postings are kind of genuine (bug reports, questions etc.).

<slightly off topic>

The one thing that I don't dig though is the whole marketing approach around Push. This is obviously the single biggest innovation with this release, and their comms around it sucks.

It does make a difference whether I can download Live 9 and the packs on 5th of march or one or two days later, or whether I am looking at a 4 month delay for a controller. Because I can get around not having Live 9 using alternative approaches in Live8, but I can't get around not having Push (if mouseless production is my goal).

I do understand some of the reasoning behind it, i.e. cash flow, small company etc. But then don't sell it with unrealistic promises. In any case, Ableton always knew that the first batch wouldn't be sent out straight away but end of march. So don't say "Available Now".

And changing a confirmed date (2-4 weeks) to 12-16 weeks as some users have reported, is ridiculous.

</slightly off topic>

Overall, it's all good.

[kitekrazy]

Ableton is unique amd I have two licenses but in reality it's an over priced DAW.

[pulsoc]

Traktor's midi editing is still lightyears beyond Ableton Live.

Just getting into Traktor, it has midi editing? Where?

[pencilrocket]

Why don't OP try to look on the bright side rather than continuing reading nagging? There are plenty of good review. I'm sure you knew software always has more bugs in earlier version. Then it is quite natural for customer to frustrate, it may also depends on how it is advertised, the price they paid, customer service and so on. If customer pay much customer expectation will be relatively high. I don't know why you are concerned about the negative feedback so seriously. That's not your job. Take it easy.

I wish people would take advantage of the LIVE 9 DEMO first before buying. It really should solve whether they like it or not.

Yes, it will effectively avoid unhappy customer.

Just getting into Traktor, it has midi editing? Where?

I think he means MIDI mapping.

[JuanSOLO]

Traktor's midi editing is still lightyears beyond Ableton Live.

Just getting into Traktor, it has midi editing? Where?

In the preferences, Controller Manager.
It does SO much, and once you understand it, it's very easy to do complex things.

[JuanSOLO]

@monohusch

If mouseless production is someone's goal, PUSH is not the only answer.
It's not the controller alone that makes it special.
It's the remote scripting that accesses the API.
The API which can be accessed through remote scripting OR max for live.
Sure the controllers velocity sesetive pads, labeled buttons, and touch encoders enable some tactile results other toys don't have, but ANY controller can perform all the API calls as long as the user knows python scripting or M4L.
So you can most definitely achieve a less mouse production without PUSH, thanks to the changes in the API.

Sure for most people they don't want to deal with API anything, and getting out of box results is worth $600.
M4L is still really misunderstood by many who think of it as coding python, it's not like that, but offers those results.
To me that makes Ableton Live 9 really cool, extreamly flexible.
However M4L or python IS no doubt steep learning curves that most "producing musicians" could care less to learn.

To me that's what makes Traktor's controller managing extreamly attractive.
It's not as tough to learn, you can get complex results, and its not trying to "appear" exclusive to a specific controller.

I somewhat agree that the PUSH marketing is wack.
It's deceiving.
And although I think remote scripting and M4L are awesome, it keeps Ableton in the controller biz big time by making it difficult to learn, but it makes them appear generously innovative at the same time.
I understand a business needs a money making strategy, I'm not against that.
Yet there's something about it that smells funny to me.

I would love to see Ableton incorporate something like a mini Bomes in the midi editing.
THEN promote the idea that anyone can use any controller because their software was so easy to hack with accompanying lessons etc. They should make it stupid clear that max for live is not really "coding"
For example, why not make a simple GUI editor that allows the user to make their own step sequencer control template that can work with various controllers.

To me they could just make the software totally bad ass, sell more of it, justifying the price of entry.
That is if they are serious about making computers a "Live" instrument.

[monohusche]

@monohusch

If mouseless production is someone's goal, PUSH is not the only answer.
It's not the controller alone that makes it special.
It's the remote scripting that accesses the API.
The API which can be accessed through remote scripting OR max for live.
Sure the controllers velocity sesetive pads, labeled buttons, and touch encoders enable some tactile results other toys don't have, but ANY controller can perform all the API calls as long as the user knows python scripting or M4L.
So you can most definitely achieve a less mouse production without PUSH, thanks to the changes in the API.

Sure for most people they don't want to deal with API anything, and getting out of box results is worth $600.
M4L is still really misunderstood by many who think of it as coding python, it's not like that, but offers those results.
To me that makes Ableton Live 9 really cool, extreamly flexible.
However M4L or python IS no doubt steep learning curves that most "producing musicians" could care less to learn.

To me that's what makes Traktor's controller managing extreamly attractive.
It's not as tough to learn, you can get complex results, and its not trying to "appear" exclusive to a specific controller.

I somewhat agree that the PUSH marketing is wack.
It's deceiving.
And although I think remote scripting and M4L are awesome, it keeps Ableton in the controller biz big time by making it difficult to learn, but it makes them appear generously innovative at the same time.
I understand a business needs a money making strategy, I'm not against that.
Yet there's something about it that smells funny to me.

I would love to see Ableton incorporate something like a mini Bomes in the midi editing.
THEN promote the idea that anyone can use any controller because their software was so easy to hack with accompanying lessons etc. They should make it stupid clear that max for live is not really "coding"
For example, why not make a simple GUI editor that allows the user to make their own step sequencer control template that can work with various controllers.

To me they could just make the software totally bad ass, sell more of it, justifying the price of entry.
That is if they are serious about making computers a "Live" instrument.

Juan,

of course, it's not just the controller but the API itself and the way it integrates.

I used to spend the majority of my time (coming from pure Max) implementing devices and a control suite for Ableton with my monome (i.e. MonoLive, MonoMidi, MonoParaSteppa, dschihadelay). Until I realised that all this tool development is actually compromising the time I spent making music.

The complexity is not in making API calls but in allocating buttons and actions in such a way that it results in a smooth workflow which also covers the main performance aspects. Reimplementing what Push does with a different controller will definitely result in significant effort and sub optimal return compared to using Push as a baseline and adding bits and pieces via M4L taking over controls or using the user mode.

Additionally, it will enable other Push Users to benefit from custom M4L extensions which will inevitably pop up, more than complete M4L "mappings" for monome, for instance.

And as you said, most of the Ableton users don't deal with programming, so they will buy a controller which includes the mapping logic.

[monohusche]

@JuanSOLO

just one more comment.

Max for Live IS coding !

I mean, you are doing M4L, so you know. I would even say that despite the fact that M4L provides a higher abstraction level than general purpose languages (i.e. python) due to its visual programming caoabilities and its focus on Audio, Video and signal processing, the fact that it is event driven, asynchronous, parallel and data-flow driven creates quite a big hurdle for people who are more used to procedural languages (even though JavaScript can be embedded). The whole signal domain and the related aspects doesn't help either.

In essence, for just writing controller stuff, M4L is actually not adding much value other than the integration of the programming environment into Live. Where it really shines is the MSP and Jitter side of things as signal and video processing extensions can't be covered with python or so.

Introduction of "Mini Bomes" etc. wouldn't make M4L programming as such easier or more accessible to a wider user group but rather add an additional layer on top of M4L which would be easier to consume but also more restrictive, so horses for courses. Coders use M4L (steeper learning curve, more flexibility), Producers use Controller Editor, Mini Bomes etc. for configuration.

I think, to implement an "open source" version of Push using monome's, APC's or Launchpads, "Mini Bomes" would not suffice, but you rather need a proper language layer (such as M4L). One reason is the contextual layer. A lot of the Push mapping (i.e. what actions are triggered) depends on the "state" of the respective application object. I.e. adding a drumrack to a midi track results in a different mapping than adding an instrument. would be hard with a simple mapping as this wouldn't be unteractive. Another example is the fact that quick button presses (e.g. NoteRepeat) result in latch mode, so the time difference between "on" and "off" is taken into consideration. Just imagine how complex the Traktor Editor would become if you add the time dimension to it.

I might be wrong though as I don't know too much about Traktor or Controller Editor.

[JuanSOLO]

Maybe i misunderstood a part of your post, it seemed as if you were saying PUSH was the end all of mouseless production. Which made me think you didn't know any under the hood stuff.

So I apologize if my post seemed patronizing.

I agree all of this deep API accessing the Ableton way distracts from the primary purpose, whch is making the music. I definitely fell into a max hole for about 3 years. Still recovering.

Which enforces my point. There are "programmers" who get off on making tools, then there are the people that use them, much like my job as an animator.
Which leads me to believe Ableton went weird somewhere.
You have guys like Stray at NativeKoktrol who seem to have the vision somewhere in between programmer and performer. Yet he seems to be a one man show.
I'm not sure why Ableton who has the resources to hire 5-10 Stays, don't reflect that in their software with an Ableton supported MapEase on steroids for all controllers on the market.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not pointing a finger at Ableton specifically, I realize that with success come a whole new challenge when trying to maintain the forward thinking that got anyone success I the first place.

[JuanSOLO]

I guess Traktor's way is more or less that softwares answer to Abletons racks mapping, but in the form of midi preferences, you have modifiers (like rules) and lots of value settings which make me describe it as "mini Bomes"

It's not perfect by any means, and you couldn't build a step sequencer with it, nevertheless it's got much more going on than any software I have seen utilizing "midi map" or "learn"
It's not the end all, but I would hope Ableton would get just as inspired by Traktor, as Traktor has been by Ableton, because there are some killer workflow ideas happening there.
Ideas that may be written off because it's DJ software, As a part time DJ and a fan of DJ's I have to add, most DJ's I know still consider more than 1 effect send, 'really complex' routing.

[JuanSOLO]

So now that we've totally derailed the topic, I'd say I'm generally happy with L9, but yeah I got some critique.
Still love it though.