Am I The Only One Not Impressed?

Discussion of music production, audio, equipment and any related topics, either with or without Ableton Live
stringtapper
Posts: 6271
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 6:21 pm

Re: Am I The Only One Not Impressed?

Post by stringtapper » Thu Nov 09, 2017 4:00 pm

Yeah, someone’s getting “off the rails” confused with “off the hook” or “off the chain.”

“Off the rails” = not good
Unsound Designer

jonbenderr
Posts: 123
Joined: Sat Feb 27, 2010 11:20 pm

Re: Am I The Only One Not Impressed?

Post by jonbenderr » Thu Nov 09, 2017 6:23 pm

I suppose I should have said "crazy"?

:lol:

sporkles
Posts: 3188
Joined: Sun Feb 18, 2007 8:43 pm
Location: Schmocation

Re: Am I The Only One Not Impressed?

Post by sporkles » Thu Nov 09, 2017 7:15 pm

jonbenderr wrote:I suppose I should have said "crazy"?

:lol:
You're damn right you should! :x


:P

Tarekith
Posts: 17332
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 11:46 pm
Location: Ableton Forum Administrator
Contact:

Re: Am I The Only One Not Impressed?

Post by Tarekith » Thu Nov 09, 2017 7:32 pm

This thread went off the rails.

:lol:

hoffman2k
Posts: 14689
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2004 6:40 pm
Location: Belgium
Contact:

Re: Am I The Only One Not Impressed?

Post by hoffman2k » Thu Nov 09, 2017 7:35 pm

Ableton is off the wagon!

Amythofficial
Posts: 20
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2016 12:23 pm

Re: Am I The Only One Not Impressed?

Post by Amythofficial » Thu Nov 09, 2017 10:51 pm

I hope to use Logic less and mix in Live.[/quote]

+1000.
Me too

Martin Gifford
Posts: 425
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 12:48 am

Re: Am I The Only One Not Impressed?

Post by Martin Gifford » Fri Nov 10, 2017 9:14 am

I'm very impressed with Ableton 10. Regarding the GUI, they managed to please both camps, which is sensible. I hated the old GUI, but quite like the new GUI.

Then there are the many improvements. And although I'm not usually interested in new plugins, Ableton 10 newbies look like they might actually be good.

One thing that bothers me is that some are saying it won't support 32bit plugins. :evil: I can't imagine people spending $50-$1,000 updating their plugins to 64bit.

ivarin
Posts: 114
Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2014 3:45 pm
Contact:

Re: Am I The Only One Not Impressed?

Post by ivarin » Fri Nov 10, 2017 9:27 am

Martin Gifford wrote:I can't imagine people spending $50-$1,000 updating their plugins to 64bit.
i can't imagine there are companies selling 32 and 64 versions separately.

antic604
Posts: 569
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2017 8:14 am
Location: Warsaw, Poland

Re: Am I The Only One Not Impressed?

Post by antic604 » Fri Nov 10, 2017 9:31 am

Martin Gifford wrote:One thing that bothers me is that some are saying it won't support 32bit plugins. :evil: I can't imagine people spending $50-$1,000 updating their plugins to 64bit.
Why would anyone do that? Just go to where you bought them & d/l the 64bit version.

Martin Gifford
Posts: 425
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 12:48 am

Re: Am I The Only One Not Impressed?

Post by Martin Gifford » Fri Nov 10, 2017 10:23 am

antic604 wrote:Why would anyone do that? Just go to where you bought them & d/l the 64bit version.
Often 64 bit is an upgrade or not available.
Last edited by Martin Gifford on Fri Nov 10, 2017 10:29 am, edited 2 times in total.

antic604
Posts: 569
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2017 8:14 am
Location: Warsaw, Poland

Re: Am I The Only One Not Impressed?

Post by antic604 » Fri Nov 10, 2017 10:25 am

Martin Gifford wrote:
antic604 wrote:Why would anyone do that? Just go to where you bought them & d/l the 64bit version.
Often 64 bit is an upgrade or not available.
Can you give examples of 64bit being an "upgrade".

I can obviously see some plugins not getting 64bit version if development stopped some time ago, but otherwise it's hard to believe any respectable developer would do that.

Martin Gifford
Posts: 425
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 12:48 am

Re: Am I The Only One Not Impressed?

Post by Martin Gifford » Fri Nov 10, 2017 10:30 am

antic604 wrote:Can you give examples of 64bit being an "upgrade".
Maybe I'm wrong. I've only ever used 32 bit.

And isn't there a compatibility problem with Ableton 10? We won't be able to open old projects that have 32 bit plugins?

ivarin
Posts: 114
Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2014 3:45 pm
Contact:

Re: Am I The Only One Not Impressed?

Post by ivarin » Fri Nov 10, 2017 10:57 am

Martin Gifford wrote:
antic604 wrote:And isn't there a compatibility problem with Ableton 10? We won't be able to open old projects that have 32 bit plugins?
plugins in old projects are to be easily replaced with 64bit versions which are 100% available if they're not abandoned long ago.
nowadays even some phones dropped 32bit support, this should have happened even earlier to Live

jonbenderr
Posts: 123
Joined: Sat Feb 27, 2010 11:20 pm

Re: Am I The Only One Not Impressed?

Post by jonbenderr » Fri Nov 10, 2017 1:33 pm

A lot of installers include the 32-bit and 64-bit versions as well as AU and VST3 versions.

If you are anything like me, you may have already installed some if you were not paying attention. :)

Or if you happen to save your installers, you might be able to use those to acquire your 64-bit versions.

theophilus
Posts: 520
Joined: Fri Mar 06, 2009 3:54 pm

Re: Am I The Only One Not Impressed?

Post by theophilus » Fri Nov 10, 2017 4:18 pm

Martin Gifford wrote:
antic604 wrote:Can you give examples of 64bit being an "upgrade".
Maybe I'm wrong. I've only ever used 32 bit.

And isn't there a compatibility problem with Ableton 10? We won't be able to open old projects that have 32 bit plugins?
I opened a set a couple days ago with Live 10 in OSX, that I originally created in Live 9 on Windows. The original set was all VST plugins, and I only have the AU versions for many of those plugins installed on the Mac. With a few minor exceptions, everything just loaded.

I don't think Live 9 could do that, but it appears to be much improved with Live 10 - i remember doing some similar back when I first moved to the Mac, and most of my sets would crash Live when opening.

The few that don't work are ones where they've put (64-bit) in the name; most companies give you separate 32 and 64 bit installers, but the DLL has the same name, it just installs to a different place. Torpedo for instance installs both to the same place, one called Torpedo and the other called Torpedo (64 bit). Since I was using 64 bit, and there's no distinction on Mac, that one didn't load.

You may have a few instances like that; you also may be able to fix them by renaming the DLL (something I just thought of - will have to try that when I get home).

Post Reply