Poll : rate Live 9 . Vote now!

[Scaper7]

A bit OT ...

if it had detatchable windows / dual monitor support i would've blindly dropped cash straight away, but there is really nothing there that interests me in any big way except maybe clip automation that earned a star .. 2 stars lets hope bitwig cuts the mustard

I was surprised to find out recently that M4L allows full multi monitor support and floating windows since V.8.

[c33]

in 3 years we have seen another company start from scratch and add everything that was available within live plus more than even this release offers.
its really starting to look like the people that left ableton for bitwig were the real back bone of the company.

No, it's starting to look like the people on this forum who have nothing but a never ending list of complaints for Ableton do not represent a general consensus and are merely the ones who bark the loudest. Like you. Talking about backbones of companies and touting software you've never even tried.

[lalo]

Great update!
But from an improvising point of view i miss the following things.

1. Automatable Send Pre/Post switch
2. Automatable show UI of Plugins
3. A feature to undock devices from the bottom and have them as floating windows
4. Loop mode for unwarped clips
5. Midi/Key Automation for custom UI objects in Max4Live
6. OSC Learn
7. Edit all the fields in the Midi/Key assignments window

I'll give a 3...and wait for Live 10

[lalo]

4. Loop mode for unwarped clips

We already have that; its called Simpler.

7. Edit all the fields in the Midi/Key assignments window

This I don't quite get; what exactly is it you'd want to edit in there?

Simpler is not like having a clip shown on the track.
I.e. i want to record several stuff during the live performance and that stuff is not related to tempo but i need it to loop.

If you have a complex setup with lot of parameters mapped is very confortable to i.e. change midi channel and midi cc number for individual parameters or for group of parameters.

My typical use of Live is in totally improvised music with very few stuff prepared before ( just effect and instrument chains ). So for my particular use i need flexibility.
Ableton Live has a lot of flexibility but it lacks just some features to match the needs of non-dj non-straight-beat-oriented stuff.
I confess that i jumped on the Live boat after the Max4Live stuff came out.
I just like to see more detailed flexibility.
The dj-oriented stuff would remain intact but we could have other options .

[lalo]

4. Loop mode for unwarped clips

We already have that; its called Simpler.

7. Edit all the fields in the Midi/Key assignments window

This I don't quite get; what exactly is it you'd want to edit in there?

about simpler...another request

Sample Loop Points and Playing directions available as Midi/Key learnable parameters ( always for flexibility sake )

[OzWozEre]

So if THAT is also included in Suite 9 then that sheds a whole new light on the deal IMVHO. At least for me. I assume this includes Orchestral Percussion (E 97,-), Orchestral Strings (E 119,-), Orchestral Brass (E 119) and Orchestral Woodwinds (E 119,-).

Edit2: This is indeed the case, the confirmation for this can be found here.

OMG! That's amazing news -- thanks so much for investing that and letting us know!!!

I totally missed that, I just assumed that the Essentials SC was just more of the same (not that that a bad thing but still...)

Funny, I have been studing/researching videos about various Orchestral Sample Packs -- man, they are frikken expensive! -- now I don't have to worry about shelling out another $500+ bucks for that stuff, "just" so I can add some lushcious strings to my mix!

I NOW GIVE IT 6 FUCKING POINTS!!!

[Angstrom]

also included in Suite 9 - Orchestral Percussion (E 97,-), Orchestral Strings (E 119,-), Orchestral Brass (E 119) and Orchestral Woodwinds (E 119,-).

I can see it all now ....


The New Hot Genre of 2013 : Orchestral Dubstep

"Nobody knows where it came from, or how it got so popular, but it's here. Orchestral dubstep. Arpegiated clarinets are in, and so are reversed distorted sousaphones and gated wub wub tympani . Looks like Orchstep is this years mysterious hot trend! See our new guide to programming Glockenspiel parts, on page 72 "

[OzWozEre]

^^^ HAHAHA!!!

[v00d00ppl]

Two stars simply because its the 9th version of the software and there is no step sequencer available without having to shell out 200-300 bucks for max4live. That's on top of the cost of an upgrade or new license.

Instead of doing that I had to shell out 300 for a used Arturia spark and that got my step sequencing fever taken care of.

300 bucks for a step sequencer when you can buy beat making programs that include step sequencing already.

Geist for 250
Maschine mikro for 350
Reason 6.5 for 350 and reason essentials for 250
FL studio for 99

When live 8 first came out I paid about 250 for my 'suite' download upgrade and then max comes out a little later for 300 dollars. Now 9 will come out and still no built in step sequencer. There's nothing else I wanted max for except to step sequence. I know that I have a chance to get an awesome discount as a suite owner, but how about just building a step sequencer natively into live without forcing me to buy 50GB of samples that I will rarely use? This is a dance music workstation isn't it? If you are on your 9th version you might want to consider who was including step sequencing since day 1.

I'll probably get live 9 upgrade, but I'm getting the most basic upgrade since all I care about is glue and the new EQ8.

I already own melodyne editor so I have been doing the whole audio to midi thing for a while.

[lalo]

Simpler is not like having a clip shown on the track.
I.e. i want to record several stuff during the live performance and that stuff is not related to tempo but i need it to loop.

Ah yes, I can see that. And of course; it would also be a lot easier if you can record, then immediately use your material instead of having to (manually) dump things into Simpler devices first. I see your point here.

thanks for understanding peter

I confess that i jumped on the Live boat after the Max4Live stuff came out.
I just like to see more detailed flexibility.
The dj-oriented stuff would remain intact but we could have other options .

Right, thanks for explanation. I can see what you're hinting at, though can't really comment on it because my workflow is obviously quite different than yours. But I do understand the points you raised above a whole better.

and thanks again

[Rosko]

Would you say that all musical styles could enjoy M4L library devices equally, or would you say that M4L devices favour a certain kind of music?

It's my impression that M4L devices favour people interested in producing a certain type of electronic music and can make good use of the Stochastic sequencers, buffer shuffling, randomisation of parameters, simple "808" style drum voice generators, etc.

At the moment I'm producing music that is somewhere between the punk surf music of Dick Dale, the film scores of Morricone and Budd, and some rough garage punk like the Stooges. Consequently I have found nothing in the library of devices (eg at max4live.com) that appeals to me, or the kind of music I am interested in making.

I understand that most people here, and the users of live are interested in making electronic music so a library simple retro electronic drums and buffer shufflers will be both welcome and appreciated. This inclusion of M4L will be great news for a large section of Live users.
however, personally the library offers me nothing more than is offered by a simple VST.

Btw - I use Liquidsonics Reverberate as my convo reverb

I am glad for you if you enjoy some aspect of Max for live. That's great for you.
I have tried it, and tried to incorporate it many times. I am still trying. I'm still not into it. Sorry I can't conform to what you want me to like.

If You like it, that's good ... for you.
Congrats on getting a good new thing in your DAW, which you like.

Just interested in knowing why you choose live over other sequencers? I can understand that features will hold little of no value if you aren't going to use them but live is to sequencers what a 909 is to drum kits. I'm sure there is a good reason you choose live but surely you can see my point, you will probably rarely be happy with the direction ableton go. M4L is great for people who make a broad range of electronic music not just one type, what it offers me personally are some great integrated midi effects & utilities that i would not be able to get outside of live/M4L & all this is now for free.

[Angstrom]

Would you say that all musical styles could enjoy M4L library devices equally, or would you say that M4L devices favour a certain kind of music?.

Just interested in knowing why you choose live over other sequencers? I can understand that features will hold little of no value if you aren't going to use them but live is to sequencers what a 909 is to drum kits. I'm sure there is a good reason you choose live but surely you can see my point, you will probably rarely be happy with the direction ableton go. M4L is great for people who make a broad range of electronic music not just one type, what it offers me personally are some great integrated midi effects & utilities that i would not be able to get outside of live/M4L & all this is now for free.

I chose Live for a few reasons.

Firstly - flexibility
because by working in session I could try different parts with different lengths against one section of a song. By using session to try out variations on a part I could quickly and easily determine the right part and apply it. I found that very difficult to do in other applications.

Secondly, - immediacy
because Live offered immediacy and intuitive control over complex functions. For example - Routing from one track to another, or sending sends back on themselves - these things are often possible in other apps but tend to be convoluted processes, difficult to find or control. Whereas Live offered an immediate access to powerful functions through an interface that used repeated learnable interaction patterns (learn it once, reapply it everywhere) and to obtain complex results. Everything is intuitive and learnable through experimentation, nothing "fails silently".

Thirdly power.
Lives racks and macros allowed user creation of complex synths and presets which are Lmost modular in nature, using simple drag and drop of "Devices". To make powerful user synths, effects, midi controls etc. please look for my generative music tutorial on this forum to see what I mean. Native power!



I'll not dwell on why I think M4L breaks that pattern, because people see it as an "attack" on them, their music, or their preferences. Only that FOR ME I feel Live could have become more modular in a way which continued with the Intuitive & Learnable strategy they originally attracted me with.

For me, and me only, yes it is a shame, and yes I am now looking around for another intuitive, learnable creative and musical application. Please though, I am allowed to express a preference for my own musical creation. And my preference is for intuitive interfaces which build upon prior models, simple but powerful. I respect that others fully love and enjoy Max and find it amazing. That's good for them.

Please respect that for me it is a process of watching a tool I loved head down a path I do not love. I love modular, I love routing one thing to another, I love powerful control over the creative process in a musical way. But I do not feel that this solution is a good one. I re-try Max once every six months. I would love to love it. But so far, I find it obtuse and non-musical, or the presets are determinedly designed for music which is not mine.

I respect other people's right to enjoy what the program, does and how it behaves, and how it benefits their music. I still wish a route had been taken which was more musical. FOR ME.

[Rosko]

Would you say that all musical styles could enjoy M4L library devices equally, or would you say that M4L devices favour a certain kind of music?.

Just interested in knowing why you choose live over other sequencers? I can understand that features will hold little of no value if you aren't going to use them but live is to sequencers what a 909 is to drum kits. I'm sure there is a good reason you choose live but surely you can see my point, you will probably rarely be happy with the direction ableton go. M4L is great for people who make a broad range of electronic music not just one type, what it offers me personally are some great integrated midi effects & utilities that i would not be able to get outside of live/M4L & all this is now for free.

I chose Live for a few reasons.

Firstly - flexibility
because by working in session I could try different parts with different lengths against one section of a song. By using session to try out variations on a part I could quickly and easily determine the right part and apply it. I found that very difficult to do in other applications.

Secondly, - immediacy
because Live offered immediacy and intuitive control over complex functions. For example - Routing from one track to another, or sending sends back on themselves - these things are often possible in other apps but tend to be convoluted processes, difficult to find or control. Whereas Live offered an immediate access to powerful functions through an interface that used repeated learnable interaction patterns (learn it once, reapply it everywhere) and to obtain complex results. Everything is intuitive and learnable through experimentation, nothing "fails silently".

Thirdly power.
Lives racks and macros allowed user creation of complex synths and presets which are Lmost modular in nature, using simple drag and drop of "Devices". To make powerful user synths, effects, midi controls etc. please look for my generative music tutorial on this forum to see what I mean. Native power!



I'll not dwell on why I think M4L breaks that pattern, because people see it as an "attack" on them, their music, or their preferences. Only that FOR ME I feel Live could have become more modular in a way which continued with the Intuitive & Learnable strategy they originally attracted me with.

For me, and me only, yes it is a shame, and yes I am now looking around for another intuitive, learnable creative and musical application. Please though, I am allowed to express a preference for my own musical creation. And my preference is for intuitive interfaces which build upon prior models, simple but powerful. I respect that others fully love and enjoy Max and find it amazing. That's good for them.

Please respect that for me it is a process of watching a tool I loved head down a path I do not love. I love modular, I love routing one thing to another, I love powerful control over the creative process in a musical way. But I do not feel that this solution is a good one. I re-try Max once every six months. I would love to love it. But so far, I find it obtuse and non-musical, or the presets are determinedly designed for music which is not mine.

I respect other people's right to enjoy what the program, does and how it behaves, and how it benefits their music. I still wish a route had been taken which was more musical. FOR ME.

yeah I'm hoping it becomes more modular as well, Live 10 maybe.

[sporkles]

I just have to say that I'm really stoked about envelope automation in Session view clips. This is probably going to make me spend a lot more time in Session view (and I don't mean that in a negative sense!). All this time, there's simply been this limitation that I've accepted and worked around, never realising how important Session automation would be to me.

[SonnyBonnier]

Session View is the business. It's one of the main reasons I converted to Live. Then I started slipping into my old habits from Cubase/Reason/Reaper, going into Arrange too early.

Then I got the Launchpad! I was so into it I devised an ultra-quick way to bring a song back from Arrange and into Session. I found out how to automate scene launching with follow actions. I found a way to make scenes launch while still keeping a couple of tracks playing in Arrange. I learned how to copy automation into Session, which will now be redundant. I wrote it all up as a tutorial of course, with videos.

So, work in Session. Capture scenes, rearrange them, you just can't do it in other DAWs.

Yes, session view is the ----