funny, i dont think i'll add anything, i'm sure in time we'll all be fine
-Use
www.illmatikvibes.com
ALTIVEC please - LIVE 2 performanse is more than crap !
Well, it's much to late to avoid being a troll here, but I'll bite. I guess my message (not the last thing, it was directed at one post in the thread, shouldn't have pluralized the one word) wasn't conveyed properly. There was a positive message hidden in there. 
My point, is that Live does what it does pretty well. Version 2 I think advances the product light years. The only reason I brought in the non-music related subject was that there's a million ways to accomplish a task. Live is one method for accomplishing a task.
Should Live not behave as you like it, try something else. Don't let the limitations of hardware and software hold you back. While Live is a tool that allows for spontanous sonic scribblings, and a software or hardware limitation might be holding you back from doing something mid-set, remember that moment. Use the idea later.
While in my opinion, this product does miracles, the real miracle is always your imagination. It's hard to avoid the cliche here, but think outside the box.
Now, you're left with two options.
1. Use Live, use other tools at your disposal, make something to be proud of.
2. Rip peices from box and manual, flush, repeat.
I do see the flaws in my logic.
We're paying a substantial amount of money for this product. We should have it do whatever we want. More importantly, it should do as advertised. Add in the cost of a $3000 laptop, a studios worth of audio software and it adds up quick. People rely on this for a living. FRUSTRATION!
It's something I'm willing to live with. Ableton is trying, I'm trying, everyone is trying their best. I've had my own hard times with this company, mainly getting any support, but it's not something to get totally bent about.
Seven words:
Don't be a tool, be the tool.
And my sincerest apologies to anyone I may have offended.
- Mike
My point, is that Live does what it does pretty well. Version 2 I think advances the product light years. The only reason I brought in the non-music related subject was that there's a million ways to accomplish a task. Live is one method for accomplishing a task.
Should Live not behave as you like it, try something else. Don't let the limitations of hardware and software hold you back. While Live is a tool that allows for spontanous sonic scribblings, and a software or hardware limitation might be holding you back from doing something mid-set, remember that moment. Use the idea later.
While in my opinion, this product does miracles, the real miracle is always your imagination. It's hard to avoid the cliche here, but think outside the box.
Now, you're left with two options.
1. Use Live, use other tools at your disposal, make something to be proud of.
2. Rip peices from box and manual, flush, repeat.
I do see the flaws in my logic.
We're paying a substantial amount of money for this product. We should have it do whatever we want. More importantly, it should do as advertised. Add in the cost of a $3000 laptop, a studios worth of audio software and it adds up quick. People rely on this for a living. FRUSTRATION!
It's something I'm willing to live with. Ableton is trying, I'm trying, everyone is trying their best. I've had my own hard times with this company, mainly getting any support, but it's not something to get totally bent about.
Seven words:
Don't be a tool, be the tool.
And my sincerest apologies to anyone I may have offended.
- Mike
Yo Board people,
while I agree that the true key for creativity lies within ourselves and we shouldn't be too obsessed with performance, this thread is about precisely that: how our software of choice can perform more efficiently to help us make music quicker and with less hassle. I think the only constructive way of contributing to Ableton's and our success is to help them make the software better. Period. And this involves addressing shortcomings (whether they are of the computing power or feature implementation kind).
While I haven't tried the beta (I will likely download the next one if there is one before the final release), I'd say, judging from V1.5, that the plug-ins are what need urgend attention on the Mac platform. Even though the CPU meter is showing higher usage than on Win machines even without plugins, the real bottleneck seem to be realtime FX - I agree that anybody worried beyond a 700 Mhz iBook concentrates on the wrong thing, but if I spend the money on a computer, I'd like to see performance that is in line with the current state-of-the-art hardware in both OS9 and X.
As I am contemplating (and actually almost bought) a TiBook, the only thing still preventing me from going ahead is how Live's doing on these machines. And I sure don't want to abandon Live because I think it's a brilliant piece of software!
Not only do I want to use Live, I would also want to use it alongside Logic via ReWire.... looking at the processor usage, I am worried that I would never be able to pull this off even though the Ti is widely considered the "luxury liner" laptop....
... so whatever can be done here (and I know a lot can be done because Logic, as a G4 optimised software, runs much more efficiently), I'd greatly appreciate!
And this is all from a PC user who is ready for the switch.
Thank you for your attention.
format
while I agree that the true key for creativity lies within ourselves and we shouldn't be too obsessed with performance, this thread is about precisely that: how our software of choice can perform more efficiently to help us make music quicker and with less hassle. I think the only constructive way of contributing to Ableton's and our success is to help them make the software better. Period. And this involves addressing shortcomings (whether they are of the computing power or feature implementation kind).
While I haven't tried the beta (I will likely download the next one if there is one before the final release), I'd say, judging from V1.5, that the plug-ins are what need urgend attention on the Mac platform. Even though the CPU meter is showing higher usage than on Win machines even without plugins, the real bottleneck seem to be realtime FX - I agree that anybody worried beyond a 700 Mhz iBook concentrates on the wrong thing, but if I spend the money on a computer, I'd like to see performance that is in line with the current state-of-the-art hardware in both OS9 and X.
As I am contemplating (and actually almost bought) a TiBook, the only thing still preventing me from going ahead is how Live's doing on these machines. And I sure don't want to abandon Live because I think it's a brilliant piece of software!
Not only do I want to use Live, I would also want to use it alongside Logic via ReWire.... looking at the processor usage, I am worried that I would never be able to pull this off even though the Ti is widely considered the "luxury liner" laptop....
... so whatever can be done here (and I know a lot can be done because Logic, as a G4 optimised software, runs much more efficiently), I'd greatly appreciate!
And this is all from a PC user who is ready for the switch.
Thank you for your attention.
format
-
Krzysztof
- Posts: 49
- Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2002 3:08 am
- Location: http://soundcloud.com/szychowski
- Contact:
Beatles had what to use?
A small point about what we have with Live. If I am not mistaken, The Beatles used 2 track Revox A77 machines to do a majority of their work...they seemed to manage quite well with this set-up. I woulld venture to suggest that we are in a better position than the Fab Four with regards to our set-ups. Any Mac or PC running Live is truly a fine set-up.
The only unfortunate thing is that by creating this gem of a tool, the Abletons have sparked people's creative imagination beyond what is possible at the present moment in time to program. Right now will just have to be a little bit later. Think 2 track Revox A77. Do what you do now on a 2 track......I have, it's a messy business.
V2 is good fun, thanks all.
Krzysztof
The only unfortunate thing is that by creating this gem of a tool, the Abletons have sparked people's creative imagination beyond what is possible at the present moment in time to program. Right now will just have to be a little bit later. Think 2 track Revox A77. Do what you do now on a 2 track......I have, it's a messy business.
V2 is good fun, thanks all.
Krzysztof
-
ischo didn't log in
Re: Beatles had what to use?
If it came with George Martin and Geoff Emerick I would take the Revox, no offense AbletonKrzysztof wrote:I woulld venture to suggest that we are in a better position than the Fab Four with regards to our set-ups.
-
Guest
hi guys,
relevent news from macnn.
IBM confirms new PowerPC chip has AltiVec
IBM confirmed that its PowerPC 970 processor, which is scheduled to begin shipping in the second half of 2003, has AltiVec-compatible execution units, as noted by a MacNN reader: "The 970's multiple execution units including an AltiVec compatible vector processor are fed by an up to 900-MHz processor interface bus, which can deliver data at a rate of up to 6.4 GBps...In addition to high performance general -purpose processing, application-specific acceleration (such as multimedia) can be achieved through the AltiVec vector engine. Codeveloped by IBM, this engine extends the PowerPC instruction set with 162 Single-Instruction, Multiple Data (SIMD) instructions." [print | email | 40
Fortunately, altivec has a future..
relevent news from macnn.
IBM confirms new PowerPC chip has AltiVec
IBM confirmed that its PowerPC 970 processor, which is scheduled to begin shipping in the second half of 2003, has AltiVec-compatible execution units, as noted by a MacNN reader: "The 970's multiple execution units including an AltiVec compatible vector processor are fed by an up to 900-MHz processor interface bus, which can deliver data at a rate of up to 6.4 GBps...In addition to high performance general -purpose processing, application-specific acceleration (such as multimedia) can be achieved through the AltiVec vector engine. Codeveloped by IBM, this engine extends the PowerPC instruction set with 162 Single-Instruction, Multiple Data (SIMD) instructions." [print | email | 40
Fortunately, altivec has a future..
-
Alex Reynolds
- Posts: 989
- Joined: Sat Jul 13, 2002 5:48 am
- Location: Philadelphia, PA, USA
- Contact:
No confirmation yet on whether this will go into an Apple product, though.
IBM already has Fortran libraries for the Linux crowd to take advantage of the SIMD instruction set, and with their push for Linux-based workstations and servers, its not inconceivable that they might release a scientific workstation running Linux with a PPC 970.
-Alex
IBM already has Fortran libraries for the Linux crowd to take advantage of the SIMD instruction set, and with their push for Linux-based workstations and servers, its not inconceivable that they might release a scientific workstation running Linux with a PPC 970.
-Alex
True, no actual confirmation, but plenty of talk from IBM has centered around customers for this chip. It's almost certain that IBM is going to sell Linux workstations with the 970, sure, but Apple would be insane not to use it.
There have also been very solid (fwiw) rumors that IBM and Apple have worked together on the bus. In general I think it's pretty safe to assume that this chip will end up in the Mac.
There have also been very solid (fwiw) rumors that IBM and Apple have worked together on the bus. In general I think it's pretty safe to assume that this chip will end up in the Mac.