why "Live" isn't that good for live performance, I

DGA · Post by **DGA** » Fri Oct 10, 2008 12:23 am

six_o_clock_crow wrote:
DGA wrote:Just how much stuff are you tweaking live that you need it active? The fact that tehre are countless users performing with small controller setups should indicate that it is possible to effectively express yourself with some consolidation.
It's not necessarily that I have loads of stuff I want to tweak in every song. But I don't want to use the same set structure (e.g. same number of tracks, same number of sends etc etc) for every song.

I know I could have just one set structure reserved for playing live, but I don't want to work like that - I want multiple small sets that I can access at will.

The funny thing is, I don't actually perform live! But te way I am working on recordings is in a 'live performance' way. You might think "why not just work on each song seperately and then mix them into an album?" But I don't want to work like that

i find that consistency in setup improves work flow.

kuniklo · Post by **kuniklo** » Fri Oct 10, 2008 12:54 am

The two biggest problems with Live for live is that the built-in stuff doesn't support program changes and that you can't record automation into session clips. You can sort of work around the first one with chain selectors in a very awkward and unergonomic way but the second is a dealbreaker.

ironically the solution is to use third party plugins exclusively and do things the old fashioned way with midi program changes and cc messages. You have to use something pretty full-featured like Kore or Kontakt because you're going to need to have *all* your effects bundled into each patch.

It's sad that this is the case and it's sad that so much energy has gone into making Live a trimmed down Cubase in the last few releases instead of fixing these fundamental flaws but that's the way it is.

drb · Post by **drb** » Fri Oct 10, 2008 4:21 am

Just a quick side note.. A few people seem to be telling me what works and does not work when performing live.

I have been performing live for many years, so I do have some background from where I form my personal opinions.

I like to work one way - you may prefer another.

ava · Post by **ava** » Fri Oct 10, 2008 4:42 am

I don't quite understand this thread...

leisuremuffin · Post by **leisuremuffin** » Fri Oct 10, 2008 5:04 am

drb wrote: I have been performing and touring professionally for over 15 years, so I do have some background from where I form my personal opinions.

well, there's your problem. no pro's use live. it's just a toy for dj's. The pros all use pantaloons superior version mobius.

.lm.

drb · Post by **drb** » Fri Oct 10, 2008 5:59 am

leisuremuffin wrote: well, there's your problem. no pro's use live. it's just a toy for dj's. The pros all use pantaloons superior version mobius.
.lm.

If you are implying I said pros don't use Live, you'd be wrong.
I'm well aware many do.

Done that mean you think there's no room for improvement?

leisuremuffin · Post by **leisuremuffin** » Fri Oct 10, 2008 12:12 pm

of course there's room for improvement.

i just think saying that live isn't good for live performance is silly.

maybe you've been playing a traditional instrument in a band for 15 years, but if you've been making live electronic music for 15 years you'd probably realize that there has never been an easier way to do it and that doing it has ALWAYS involved working within limitations. The people who are best at performing live electronic music, or integrating electronic music into a live band have always had to design their mode of performance around the tools they have to work with. Today it's easier and more flexible than ever thanks to ableton live.

.lm.

forge · Post by **forge** » Fri Oct 10, 2008 3:07 pm

WebSite! wrote:
kenporter wrote: Like I said in my initial post, on PC's enable "Allow Multiple Instances" in the preference (Look and Feel tab) of Live and you will be able to run 2 or more copies of Live at the same time, sharing the same audio interface and midi interface. Just tried it on a PC at work too...

Ken
nope, it doesen't work with my Presonus Firebox.
w

It depends on the sound card/driver - My FW410 is really good at playing whatever I throw at it at once, but some sound cards wont do this.

leisuremuffin wrote: ..i just think saying that live isn't good for live performance is silly.
... Today it's easier and more flexible than ever thanks to ableton live.
.lm.

actually I'm personally a little disappointed with the way Ableton have approached things more recently from a realtime/live standpoint. It's not that I don't like a lot of the things they've added, I just feel they could have done a lot more to really expand on the Live performance capabilities and cluttered the program up with a lot of studio oriented stuff

I mostly make music with Live so I don't mind having alot of these 'DAW' features, but I would happily have waited for them when so many others do them if it would mean they really focused on streamlining the whole live thing

I mean MIDI control still has a lot of ways it can be improved, the session automation thing needs no mention, there are actually heaps of things that could be done to improve Live performance and realtime production that should have come first IMO

again, I like most of what they added, I just think the priority should always be Live performance with this program

leisuremuffin · Post by **leisuremuffin** » Fri Oct 10, 2008 3:46 pm

i agree to a certain extent. The only thing that pushed me to upgrade last time was the drum rack.

however, i also believe that there simply isn't any software out there that's better right now. The instant there is, i'll switch. until then, i think that saying "live isn't good for live performance" based on the groundbreaking and unchallenged workflow of the session view is pretty silly. Yes, it takes a good deal of planning and hard work to put together a way of working within one set that is flexible enough to both perform pre-written material and improvise new material on the spot. But much less than it took back in the days when we had to perform on hardware. Electronic music was once a studio only artform, it's evolution into a performance based artform is still happening, and right now, live is the forefront.

.lm.

forge · Post by **forge** » Fri Oct 10, 2008 3:54 pm

leisuremuffin wrote:i agree to a certain extent. The only thing that pushed me to upgrade last time was the drum rack.

however, i also believe that there simply isn't any software out there that's better right now. The instant there is, i'll switch. until then, i think that saying "live isn't good for live performance" based on the groundbreaking and unchallenged workflow of the session view is pretty silly. Yes, it takes a good deal of planning and hard work to put together a way of working within one set that is flexible enough to both perform pre-written material and improvise new material on the spot. But much less than it took back in the days when we had to perform on hardware. Electronic music was once a studio only artform, it's evolution into a performance based artform is still happening, and right now, live is the forefront.
.lm.

well, I wouldn't put too much on the thread title, it was provocative and grabbed everyone's attention and he has a point on the request even if the title was a little OTT - admittedly Ken Porter offered a solution, but the tab idea is one I've seen pushed before and it's a good one

I'm just saying this is probably another example of where Ableton seem to be more interested in covering all bases rather than focusing mainly on Live stuff - that just seems kind of a shame to me when there are 56 billion really good studio DAWs around and NO Live programs

twitterytom · Post by **twitterytom** » Fri Oct 10, 2008 10:02 pm

i tried building a live set that has a very diverse style, e.g. i can't reuse the same instruments and effects very much across songs.

i layerd instruments in a nice and organized session into various instrument racks. the problem i was having is that CPU use went over the top. could it be that unselected chains in instrument racks still use processing power?

dj superflat · Post by **dj superflat** » Fri Oct 10, 2008 10:56 pm

i'm backwards -- i like live lots as a DAW, but find it doesn't do much of what i need for live work. what i continue to find odd is that there's clearly demand for lots of live functionality none of the DAWs currently offer, but they continue not to offer it.

Surreal · Post by **Surreal** » Sat Oct 11, 2008 3:29 pm

i thought i had it bad trying to make a live improv beatboxing set...

Live is great for some people. not great for others. i had live 6 for a looong time languishing. i put my monome together and now i have almost constructed a set around Live.

you need to figure out what you want from live and figure out the best way to get what you want from live, as is true for everything.

drb · Post by **drb** » Sat Oct 11, 2008 6:25 pm

I started this thread to point out what I feel are real weaknesses in Live as a live performance instrument. I do agree we may not have a better choice at this time.

When I looked at Live *1.0*, I thought it had some great potential. Then I waited, and waited, and here we are on version 7, and still no reasonable way to create complex sets of music without dumbing down everything.

As a DJ tool, it also suffers. No way to see the waveform on two tracks at once. Is there ANY dj program that we'd accept that in? None, but people seem to think it's okay in Live.

Because Live does some things very well, people seem to defend it, and not say, 'yes it's good, but these fundamental major flaws need to be fixed'.

Do we need another synth, or do we need a fully working platform?

dj superflat · Post by **dj superflat** » Sat Oct 11, 2008 10:10 pm

please, pretty please, give me another synth that's not much different from everything else out there on the market, rather than some basic live functionality that would seem central to live's mission.