Who is actually happy with the direction Ableton is going?

[Michael Hatsis]

To me, It seems like they are moving away from a 'choose your workflow' style program to a 'this is how you should use Live' style program. Things like Push, the new so-called 'browser' and lots of the little changes they have forced upon users with no option to revert back to pre-Live 9 behavior are pretty good indicators of this change in attitude.
If you remember back, one of the reasons it took so long for them to actually make a dedicated controller for Live is because they said they didn't know how to approach the creation of a one size fits all controller because of all of the different workflows that users had. Now not only do they have a dedicated controller, but seem to be designing the program to fit the workflow of this new controller.

Personally, I don't need Ableton to make a controller, there are plenty of amazing controller options out there. I need them to make Live faster, more efficient, and more flexible.

I'm still on Live 8.

Mike

[Not_Elba]

To me, It seems like they are moving away from a 'choose your workflow' style program to a 'this is how you should use Live' style program.

I agree.

They should stop working on implementing new features and concentrating on improving the essential things. The overall workflow.
And they shouldn`t implement half-baked things like the new browser, limited automation curve editing (I know freeware which does it much better, sorry), or the overdub workflow.
Or the window (no detachable/docking windows or flexible gui configuration) and general configuration capabilities.
Everyone is different and has a different workflow. Give us total control of everything inside Live (not just automation parameters).
That`s the way they should heading in the future IMO.
Evolution instead revolution.

[dazzer]

They should listen to absolutely every user on this thread and implement EVERYTHING that has been suggested, even if some of it is truly contradictory. Then, and only then, will they be moving in the right direction.

[-art-]

I am very happy with Ableton Live and it suits my purposes very well.

Push looks like an excellent device that combines session, drum, and melodic control.

In and among the Instruments and FX and M4L I have stuff that could keep me busy for years.

[oddstep]

Everyone is different and has a different workflow. Give us total control of everything inside Live (not just automation parameters).

This. One example. I often use timestretching of audio clips in complex mode during live performance. Stretching stuff out by clicking on the *2 button. It's a good sound. However not only is there no access to this parameter via the userconfiguration text. But its not even midi mappable. There are huge chunks of Live that haven't been fully implemented. Its like session automation. It's great, but its best for the use case of a individual working alone, largely with softsynths.. layering one track at time.

[brettonwoodsapocalypse]

To me, It seems like they are moving away from a 'choose your workflow' style program to a 'this is how you should use Live' style program.

There's some element of truth there. In that sense the browser is fairly representative of L9. It's actually more efficient than L8 old browser ( let's be honest) but it's not as flexible.
I agree as well that seeing Live beeing more and more in sync with Push might not be to everybody's taste but on the other hand Live has always been about performing and in that sense designing hardware which is highly optimized to software ( and vice-versa) seems to me the only way forward if you consider Live more an instrument rather than a sequencer.

[Willyum]

I will not upgrade to Live 9 in it's current state.
I hate the Browser!!! I recommended they keep a legacy-browser mode during beta testing. I love Live 8, use it everyday, and there are a lot of features in 9 that I do want... but a lot of the the new stuff feels half baked to me. I also do not like that they abandoned the first two 'Live-Instruments' (launchpad and apc40 were both ableton branded... neither got any updated scripts. I also don't like that I get stripped of my 'Suite' status unless I buy their friends software (I don't want Max... and that is the only difference from 8 Suite to 9 suite (and some orchestral sounds)), So I own every Live Device made, but would be stripped of 'Suite'...Horrible! I don't like that they absolutely ignored the largest thread during beta testing... Old Abes would have talked to the people and at least said 'no, we're not doing that and here's why'.

The biggest disappointment for me is that, because I refuse to upgrade, I don't get to use the new nativeKONTROL.com scripts where he gives ALL controllers 'Push' functionality!

[re:dream]

The browser was unfamiliar and irritating at first, but the more I use it, the more intuitive it feels.

The fact that I have a Live 8 library and a Live 9 one is a little irritating, but I can see that they wanted to keep the old structure for legacy reasons.

[deva]

I am happy enough with the direction Ableton is going.

[nemoy]

To me, It seems like they are moving away from a 'choose your workflow' style program to a 'this is how you should use Live' style program.

There's some element of truth there. In that sense the browser is fairly representative of L9. It's actually more efficient than L8 old browser ( let's be honest) but it's not as flexible.
I agree as well that seeing Live beeing more and more in sync with Push might not be to everybody's taste but on the other hand Live has always been about performing and in that sense designing hardware which is highly optimized to software ( and vice-versa) seems to me the only way forward if you consider Live more an instrument rather than a sequencer.

And here's the Problem: It is great, to have a dedicated Hardware controller to perform live. But then, they changed their focus a lot more towards a DAW and a recording/production workflow, than towards actual live performances.
The whole session-record/Midi overdub -mess was a really clear sign...

Live Performances is the one really big thing about ableton. They should advance a lot more in that direction! And "push" this even further!

[Michael Hatsis]

To me, It seems like they are moving away from a 'choose your workflow' style program to a 'this is how you should use Live' style program.

There's some element of truth there. In that sense the browser is fairly representative of L9. It's actually more efficient than L8 old browser ( let's be honest) but it's not as flexible.
I agree as well that seeing Live beeing more and more in sync with Push might not be to everybody's taste but on the other hand Live has always been about performing and in that sense designing hardware which is highly optimized to software ( and vice-versa) seems to me the only way forward if you consider Live more an instrument rather than a sequencer.

The browser is definitely not more efficient in Live 9. Efficient is definitely not the word i would use to describe it . Different- yes. A marketing tool- yes, I guess it is efficient if you are a push user or using partner live packs, but that's it.
Definitely not efficient if you are organizing your own content. Also, I cannot efficiently browse my hard drives either, unless I index them and wait- no thanks. As for the indexed search, seems to still be a mess for most people.

Also, I haven't seen anything from Ableton that indicates Push is a performance controller. Everything I have seen so far says that it's a composition tool.

[Michael Hatsis]

To me, It seems like they are moving away from a 'choose your workflow' style program to a 'this is how you should use Live' style program.

There's some element of truth there. In that sense the browser is fairly representative of L9. It's actually more efficient than L8 old browser ( let's be honest) but it's not as flexible.
I agree as well that seeing Live beeing more and more in sync with Push might not be to everybody's taste but on the other hand Live has always been about performing and in that sense designing hardware which is highly optimized to software ( and vice-versa) seems to me the only way forward if you consider Live more an instrument rather than a sequencer.

And here's the Problem: It is great, to have a dedicated Hardware controller to perform live. But then, they changed their focus a lot more towards a DAW and a recording/production workflow, than towards actual live performances.
The whole session-record/Midi overdub -mess was a really clear sign...

Live Performances is the one really big thing about ableton. They should advance a lot more in that direction! And "push" this even further!

As I mentioned above, I haven't seen anything from Ableton that markets push as a performance tool. A performance tool is something like Touchable, Live control, APC40 or Lemur...

A way forward for performance is to have a robust, well documented API so that 3rd parties like Livid/TOuchable guys/Liine.... can make some ridiculous controllers. One sie fits all is definitely not the best move I think.

Mike

[andydes]

To me, It seems like they are moving away from a 'choose your workflow' style program to a 'this is how you should use Live' style program. Things like Push, the new so-called 'browser' and lots of the little changes they have forced upon users with no option to revert back to pre-Live 9 behavior are pretty good indicators of this change in attitude.

I'm not sure really. The browser and Push do seem to indicate this. On the other hand, M4L is the ultimate tool for customising workflow. If anything, that takes things a bit too far in the other direction- If Live can't do something, make it yourself (but that's not really the same as having features built in).

The browser issues are worrying. Possibly they only really became apparent in the beta and it's too imbedded to have an option to revert back. Hopefully they can be resolved quickly.

As for Push, I don't have a problem with it, nor am I likely to get one. It's clearly an attempt to counter to Maschine. I think they need to make sure that push and any successors ate designed to work with live. Not the other way round. Live itself needs to be hardware independent.

So generally, I'm pretty happy with the direction. It doesn't seem to changed much to me. Just as long as they fix the issues people have

[CFM]

I don't think the browser or push make any difference. I still use Live like a traditional DAW like I did 4 years ago. I'm only thinking about buying push if I want to become a certified trainer.

[SuburbanThug]

As for Push, I don't have a problem with it, nor am I likely to get one. It's clearly an attempt to counter to Maschine. I think they need to make sure that push and any successors ate designed to work with live. Not the other way round.

I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around the Push vs. Maschine sentiment. There is some overlap between the two but actually a lot less than pretty much any other two controllers set side by side. Maschine is geared towards sampling and drum programming. Push is geared towards song writing, composition, instrumentation. Just because they are both geared towards doing more outside of the box doesn't make them exclusive competitors.

As long as you know precisely what you want out of a controller the choice between the two becomes very clear. Push is for someone who would work with a traditional style or modern pattern based hardware sequencer and Maschine is for someone who would prefer an MPC style sequencer. They can each do a bit of what the other one does, theoretically, but their workflows are completely different. You can't cut samples with Push and you can't play complex chords and melodies at the same time on Maschine.