Are you talking about the updates to 9 in particular, or the Push functionality?"In a gold rush, sell shovels"
Also, very aptly put
Are you talking about the updates to 9 in particular, or the Push functionality?"In a gold rush, sell shovels"
Lol, no I mean that I already have an audio interface, and with 'push' it looks like Ableton's going to start developing branded hardware. Sorry for the confusionSzuumm wrote:Where did you get an Ableton audio interface? I'd like to check that out.dnbhallifax wrote:An Ableton audio interface? Got one already
Definitely, Studio One runs sooo much faster and lighter than Live! And once you bookmark your folders, their browser's miles better than Live 9's by milessimpli.cissimus wrote: The new from ground up programmed software of Bitwig
is up to date and uses the latest technology to make use of today's processors.
Live's software isn't competitive in that way and full of bugs.
I can run the same amount of VST's in StudioOne at half CPU !
beatz01 wrote:... the pathetic Steve Jobs wannabe presentation and so on, it all sreams:
"We want to be Apple!"
one of the biggest problems of our time. marketing is the enemy. I admire RME for being such a reliable, solid but also damn successful company. Furthermore for me it's the best buying experience to buy their gear because I know it's not a 50% discount event around the corner and the gear works near to perfection (at least for me).beatz01 wrote:My point was that it looks as if Ableton want a bigger share of the prosumer/consumer market and hence the positioning in the more lifestyle/fun gadgets/"everything is so easy"(although it's not) category.I'm not saying L9 IS easier than L8 or anything, i'm talking about a shift in their MARKETING.
I would say that for both products. When they considered what was important to include and what their prospective purchasers might value, it seems that things like " accessing and previewing partner content" is top of the list, while "managing existing/user content" wasn't actually on the list.agent314 wrote:Are you talking about the updates to 9 in particular, or the Push functionality?"In a gold rush, sell shovels"
Also, very aptly put
Very interesting observation. I wonder to what extent this was an issue of fiscal prudence/necessity (i.e. leverage an incidental income stream rather than rely on the big bang at new release time) vs. an effort to push Ableton as a brand for sound resources rather than strictly the DAW toolI would say that for both products. When they considered what was important to include and what their prospective purchasers might value, it seems that things like " accessing and previewing partner content" is top of the list, while "managing existing/user content" wasn't actually on the list.
The new browser didn't prioritise user content, user organisation methods, user creative requirements and circumstances. Instead it prioritised partner content, partner organisation methods, partner requirements.
Notice how the author/creator is just a nested folder called"other" in their arbitrary categories , and know where you stand in their conception.
Of all of our various working methods, situations, musics, organisation methods. Whose does this conform to?
Or do we conform to it?
Where do you mean? I don't have any Other folders in my browser?Notice how the author/creator is just a nested folder called"other" in their arbitrary categories , and know where you stand in their conception.
That's sort of my point. If these guys really jumped ship to start Bitwig, i would wager to say that it's because they were probably being stifled by development priorities that shifted toward developing "strategically designed" bullshit like the new browser (as so elegantly broken down by Angstrom) and no interest in new ideas that might actually lead to anything innovative or practical.agent314 wrote:Thinking about my analogy earlier, maybe it could be the other way around
Maybe the Bitwig guys who left Ableton are the ones with the real original idea, and it's their baby and a genuine expression of their desires, the way Live used to be for them.
Maybe 9 will become the app that lost vision, because it went with the dudes to Bitwig...
No, the edit was proof that you stood out in my mind as probably the most consistently childish.simpli.cissimus wrote:...and that Edit is just a proof that the way you mentioned me shows that you're the one who's childish !SpeedKing wrote: EDIT: Obviously I'm not saying that anyone who doesn't LOVE Ableton is childish, but I'm speaking more of the simpli.cissimus' of the world here.
Had the impression to read a Kardashian tweet...
To underline how you nailed it, lets look at the new stuff in Live9agent314 wrote:Thinking about my analogy earlier, maybe it could be the other way around
Maybe the Bitwig guys who left Ableton are the ones with the real original idea, and it's their baby and a genuine expression of their desires, the way Live used to be for them.
Maybe 9 will become the app that lost vision, because it went with the dudes to Bitwig
We shall see
All I know is, for my purposes, Live 9 is great and it's fortunate that I love using it.
Looking forward to trying Bitwig, but until I get my hands on it, I'm glad to have what I've got.
I'm inclined to think there have been a lot of structural, behind-the-scenes code changes, which could explain the lack of whizbang-wow-look-at-that features in 9, and why there was so much third-party development from Cytomic Andy/the Max people/etc.Must have been three hard working years for Ableton programmers.
Starting from a fresh code base can be a blessing and a curse though. 10 years of development, you're going to run into and address a lot of bugs related to real-world use issues (hardware device/driver support, VST issues, etc) that you only find when you have thousands and thousand of actual users using your program. But you're also constrained to legacy code, which can limit flexibility.Bitwig is also fresh from start programmed and has 64bit really working,
where Ableton them self not recommending it