Ableton should license harrison mixbus as an add on mixer.

[topaz]

There, said it.

Live would benefit hugely from a better mixer, an extended version of harrison mixbus would be exactly that

[3dot...]

what makes you think that it's "better"?

[topaz]

because everything needed is right there in front of you, no need to dive into multiple mouse clicks and opening lots of separate
plug in windows when trying to get a quick mix.

I am not for one minute saying it should be the main mixer but as an Alt when working in arrange view.

what makes you think that it's "better"?

[3dot...]

like what?

what features does it have that you miss when working in Live?

[topaz]

I said in my last reply.

like what?

what features does it have that you miss when working in Live?

[3dot...]

not really ... you said that "everything" needed is right there in front of you"
I don't really get it, as mostly everything I need is right in front of me with Ableton..

also...what do you mean by "no need to dive into multiple mouse clicks and opening lots of separate
plug in windows"?
are plugins not needed in Harrison? What technology do they use?

[topaz]

have a look at the harrison mixer.

its has eq, dynamics, right in the mixer with no need to load a plugin.

yes it does support plugins too but for getting a quick mix together it is cool.

it also has tape saturation built right into the master.

it automatically creates macro controls for any plugins loaded.

not really ... you said that "everything" needed is right there in front of you"
I don't really get it, as mostly everything I need is right in front of me with Ableton..

also...what do you mean by "no need to dive into multiple mouse clicks and opening lots of separate
plug in windows"?
are plugins not needed in Harrison? What technology do they use?

[oblique strategies]

Harrison Mixbus has everything in view, with a one knob-per-function approach. It's an excellent method & GUI for mixing, especially the classic mixing as performance method. Think of Jamaican Dub mixing & you can see the advantages to the approach of having parameters available & in clear view at all times.

[oddstep]

Just make a template with all the eqs, compressors and saturators you want and get a controller that can steer that setup. Job done. I don't want to waste money paying ableton to licence a skeumorphic imitation of an oldhat desk.

[oblique strategies]

One can use a flathead screwdriver to drive a phillips head screw, but sometimes it's just easier to use a phillips head screwdriver...

[topaz]

That sounds cool, can you please post some examples.

Reccomended controller, maybe a live set demonstrating this workflow?

Just make a template with all the eqs, compressors and saturators you want and get a controller that can steer that setup. Job done. I don't want to waste money paying ableton to licence a skeumorphic imitation of an oldhat desk.

[login]

I hate skeumorphic workflow and this stuff has it all over it. It's a nice idea but it could have a much better GUI. I would love this concept made by fabfilter.

I can see the appeal for something like this, but I would even use it but I would prefer to finish all the arranging in live bounce and only take audio for mixing to the console software,

[cstump]

You know for the performance aspect of Live I think the way it is set up now is about right, just a drop down arrow and all your plugins are displayed with all of their settings not to mention the Macros. I think a regular mixer may really defeat the real purpose of Live by adding an unnecessary layer to the process as it is now.

Maybe as a Mastering stage where a mixer would come in handy but not as a Performing stage which at the moment the existing mixer is well suited for this purpose.

[oblique strategies]

Don't get me wrong, I love Live's look & agree that one can do a lot with Live's workflow.

And I only really like skeuomorphic interfaces for specific & distinctive pieces of gear like a Roland Space Echo, a Mu-Tron Bi-Phase, or other classics.

In that case a skeuomorphic interface actually speeds up the workflow because of the familiarity. I think the Harrison Mixbus, falls into this category, especially for those who used hardware mixers.

[login]

In that case a skeuomorphic interface actually speeds up the workflow because of the familiarity. I think the Harrison Mixbus, falls into this category, especially for those who used hardware mixers.

I agree about emulations of familiar and classic pieces of gear.

But the idea on Mixbus is nice, would be much nicer if it was redeseigned for working with a mouse, imagine having the visual dsiplays of PRO-q, ProC; PRoL in that thing. WHy they impose the limitations of hardware over it?