APC40 v.s PUSH

[humnumb]

i also think that push is much more set up as a rival to maschine than to the apc40.

Not much of a rival considering Push
- doesn't automap to third party plugins
- has no step automation (step parameter lock)
- no waveforms on the hardware LCD when sample editing
- still requires you to use the mouse/trackpad for things like opening/closing plugin windows
- knobs are unfortunately positioned above the LCD screen
- way overpriced in comparison to Maschine

Machine < -- > (Drums software) --> ??? (Where's the DAW?)

Sorry but Maschine's software is far from a mere "drum software" even if it's not a full-on DAW. It's a fully featured sampling workstation/host instrument.

[JuanSOLO]

Not much of a rival considering Push
- doesn't automap to third party plugins
- has no step automation (step parameter lock)
- no waveforms on the hardware LCD when sample editing
- still requires you to use the mouse/trackpad for things like opening/closing plugin windows
- knobs are unfortunately positioned above the LCD screen
- way overpriced in comparison to Maschine

-Maschine automapping, Live's Racks (bluehand)
-no step automation? There is recordable automation which could be hacked with M4L creating Step Automation. I mean the APC40 and mark egloffs device has provided step automation before Maschine.
-the LCD screen is not a "cant show waveform" kinda thing
-I can open and close windows with my APC40 using M4L or Bomes
-knob positioning will not prove be crippling whatsoever
-Maschine cost 649 dollars, "way overpriced" is a total exaggeration.

Lastly Machine users will be able to emulate PUSH, and vise versa, it's in the programs/scripts people.

[condra]

Well they are two different things, or three different things when you include MPC Renaissance

They each have strenghts and weaknesses, but over the next couple of years there will be plenty of people who want an integrated hard/soft solution who will be deciding between the three, so I do think it is fair to compare them.

Right now, Maschine has the benefit of 99% mouseless operation, but the DAW is very basic compared to Live, and the learning curve is pretty steep.

The Renny has a soundcard built in, but from what I've seen, it will require plenty of mouse use to get things done and finished.

For those of us already used to Live, Push blows the competition out of the water as far as I'm concerned.

[OzWozEre]

Machine < -- > (Drums software) --> ??? (Where's the DAW?)

Sorry but Maschine's software is far from a mere "drum software" even if it's not a full-on DAW. It's a fully featured sampling workstation/host instrument.

I hear ya, what I'm trying to say is that Maschine will only take you so far, you will still need to dump-to-daw at some point, whereas with Push you are "already there" -- at least this is my understanding...

[JuanSOLO]

-- at least this is my understanding...

it's not just your understanding, it's true.

[humnumb]

-Maschine automapping, Live's Racks (bluehand)

Maschine automaps any loaded plugin, without any setup beforehand. The automapping can be customized as well.

Push: "With VSTs, we currently can't access parameters in an automatic and consistent way, as we can with our own devices, so you would be left with a way to load a VST, but not control it automatically." viewtopic.php?p=1445043#p1445043

-no step automation? There is recordable automation which could be hacked with M4L creating Step Automation. I mean the APC40 and mark egloffs device has provided step automation before Maschine.

We're talking about built-in features, not hacking with an additional tool that would still require the Suite version of Live 9.

Push: "We don't have per step automation of devices (also known as parameter lock)" viewtopic.php?p=1445659#p1445659

-the LCD screen is not a "cant show waveform" kinda thing

The Push doesn't show waveforms on the LCD screen whether or not it can or cannot do it technically in theory.

-I can open and close windows with my APC40 using M4L or Bomes

Again, I'm talking about comparing it to built-in features of Maschine, not using additional tools like M4L or Bomes.

-knob positioning will not prove be crippling whatsoever

You sound so certain even though you've never tried it. It might not be "crippling" but I can see why the unfortunate design decision might end up being annoying for many.

-Maschine cost 649 dollars, "way overpriced" is a total exaggeration.

Not at all. Maschine's price always includes the software license.

[humnumb]

Right now, Maschine has the benefit of 99% mouseless operation, but the DAW is very basic compared to Live, and the learning curve is pretty steep.

Huh? Maschine's learning curve is far from steep, especially compared to Live. In fact, Maschine (which is not a DAW) is about the easiest thing to learn, especially if you're already familiar with Live.

[humnumb]

Machine < -- > (Drums software) --> ??? (Where's the DAW?)

Sorry but Maschine's software is far from a mere "drum software" even if it's not a full-on DAW. It's a fully featured sampling workstation/host instrument.

I hear ya, what I'm trying to say is that Maschine will only take you so far, you will still need to dump-to-daw at some point, whereas with Push you are "already there" -- at least this is my understanding...

If Live is your daw of choice. I prefer to drag my arrangement from Maschine into Logic for mixdowns. Also, it's not true that you "need" to dump to a DAW at some point. You can take it all the way within Maschine from mixing to mastering. It's all a matter of preference. What it doesn't have is a linear arrange view with audio tracks that span across scenes and all the tools associated with that you expected from a full-on DAW. And I prefer Logic for that because it's far superior to Live in that department.

[JuanSOLO]

True, I am citing a lot of workarounds, yet a lot is already possible with workarounds.

Not sure the importance of opening and closing plug ins is, when it seems like the point is to focus on the hardware, not the laptop. Yet for those who use that feature in Maschine is that a deal breaker when considering PUSH? I'd say unlikely.

Pending on how I hold my hand, I can block the view above the knobs or below, you can only look at one thing at a time anyways, and if your just dead set on knowing the parameter value visually move thy fucking hand so you can see it? I dont need Push to figure this out, im not dumb.

Not sure if you are familiar with Hanz Pertovs APC40 script but it provides "built-in" features to the APC40.

Someone like Stray, will no doubt modify the script if they want to add step automation, like "build it in"

Automapping in Maschine is only valuable to me if I customize it, which takes about as long as it does to configure a VST rack in Ableton and get 8 banks of 8 parameters via Shift+device button on my APC40.

Seems to me people are so eager to be spoon fed rather than learning the program and what it does and doesnt do.

[deva]

Pending on how I hold my hand, I can block the view above the knobs or below, you can only look at one thing at a time anyways, and if your just dead set on knowing the parameter value visually move thy fucking hand so you can see it?

I find the display in front of the knob is more visible... My guess is that I will prefer it that way on Push

[humnumb]

True, I am citing a lot of workarounds, yet a lot is already possible with workarounds.

And a lot of people don't want to bother with hacks and workarounds, which is why they might be interested to know about the built-in "out of the box" capabilities of Push and its limitations compared to already existing solutions like Maschine.

[JuanSOLO]

um, copy/paste modified remote script you downloaded from internet and choose it in Live control surface selector.
thats a bother?

let me put it this way.
PUSH will inevitably offer step automation, even though you can achieve the same basic results with recording the automation using the knob.

Maschine will never offer 4x4 drum pads on the left, 4x4 extra pads? on the right, sitting under 2 rows of 8 steps (32 steps), ALL on DECK right in front of you for editing, all seamlessly incorporated into Live.
That alone squashes Maschine for step sequencing.
In fact, it's the most robust solution for step sequencing available, unless you build your own.

[humnumb]

2 rows of 8 steps (32 steps)

That's 16 steps, not 32.

[JuanSOLO]

I ment 4 rows of 8 steps, sorry.
but yeah thats 32 steps.

[delicioso]

Maschine will never offer 4x4 drum pads on the left, 4x4 extra pads? on the right, sitting under 2 rows of 8 steps (32 steps), ALL on DECK right in front of you for editing, all seamlessly incorporated into Live.
That alone squashes Maschine for step sequencing.

It doesn't if the ability to have step automation built-in like Maschine is important to what you do, or any of the other Maschine features that Live/Push doesn't have, as someone already mentioned above.

The Push controller could never replace Maschine for me because I'm one of those people who doesn't like to use the mouse or stare at the computer screen constantly to make music. Live and Maschine are two different beasts that work well together and compliment each other nicely for what each lacks.