Feature request: Pls. do not bloat Live with features

[MallorcaMalle]

Here's just my thoughts about feature overkill could have negative impact on software...

Of course many, many feature or improvement request in this forum are reasonable and valid. There are a lot of things that can be improved without breaking the nature of this software (plugin manager, etc.). I had many feature requests when beginning using live. Wanted this feature from Cub***, that from Reas** and another from FL St****...

But over time using Live a lot I got more and more convinced of the clean interface, the xtremely fast workflow, the simpleness of getting things done fast, the reduction of too many options, the reaction time, the coherence of everything, session view, automation, the plug-and-play hardware support, Push 2, ...

So nowadays I'm confident they know what they are doing and they may read all the requests but think not only twice but threefold whether to implement something new or not. Live's originally use case was and still is streamelined especially for electronic music. And it is more and more used for other genres like rock or use cases like film scoring. That's very good i.m.o. - I just hope Live will not blow up and keep it's simplicity and lightning fast workflow in future releases.

What do you thing about this?

[Tarekith]

Live is almost 20 years old now, and if you look at all the features that have been added over the years and how clean the UI and menus still are, I think there’s nothing to worry about. A LOT of work and thought goes into making sure new features are added in a way that doesn’t break that Live aesthetic and functionality.

[MallorcaMalle]

You're right. And up to now, actually it even got better with the versions. So looks good for future updates so far...

[jlgrimes]

Here's just my thoughts about feature overkill could have negative impact on software...

Of course many, many feature or improvement request in this forum are reasonable and valid. There are a lot of things that can be improved without breaking the nature of this software (plugin manager, etc.). I had many feature requests when beginning using live. Wanted this feature from Cub***, that from Reas** and another from FL St****...

But over time using Live a lot I got more and more convinced of the clean interface, the xtremely fast workflow, the simpleness of getting things done fast, the reduction of too many options, the reaction time, the coherence of everything, session view, automation, the plug-and-play hardware support, Push 2, ...

So nowadays I'm confident they know what they are doing and they may read all the requests but think not only twice but threefold whether to implement something new or not. Live's originally use case was and still is streamelined especially for electronic music. And it is more and more used for other genres like rock or use cases like film scoring. That's very good i.m.o. - I just hope Live will not blow up and keep it's simplicity and lightning fast workflow in future releases.

What do you thing about this?

I think part of Live's niche is carefully implementing new features. I think most DAW companies follow this to a certain point, but Live is one of the least bloated DAWS.

That said its a fine line. Not implementing enough wont excite new users and might get rid of old ones. The main problems with new features though is when/if they conflict with existing ones or adds too much clutter to a GUI. If a button is not useful to a certain user, it might possibly annoy them or confuse them as their only interaction is accidentally clicking the button having it do something they don't want. But when new features are added that benefit most users at the same time while adding minimal clutter, this usually is a win win for most. But at the same time though care must be taken to not underimplement (and fall to the dust of other competitors), but mainly just implement smartly.

[Slow Hand]

I agree with this sentiment.

Live's strength is in being powerful and intuitive with a minimum amount of superfluous features to get in the way of the user and potentially inhibit them. The Live developers do a good job of integrating new features in a way that feels light and unobtrusive.

It's always a little frustrating when Live doesn't have some niche features that other DAWs have, but that's what sets it apart as well. Pro Tools is a beast at editing, tracking, and mixing but nobody wants to be fussing with Pro Tool's problems when they're in the middle of getting an idea down in the studio or on stage.

[jonljacobi]

+1 KISS

[josefreak]

+1 KISS

Yes, but some of the features people ask for would make Live more streamlined than it is now. So, there's that too

[Machinesworking]

So, this is an interesting subject, because I completely think Live is one of the most schizophrenic DAWs when it comes to the KISS motto or UX. Max 4 Live being integrated in makes for a stark contradiction to the whole KISS idea, yet here we are. Keyboard shortcuts, Live has the least amount of any DAW I know of. and they are not user definable. It took Ableton 20 years to ad in a shortcut to expand the piano roll to full screen. This is the sort of minimalism that IMO gets in the way of daily use. I get the idea of a WYSIWYG DAW, but sometimes Live takes it too far. Someone mentioned that the cursor doesn't change to different tools when doing various tasks as a plus, I've always hated that, especially with things like slicing, it's always a crapshoot if it's going to work properly, and a little visual feedback would be better design wise IMO.

I get it that this aspect of Live has it's fanbase, but IMO sometimes Live suffers from strict adherence to it's WYSIWYG philosophy. When you get to the "power user" phase of working with it, you're still slowly navigating the interface, still dealing with pop up windows to adjust quantize size etc. It's gotten better, but it's still the slowest DAW I use when it comes to the interface, and that is directly due to it being somewhat dragged down by its own KISS philosophy.

[jonljacobi]

+1 KISS

Yes, but some of the features people ask for would make Live more streamlined than it is now. So, there's that too

Agreed. I especially would like them to expand the ability to define/redefine keys to avoid so much mouse use. I use Keyboard Maestro to add them at the moment, but if I could get away from that, it would be nice. Plus, I occasionally have to change mine to accommodate Live's new hard-wired keystrokes.

But a lot of the suggestions are for a 1% workflow and some want to change what's in place Generally, I like how Live has managed to keep most new features out of the way of those that don't use them. I simply want them to continue that. I would actually like more options to reduce visual clutter.

[papanoongaku]

I agree that careful integration is important.
But I’m also new to Ableton. I cut my teeth on Digital Performer 2.5 at the turn of the century. And I recently moved back to Mac from Windows where I had used Sonar.
I chose ableton because of its great community and because I love looping and grid based arrangement (I have lots of Elektron and Korg Gear and write on my physical hardware). I also was enamored by their rejection of corporate suitors looking to buy the company out. I LOVE the spirit of their management team. As a business owner myself, I love that they have a clear vision and they walk the walk. Bra-fucking-vo!
I’m really loving ableton but it has been a shock that there are some things missing that even Reason has: the ability to ignore pan and level settings when exporting, for example.
The things I’m surprised at aren’t big things like comping, new features that are headlines, but the under-the-hood quality of life features for exporting (or bigger things like saving mix states)
I’m all about Ableton keeping it weird. Just like with Reason and their rack-based workflow. I don’t need the built in Chord Suggestion tools of Cubase, and I don’t need giant icons of drums from Logic. I don’t need 1 million options for syncing video or the ability to customize click patterns like DP. I just want a few of those things that shave 10 minutes off my workflow here and there (like bypass all plugins or ignore pan and volume on export).

[Rootxp]

About the topic of "Ableton might get bloated with Features".

It's very nice to hear that you're satisfied with Ableton right now. But what makes you assume that Features REDUCE simplicity and quickness? Wrong assumption, sorry.

a) Many feature requests are exactly about simplicity and quick workflow.
b) When those Features would be implemented, Ableton would be simpler and quicker.

c) Now lets assume that the case happens, which you fear the most: A Feature which isn't about quickness or simplicity in particular gets implemented. Have you thought about the possibility of making Ableton customizable? You would never ever have to fear about a "bloated" version if Ableton is highly customizable. Real deep customization is something which is on my Feature request list. It would mean that users like you could start Ableton in "easy mode", and users like me could go to preferences and go to "advanced mode" where a godlike tree of possibilities would emerge to adjust and configure Ableton to individual needs.

Now to the last assumption which was made "So nowadays I'm confident they know what they are doing and they may read all the requests but..."
Well, i m confident that they know what they are doing, but since they do NOT communicate about it, we have no clue what on earth they are doing. (no public roadmap, zero communication about the feature requests)
At least one thing is certain, from years of experience within the centerpoint Beta Forum: They do NOT care about what betaforum-users want. There are literally dozens of highly upvoted feature requests since MANY years.
Best example is Bounce in Place. A feature which has been requested since AGES, and has many hundred upvotes in the BetaForum.
It's also a prime example of Features which would make Ableton quicker and simpler.

[jonljacobi]

Features you don’t use, generally get in your way. This can be mitigated with good design and customization, but it is not an errant assumption as you suggest.

And while Machinesworking finds Live the slowest, I find it by far the quickest to use. I suppose it all depends on what you do with it and how you prefer to do it.