6 better be a rock !!!!

knotkranky · Post by **knotkranky** » Wed Mar 29, 2006 9:53 pm

eisnein wrote:
knotkranky wrote:No doubt, that crap is boring for sure. I'm looking forward to Live users who will address the factual issue I have put forward. If it was a non-issue, then it would be so. You don't have to like me, but if you intend to focus on me more than the point, then what is "your" point? I agree, I am not so important, you can have it, but my complaints and love for Live, as shared by others, is.

uhhhhhhh what the hell?

did you miss this--

if you hang around the forum you will, if you havent already noticed that Ableton has a specific forum for BUGS & PROBLEMS. and it says for a faster response EMAIL them.

in terms of their updates it seems that they tend to actually take the time to read these and include suggestions from actual users and not just "the pros" that endorse them. there are countless improvements suggested right here on this board that were implemented in 5.

Nope.

knotkranky · Post by **knotkranky** » Wed Mar 29, 2006 10:11 pm

Now, i could be wrong, but i'm assuming you're an engineer.
If you are, i can pretty much guaruntee that you will never use live as a DAW for a big client.

I think's Abes would be dissapointed to believe that themselves.

You can't even use logic or cubase as a DAW for a big client.
Name one major studio that does.
Plenty of project studios do, but i can't think of any major studio that uses something other than pro-tools to track to. Unless we're talking 2" tape.

Yes you can, and many do. Studio's don't use programs, people do.

And why would you want live as a DAW for a client? Are you writing for the client? What advantage would live present in a tracking or mixing situation? I don't know about you, but if it's about timing correction, I don't wanna do that job anyway. Another take of the offending part will cost the band less than me taking an hour to fix bad timing.

Well for one thing, Hip Hop clients would freak on it, and some do. But once it goes into another daw it's not in Live. I agree on the repair crap.

If you use it for what it's for and don't push the cpu you will find it to be plenty robust.

I'm sorry, but repeating that it is somehow unreliable over and over again does not make it so. You're just expecting live to be someting that it isn't and shouldn't be. 32+ entire song length tracks and plugins? I don't think so. 15 to 20 tracks with tons of 4 to 16 bar clips in each and plug-ins/virtuial instruments to create an original piece of music, yes. Or a similar setup for an electronic musician to do a live remix of their material on stage, yes.

Well, is that all Live is for?

leisuremuffin · Post by **leisuremuffin** » Wed Mar 29, 2006 10:52 pm

knotkranky wrote:
Now, i could be wrong, but i'm assuming you're an engineer.
If you are, i can pretty much guaruntee that you will never use live as a DAW for a big client.
I think's Abes would be dissapointed to believe that themselves.

You can't even use logic or cubase as a DAW for a big client.
Name one major studio that does.
Plenty of project studios do, but i can't think of any major studio that uses something other than pro-tools to track to. Unless we're talking 2" tape.
Yes you can, and many do. Studio's don't use programs, people do.

You're evading the question. You know as well as i do that the vast majority of engineers use pro tools for tracking bands. This isn't because pro tools is the best software ever made for the job. It's because it is the most recognizable name. I don't think live is meant to replace pro-tools. You can't name a major studio that advertises logic or cubase above pro-tools because one doesn't exist. If they have logic or cubase it's always gonna be mentioned after pro-tools. A rock and roll band will never call you at your studio to ask you if you have logic. How many phone calls do you get asking if you have pro-tools? If you own a studio, you know you get that phone call 10 times a day. The fuckin guy on the other end of the phone barely knows what pro tools does anyway, he just knows he needs it to record his bands demo. (actually, this is becoming less and less true, more and more musicians actually seem to know something about recording these days.)

I don't think ableton would be dissapointed that live won't replace pro-tools and the DAW market, I think that they are happy that live could easily be used to write an entire hit hip hop record (for example since you mentioned it), from start to finish including vocals. (assuming you actually have talented MCs that don't need a shitload of editing) No problem. No need to open PT. No need to even set foot in a comercial studio. That's what's interesting about it. You and a lot of other engineers have a very set way of thinking. A way of thinking that doesn't always apply to a record that doesn't feature drum kit/guitar/bass etc. That's just one small part of the reason why that industry is shrinking every day while the home recording sector is growing.

Sorry, i'm not the best with pasting the quotes, but to answer your last question, "is that all live is for?" No, but it's what it is best at and what it was originally designed for. I don't need another DAW. The world doesn't need another DAW. You certainly don't need another DAW, you have an HD system! You wouldn't even have live if you didn't realize that it does something special and seperate from what PT does.

.lm.

eisnein · Post by **eisnein** » Wed Mar 29, 2006 11:03 pm

oh yeah- i got so caught up in cut and paste of quotes that i forgot to say that i havent had Live crash on me hardly at all that i can remember compared to PT or logic which crash semi-regularily....mostly PT

knotkranky · Post by **knotkranky** » Wed Mar 29, 2006 11:21 pm

leisuremuffin wrote:
knotkranky wrote:
Now, i could be wrong, but i'm assuming you're an engineer.
If you are, i can pretty much guaruntee that you will never use live as a DAW for a big client.
I think's Abes would be dissapointed to believe that themselves.

You can't even use logic or cubase as a DAW for a big client.
Name one major studio that does.
Plenty of project studios do, but i can't think of any major studio that uses something other than pro-tools to track to. Unless we're talking 2" tape.
Yes you can, and many do. Studio's don't use programs, people do.

You're evading the question. You know as well as i do that the vast majority of engineers use pro tools for tracking bands. This isn't because pro tools is the best software ever made for the job. It's because it is the most recognizable name. I don't think live is meant to replace pro-tools. You can't name a major studio that advertises logic or cubase above pro-tools because one doesn't exist. If they have logic or cubase it's always gonna be mentioned after pro-tools. A rock and roll band will never call you at your studio to ask you if you have logic. How many phone calls do you get asking if you have pro-tools? If you own a studio, you know you get that phone call 10 times a day. The fuckin guy on the other end of the phone barely knows what pro tools does anyway, he just knows he needs it to record his bands demo. (actually, this is becoming less and less true, more and more musicians actually seem to know something about recording these days.)

I don't think ableton would be dissapointed that live won't replace pro-tools and the DAW market, I think that they are happy that live could easily be used to write an entire hit hip hop record (for example since you mentioned it), from start to finish including vocals. (assuming you actually have talented MCs that don't need a shitload of editing) No problem. No need to open PT. No need to even set foot in a comercial studio. That's what's interesting about it. You and a lot of other engineers have a very set way of thinking. A way of thinking that doesn't always apply to a record that doesn't feature drum kit/guitar/bass etc. That's just one small part of the reason why that industry is shrinking every day while the home recording sector is growing.

Sorry, i'm not the best with pasting the quotes, but to answer your last question, "is that all live is for?" No, but it's what it is best at and what it was originally designed for. I don't need another DAW. The world doesn't need another DAW. You certainly don't need another DAW, you have an HD system! You wouldn't even have live if you didn't realize that it does something special and seperate from what PT does.

.lm.

Ok, let me run through this....I'm sorry i'm not sure the question i'm evading......PT is the best audio recording and playback system in the world......A studio is not defined by it's daw.....The occasional rock band will work in Logic......Actually, I mix more poorly recorded material recorded by musicians than ever......

You said Live will never be a daw.......Believe me, Ableton wants some of PT's market share. They have aspirations too......Don't call them MC's anymore.....It's my open mind and not being set that's making a few angry......

So Live is a daw?......I love Live and I would very much like it to clean up on PT.

knotkranky · Post by **knotkranky** » Wed Mar 29, 2006 11:36 pm

eisnein wrote:oh yeah- i got so caught up in cut and paste of quotes that i forgot to say that i havent had Live crash on me hardly at all that i can remember compared to PT or logic which crash semi-regularily....mostly PT

I just want Live to be much more reliable and stable. I've had my PT system on and working for two weeks straight on 8 different sessions, switching back and forth. No crashes, no skips or glitches. Not even a snat. I hit stop, go to bed, wake up, hit play. It does audio like a dream.

knotkranky · Post by **knotkranky** » Wed Mar 29, 2006 11:42 pm

Why the big opposition? what is so scary about more Live reliability? Why are some of you cats "trying" to kick my ass?

leisuremuffin · Post by **leisuremuffin** » Thu Mar 30, 2006 1:02 am

Frankly becasue i'm tired of people talking about live being unreliable when in fact that is bullshit.

.lm.

knotkranky · Post by **knotkranky** » Thu Mar 30, 2006 1:12 am

leisuremuffin wrote:Frankly becasue i'm tired of people talking about live being unreliable when in fact that is bullshit.

.lm.

Your name isn't Scott McClellan by chance is it?

eisnein · Post by **eisnein** » Thu Mar 30, 2006 2:08 am

doooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooood-

seriously we arent trying to kick your ass and we want Live to be the best it can be which is why we submit requests, beta test, notify abletons of bugs and trouble shoot with other users to get the best possible setups we can.

if you remember your original incendiary comment-

Ok so, Live is already a rock for a lot of you. But from the ones who know that's not true, 6 better be a rock. I want 6 to be tight. You pro's know what i'm talking about. Live apologists; you're out numbered. Ableton; get it together. Your app is damn cool.

which basically said if it was a rock for us...that just meant we arent in the PRO know.....

alright im done with this thread now.

knotkranky · Post by **knotkranky** » Thu Mar 30, 2006 5:56 am

we want Live to be the best it can be which is why we submit requests, beta test, notify abletons of bugs and trouble shoot with other users to get the best possible setups we can.

Yes, I understand, but I have to work also. For some in the music business, it just has to work.

Ok, I made my point. It's all redundant from here. Understand that this is a part of my passion for this program. I stand behind my comments in this thread. Yeah it's a bit aggressive, but my relationship with the program is more important than with the company. My priorities are for my business. I understand I am asking Live to do more than it can, at least for right now. I just want Abe's to understand that some of us need more than what the bugs forum can do, and that is to add a more solid DAW feel as expressed in the features list. 6 is around the corner and maybe Abe's worked out some of that stuff already. Cheers and thank you Ableton.

njh · Post by **njh** » Thu Mar 30, 2006 7:25 am

i dont understand why alot of you people dont want live to be a full on daw.
do you like going from program to program to make i song. i cant stand it. i want to be able to record instruments with pristine audio quality and make electronic music with the same app. as it stands now, nothing is a full on daw. live is the closest but there are alot of things in it that are a pain in the ass that hold it back (like the piano roll, zooming in on a wave and having your computer glitch, and good but not great audio quality).
anyways i want one app for sequencing aranging and editing, is that so much to ask for when that is what i pay for?

leisuremuffin · Post by **leisuremuffin** » Thu Mar 30, 2006 7:36 am

njh wrote:i dont understand why alot of you people dont want live to be a full on daw.
do you like going from program to program to make i song. i cant stand it. i want to be able to record instruments with pristine audio quality and make electronic music with the same app. as it stands now, nothing is a full on daw. live is the closest but there are alot of things in it that are a pain in the ass that hold it back (like the piano roll, zooming in on a wave and having your computer glitch, and good but not great audio quality).
anyways i want one app for sequencing aranging and editing, is that so much to ask for when that is what i pay for?

For fucks sake! there is nothing wrong with lives audio quality when not warping. You don't have to use any other program at all unless you are running a shit load of tracks. Like more than 20 on my very very weak g4 laptop.

Where do people get these ideas about lives sound quality somehow being bad?

glitching? that's all cpu. use less tracks and less plugins and you won't have any.

Do i want live to improve? Yes, just like everyone else does.

That is different from claiming that the application is somehow "sup-pro" or unreliable.

.lm.

knotkranky · Post by **knotkranky** » Thu Mar 30, 2006 7:51 am

leisuremuffin wrote:
njh wrote:i dont understand why alot of you people dont want live to be a full on daw.
do you like going from program to program to make i song. i cant stand it. i want to be able to record instruments with pristine audio quality and make electronic music with the same app. as it stands now, nothing is a full on daw. live is the closest but there are alot of things in it that are a pain in the ass that hold it back (like the piano roll, zooming in on a wave and having your computer glitch, and good but not great audio quality).
anyways i want one app for sequencing aranging and editing, is that so much to ask for when that is what i pay for?
For fucks sake! there is nothing wrong with lives audio quality when not warping. You don't have to use any other program at all unless you are running a shit load of tracks. Like more than 20 on my very very weak g4 laptop.

Where do people get these ideas about lives sound quality somehow being bad?

glitching? that's all cpu. use less tracks and less plugins and you won't have any.

Do i want live to improve? Yes, just like everyone else does.

That is different from claiming that the application is somehow "sup-pro" or unreliable.

.lm.

Booya!!! njh, you are a star. Leisuremuffin, it doesn't matter where the glitches come from. You help us more than you know. Power to the people

mercyplease · Post by **mercyplease** » Thu Mar 30, 2006 11:36 am

leisuremuffin wrote:
mercyplease wrote:
leisuremuffin wrote: Besides, Pro-tools isn't really useful for anything other than straight up tracking editing/arranging and mixing.

.lm.
I had to titter at your comment that tracking/editing/arranging and mixing is all pro tools can do. This is not enough or important?

For mixing/audio editing and linear arranging Pro tools beats Live hands down but you make it sound like those crucial elements are by the by.

Dont try so hard man.

Did you read any of the rest of my posts? I think you miss the point.

No, tracking/mixing/editing/arranging is not enough unless i am working with excellent real time performers.

Did you understand what i meant when i said, "good luck *creating* music with pro tools?"

The majority of people who came to live are from a backround of electronic music, not engineers. These people understand what live excells at, making loop-based music break out of the loop. I'm a little bit on both sides, I've recorded and mixed "rock" bands as well as composed and performed original electronic music. I understand that pro-tools has an advantage for straight up tracking and mixing, but why would anyone buy live if that is all they wanted to do with it? Tracking/mixing and editing does not write music.

And by the way, there's nothing really wrong with live's mixing and editing capabilities, there's just a few simple little features that would put it over the top. Like edit and mix groups as i keep saying. It's not like pro-tools somehow sounds better when mixing. It just has an easier workflow because that is the only thing it does.

.lm.

With all due respect I your experience in general must be limited. No point getting in to a slanging match here but as mentioned I have composed/arranged/mixed entirely with pro tools and live. no probs man