wish : Elastique Pro algorithm

Angstrom · Post by **Angstrom** » Thu Apr 17, 2008 6:20 pm

it's a popular wish this one isn't it.

I wonder if it's just because it says "pro" in the title

andydes · Post by **andydes** » Fri Apr 18, 2008 10:51 am

I can't make music if there's anything out there more "pro" than Ableton.

Reaper has E Pro and Ableton has E Efficient
=> Ableton is just a toy
=> my music sucks.
QED.

But, yeah, it should have it anyway. Think it will have a more noticable improvement on sound quality than the 64 bit mix engine business. And, I'll wager a lot easier to implement.

djgroovy · Post by **djgroovy** » Fri Apr 18, 2008 4:08 pm

andydes wrote:Think it will have a more noticable improvement on sound quality than the 64 bit mix engine business.

Word.

bitpull · Post by **bitpull** » Sat Apr 19, 2008 12:57 am

Nokatus wrote:As timestretching functionality has always been at the core of the Live workflow, in my opinion adopting these kinds of technologies and keeping them up to date should be one of the top priorities in Ableton's plans.

agree! Also, it should be selectable between pro, efficient and soloist because of the workload.

Hervé · Post by **Hervé** » Sun Apr 20, 2008 10:51 am

Nokatus wrote:As timestretching functionality has always been at the core of the Live workflow, in my opinion adopting these kinds of technologies and keeping them up to date should be one of the top priorities in Ableton's plans.

Yhea, timestrech have been the main abl argument in all the adds/ interview thes did, for years...

+1 for the pro algorythm.

Advent57 · Post by **Advent57** » Sun Apr 20, 2008 1:50 pm

Yes Please

mekon · Post by **mekon** » Mon Apr 21, 2008 8:21 am

+1 for quality stretching

friend_kami · Post by **friend_kami** » Wed Apr 23, 2008 5:50 pm

mekon wrote:+1 for quality stretching

+1

mr.adl · Post by **mr.adl** » Wed Apr 23, 2008 5:59 pm

+1 this could definetely get an improvement.

poshook · Post by **poshook** » Thu Apr 24, 2008 6:44 am

bitpull wrote:
Nokatus wrote:As timestretching functionality has always been at the core of the Live workflow, in my opinion adopting these kinds of technologies and keeping them up to date should be one of the top priorities in Ableton's plans.
agree! Also, it should be selectable between pro, efficient and soloist because of the workload.

and always set Pro during mixdown option

cmcpress · Post by **cmcpress** » Fri Apr 25, 2008 10:30 am

cashen · Post by **cashen** » Sat Apr 26, 2008 7:30 pm

+1

Word.

Gravis · Post by **Gravis** » Sun Apr 27, 2008 5:20 am

agreed

tricil · Post by **tricil** » Sun Apr 27, 2008 5:22 am

poshook wrote:
bitpull wrote:
Nokatus wrote:As timestretching functionality has always been at the core of the Live workflow, in my opinion adopting these kinds of technologies and keeping them up to date should be one of the top priorities in Ableton's plans.
agree! Also, it should be selectable between pro, efficient and soloist because of the workload.
and always set Pro during mixdown option

Angstrom · Post by **Angstrom** » Sun Apr 27, 2008 1:10 pm

tricil wrote:
poshook wrote:
bitpull wrote:agree! Also, it should be selectable between pro, efficient and soloist because of the workload.
and always set Pro during mixdown option

I'm not sure that "always set pro" is a good idea as it would change the sound. In a case where someone is abusing 'Efficient' at extreme settings to get a certain sound they wouldn't want a mandatory switch at render time.

I think if people are wanting an 'offline' warp that is a different matter than asking for Elastique Pro.
Even though Elastique Pro is better than 'efficient', it is still not artifact free, it is just a better featured real-time stretch than 'complex'. It is not a quality offline stretch.

An offline stretch is something else entirely.