Live 6 complaint !!! File management system is messed up

[Josh Von]

r create a subfolder in the Library, and save your clips there. Live won't create any Project folder then.

Hi A .. there are some good tips in this thread and thats appreciated, but I definitely have to agree with the premise of this thread - not surprised at all that its over 6 pages long and growing

In general I think Ableton has missed the plot on file management, its all way too cumbersome and its constantly throwing up problems for us to solve, rather than manage anything better

Big for instance (and only one of many):

I dont use Ableton's Library. My organizational system was in place before Live 5 and I dont want to change it. My projects and waveforms total over 80+ GB worth of stuff, and its pretty detailed how I have it broken down.

Ive tried (once) to move the entire structure under yours and adapt, but it didnt work out, so I dropped the idea. And Im sure Im far from alone on this, people have existing organizational schemes ... takes a long time to develop and hours and hours sorting things

Now any features that utilize the Ableton Library structure in any way are not available to me or anyone else who has a large existing library structure that they cant adapt.

.

[Amaury]

Maybe (probably) I'm being stupid here, but when I drag a clip or set of clips to the browser, I DON'T want a Project Folder created! I just want the Live clip to be saved into an existing normal folder.

No, not stupid at all imo (are you being sarcastic?)

Default behavior of clips being buried in a project folder / track structure in the browser this defeats the purpose of the clips for me for the most part .... its probably the #1 reason I hardly use the Liveclips feature other than specialty home production

Its not practical live to drill down thru all that to bring back your clips

.

Hi Josh,

How could you imagine being able to collect referenced samples for your clips? Did you like the Live 5 way better, with no way of doing it?

I mean, I fail to see the interest of dropping clips anywhere on the computer - in my case, I have, say, 1 or 2 folders I would drop clips in, with a subfolder structure, in which case, as I indicated before, there is a very easy way to avoid Live creating a folder each time AND to allow to 'inspect' the collection. Other clips I save, are in other projects generally, and on very very rare occasion, I want to save a clip on the Desktop of my computer, mostly for testing purposes...

I'm very ready to learn about your and others workflow and how/why/where they use Live clips.

best,
Amaury

[Tone Deft]

Keep in mind that this is a dialogue between developers and users, not a gripe session. Ableton HQ understands that users are confused and frustrated. We can help them help us. They came up with Live to begin with, they can get this right too.

[Amaury]

I imported a Covert Ops .alp, while that .alp was open a white folder was in the explorer (called 'Current Set' I think, something generic) I did the import and started a new set and that folder was gone. I could reintsall a .alp and give a better description, but I'd rather not mess with a working setup. Anyway, one of the great mysteries to me.

I can't tell exactly how you did things, but here how I guess it should work:

When you unpack the .alp file, you should choose a location outside the Library - the computer desktop for example. The resulting folder is a 'Project folder', thus the white colour and custom icon.
Then, these third party packs are generally meant to end up into the Library, so the thing to do, is to locate the folder in the Live Browser, right-click on it and choose 'manage project', and then to choose 'export to Library' in the file Manager.

The files from the Project will be imported into the Library, retaining the same folder sructure as you see in the Project folder you just unpacked.

Once this is done, you can delete that unpacked Project Folder from your desktop. The files are into the Library. (Operators A and B, I guess that's how your packs work, if it is wrong, please correct me!)

Regards,
Amaury

[Josh Von]

It is only today , when I wanted to use a take from a shorter version of the tune, realized how "innovative" messed up the new system is.
.
I have all my samples well organized since years in my sample library, named with details on separate partition that I can copy, transfer without messing up to any HD, or computer. It is E:\Samples\....so I can just keep on adding any new material. Simple way that most of professionals use, such partition needs hardly defrag, paths are defined and application independent.
Only today, looking for a take to use it in another version of a song I saw the song folder empty, instead everything used / unused is in the recorded folder it is like a big trash bin, damn innovative, thank you very much !
Any song will have samples from my library and recorded for that song. I never ever use any Live preset, wav or whatever from Lives library. Is it that now I am forced , like it or not to follow a concept of some developer ? No other options ? Is it the idea to tie the user to Live instead of letting him use general, widely universal system of archiving that is application independent.
Maybe I am too stupid but the fact is I am wasting time writing this and and trying to find out solution, instead of doing my work.
Are the days of Live as application to be used byr professionals over and instead it is club for betatesters geeks playing games with some developers with limited awareness of what using computer for producing music is.
I am practically oriented so it is not a question to discuss or complain really, if it is messed up the way this company develops I got to live with it .
All I would expect is perhaps someone who works similar way ( I guess Tarekith) could suggest some workable solutions. I am not keen to change completly my main application, hope there is some way to continue with Live though as for the moment it does not look to bright for me.

Its interesting that people are independently thinking exactly the same things on this (i posted my last post before reading down and finding at least 2 people that already said the same thing!):

Ableton should take note. rikhray totally understands the heart of the problem with this IMO and it is this:

How does a company that is almost defined - in a very practical sense - by an open platform, open source philosophy (arguably, to a fault) ...

... how does it happen that they completely do a 180 degree turn on file management and make it proprietary, cumbersome, and boxed in system.

This is what some of us are trying to figure out. In the meantime we're not using the Library system or hardly any of the file management features ... they are better off avoided imo, too often create more trouble than theyre worth.

.

.

[Josh Von]

you can still view samples that are unused when you do file management and then project management. But you'll have to manually select and move to trash the files from your browser. Again, more flexible, but total PITA.

Totally agreed

.

[Amaury]

r create a subfolder in the Library, and save your clips there. Live won't create any Project folder then.

Hi A .. there are some good tips in this thread and thats appreciated, but I definitely have to agree with the premise of this thread - not surprised at all that its over 6 pages long and growing

In general I think Ableton has missed the plot on file management, its all way too cumbersome and its constantly throwing up problems for us to solve, rather than manage anything better

Big for instance (and only one of many):

I dont use Ableton's Library. My organizational system was in place before Live 5 and I dont want to change it. My projects and waveforms total over 80+ GB worth of stuff, and its pretty detailed how I have it broken down.

Ive tried (once) to move the entire structure under yours and adapt, but it didnt work out, so I dropped the idea. And Im sure Im far from alone on this, people have existing organizational schemes ... takes a long time to develop and hours and hours sorting things

Now any features that utilize the Ableton Library structure in any way are not available to me or anyone else who has a large existing library structure that they cant adapt.

.

Notice: I'm really only trying to understand and help people understand, and mostly am motivated by my own experience as a user. I totally respect your position and other's if it is well thought after considering the system, I don't want to argue whether it is good or bad. But I'm interested to hear why.

Question: you have your samples organized in a folder structure, right? Have you thought of (copying first) moving that to the Library, or moving the Library to the location of that sample collection and merging both. It would have two advantages:
-when you collect and save a Project, you could choose not to include the files from your collection more easily
-if you would choose to include these samples 'from the Library', the resulting sub folder structure into your Project would be the same as your own.

best,
Amaury

[Josh Von]

How could you imagine being able to collect referenced samples for your clips? Did you like the Live 5 way better, with no way of doing it?

I'm very ready to learn about your and others workflow and how/why/where they use Live clips.

Personally I had / have two main purposes for the Liveclips feature,

1 - Saving individual sounds / elements from a project for later use in another project (ie. a particular Snare, or Bass, or Lead sound with all associated factors to recreate the sound), and

2 - Occasionally saving the clips from two or more full DJ length tracks to remember / re-create a particular mix


In the first case I have never ended up using this (potentially) amazing feature, because the process of bring back the clips from my browser - or previewing them - took so long and locked up my machine so badly it was unworkable.

So, the Liveclips feature was dead for me - completely broken. I have a new machine now - two of them - so this isnt so much of an issue anymore

In the second case, I end up not doing this - because dragging the clips from the Session view to the browser, creates a new directory structure under my existing directory structure:

Track Library / Techhouse ... becomes ..

Track Library / Techhouse / X Project (or whatever) / Track Name

The two extra folders force you to grab the trackball and drill down to find what you saved. In the case where you have saved two tracks that contained special FX or VST's etc in the insert, this is understandable

However for the straight audio file, like a DJ track, where you are only concerned with things like Loop location, Pitch info, ie clip data ... its redundant and a timewaster, and more complicated than its worth.

I think the Liveclips concept needs to be more flexible - we need Clips that save the inserts and Clips that just save the clip data. Theyre not the same

.

[Amaury]

How could you imagine being able to collect referenced samples for your clips? Did you like the Live 5 way better, with no way of doing it?

I'm very ready to learn about your and others workflow and how/why/where they use Live clips.

Personally I had / have two main purposes for the Liveclips feature,

1 - Saving individual sounds / elements from a project for later use in another project (ie. a particular Snare, or Bass, or Lead sound with all associated factors to recreate the sound), and

2 - Occasionally saving the clips from two or more full DJ length tracks to remember / re-create a particular mix


In the first case I have never ended up using this (potentially) amazing feature, because the process of bring back the clips from my browser - or previewing them - took so long and locked up my machine so badly it was unworkable.

So, the Liveclips feature was dead for me - completely broken. I have a new machine now - two of them - so this isnt so much of an issue anymore

In the second case, I end up not doing this - because dragging the clips from the Session view to the browser, creates a new directory structure under my existing directory structure:

Track Library / Techhouse ... becomes ..

Track Library / Techhouse / X Project (or whatever) / Track Name

The two extra folders force you to grab the trackball and drill down to find what you saved. In the case where you have saved two tracks that contained special FX or VST's etc in the insert, this is understandable

However for the straight audio file, like a DJ track, where you are only concerned with things like Loop location, Pitch info, ie clip data ... its redundant and a timewaster, and more complicated than its worth.

I think the Liveclips concept needs to be more flexible - we need Clips that save the inserts and Clips that just save the clip data. Theyre not the same

.

What about making your 'Track Library' folder a Live Project folder, by copying one of the 'Ableton Project Info' into it? As an intermediary solution?

best,
Amaury

[Josh Von]

Question: you have your samples organized in a folder structure, right? Have you thought of (copying first) moving that to the Library, or moving the Library to the location of that sample collection and merging both.

Yes, Im pretty sure that this is what I tried as soon as Live 5 introduced the Library.

As far as I recall it ended up breaking something really, really bad and caused me over a full days work. Im terrified to even consider trying this again

I've learned to avoid the Library and all its features at almost any cost, because every time I have tried to dig into it and use it for any reason, its cost me time that was completely wasted

Also:

We (myself and others on the board) have pointed out that Live re-installs are dangerous to anyone dependent on thier Library, because Live doesn't have a way to point you to an existing Library structure

It wants to point you to a new Library location - forces you to choose one, and doesnt have "use existing location" option.

SO not only would my 80+ GB existing structure be lost again, I would have yet another place on my harddrive(s) with a spurious Live library. I think Im up to about 23 or more of those now, Ive given up on trying to track them down and delete them.

It would have two advantages:
-when you collect and save a Project, you could choose not to include the files from your collection more easily
-if you would choose to include these samples 'from the Library', the resulting sub folder structure into your Project would be the same as your own.

Yes, these kinds of things are among the top reasons why I immediately tried to do this a couple of years ago when the Library first came about.

But again - the experience was so traumatic and wasted so much of my time - and subsequent realizations about the system only reinforced why it would be a bad idea (see above) ... I never tried again

I would have to say that I do manage without it (Live Libary) most of the time, I do things manually and end up wasting about 5x as much disk space as I probably need to.

But this is a small tradeoff to be able to work without something broken, or confusing, or spending hours or days setting something up only to find out its going to hose your whole workflow

.

.

[Josh Von]

What about making your 'Track Library' folder a Live Project folder, by copying one of the 'Ableton Project Info' into it? As an intermediary solution?

best,
Amaury

Yes, thanks ... I saw this earlier in the thread and Im going to give it a shot.

I'll test it out in a bit. If it works and is useful that will be great

.

[rikhyray]

I gave it a serious try, being fed up with wasting so much of time with searching for files to delete, reading Amaurys posts again, manual, etc, etc. So watching the Oscars made serious reorganising of my live Library.
Disappointing, I does not really work, the packing could be usefull but didn't work well. Amaury why don't you write specifically what is the pack`s limit ? 2G, 3 G. Afetr waiting half an hour Live tells you that is cannot pack.
every thing File Management does takes enormous amount of time.
Since you ask here my answer, the new system does not bring much except taking my time.

I could have done same with Live 5. Make new folder, name it- 5 sec, save all the sets that have something in common ( what you would call project) and save them as self contained there. I am absolutely sure it would take me a third of time all these procedures took with Live 6. Most important I could do most of file moving while working on something else Live 6 is like a romance turned sour- secretary who wants her full attention "will you divorce your wife and marry me ?"

I absolutely see no slightest benefit in doing it through "collect and save". Live searching help ? You must be kidding, using my brain, doing it manually or with help of any search is much faster.
The previous system was typical "Live like" - simple and clear.
Mind you, and all at Ableton, it is the biggest mistake (of sorts) of Logic and Cubase, making thing supposedly better, while in reality unnecessary complicated.
The original reason why lots of people, including myself, gave up those programms, was the simplicity and clarity, allowing fast response, letting us do creative work focused on the music without being, diverted by "have to click this or that"
Because of this we compromise, definitely missing lots of functionalities of those excellent but feature overloaded programs.
I think I earned the right to give a judgment, since I gave at least 12 hours to learn and try this system, I done my best to love it, like it, use it.
Conclusion- it was waste of developers time and waste of users time to try to adopt to it.

Dont get me started on the tarsh bin called "recorded" and finding unused files. That is something driving me nuts and reason enough to gave up this program altogether. I abolutely see no way to handle it.
Only option- doing all recordings in other application Wavelab or whatever. to have some control of that takes that can grow to occupy half of HD in no time.

Amaury explain me why it is better to have everything thrown in same "trash bag" instead of like before in "XXXX sounds" and simple option of deleting before closing recording session. It is the away any application does. Even being carefull and renaming tarck by any single take does not help since Live writes those digitis before 000XXX before the name anyway so there is no benefit of precisely naming takes since they will be listed in the "recorded bin" according to those numbers not given names
even using abacus, pen and paper, you thorwe the waste after work is finished.
BTW. I followed your instructionAmaury exactly, and it does not work, manager shows no unused files but they are there unassigned to any set. Might be bug, can happen. But why the whole thing ?Now coming bug fixing, wasting human resources when that whole thing worked OK, everybody used replace and edit button, I never heard anyone complaining about what you called "annoying window" Now I would calle it missed "blessed" window.
Why Ableton tries to reinvent the wheel ?

I suspect that most people realize late what the new system does, they just carry on like they used to and then the file management surprise hits them

[Josh Von]

every thing File Management does takes enormous amount of time.

Yes.

The original reason why lots of people, including myself, gave up those programms, was the simplicity and clarity, allowing fast response, letting us do creative work focused on the music without being, diverted by "have to click this or that"

Here is where the dilemma comes in, and I will repeat this here:

Its not "number of features" or "number of options" that is the enemy

Its how those features are

1 - Implemented ("what is the most intuitive way to accomplish the task"), and

2 - Accessed ("what is the most intuitive, unobtrusive way to access that feature")

Then of course

3. Efficiency ("how quickly does it work") and

4. Reliability ("how stable is the implementation")


I can definitely say, Live raised the bar - in basic design and feature set - and is absolutely brilliant in meeting most of those requirements for a large majority of its features.

However with the File Management (and unfortunately, Audio stability and system resource management) its almost like it was designed by another company. Sad to say I think it fails right now on all four accounts .

On the topic of "feature bloat" - criteria 1 and 2 (Implementation and Accessabilty) tell the whole story as far as usability.

It just takes a little thought, and possibly some user workshops / testing ... to decide what it is people are trying to do, and come up with creative ways to get them in the program in a way that lets you do that with the minimum amount of hassle

It really appears that this was not done with the File Management - like I said it seems like it was designed by some other company or was rushed and done "by committee"

.

.

[rikhyray]

it seems like it was designed by some other company or was rushed and done "by committee"

.

.

Exactly my impression, it is so unlike Live

[Tarekith]

Interesting that you mention the reinstall issue, as that's a fear of mine too. I have to reinstall OS's a lot to beta test certain gear from a fresh install, so this is a concern for me too. Therefore I just keep my sample library on an external HD and competely ignore Live's library. Actually, usually I delete most of it to free up some HD space on my laptop.