Ableton Forum

Ableton is far ahead of everyone else in terms of workflow, audio manipulation, and performance. That being said they are far behind in stability, as well as a lot of the functions that you find tools, and other main stream daw's.

They just need to take the year or so to rewrite a lot (if not all) the code and implement very few (if any new features) They do not need to concern themselves with the DAW race. Look at reason. They seem to be 5 years behind the "DAW race" in implementing futuristic features but they still have a very loyal fan base that is willing to shell out their cash to buy the product. Why, because they know that their product will do exactly what it is suppose ti without problems. I am not comparing the two, or even saying that reason is better.

All I am saying is that live does not need to concern itself with falling behind or leading (think that was part of the problem to begin with), they just need to concentrate on producing a product that does what it is suppose to WITHOUT FAIL. Also do not advertise products that you do not give your customer after the release, that is simply horrible business.

They also need to greatly alter the way in which they perform beta testing.

Doing the reason 5/ record 1.5 beta testing has opened my eyes to the way in which this should be done.
After you register a bug it goes up on a board starting whether they have looked, if others have reproduced it, and the level of concern that this specific bug has.

They just need to alter their business out look and the way their product is produced


P.S. did not know Sonar had matrix view, going go check it out thanks for the tip!?! It's really one of the main reasons I really use live

HeadrickProductions wrote:Ableton is far ahead of everyone else in terms of workflow, audio manipulation, and performance.

P.S. did not know Sonar had matrix view, going go check it out thanks for the tip!?! It's really one of the main reasons I really use live

When you get into things like support for third party vsts, audio units, and max for live it's like opening a pandora's box for problems. It's funny because restrictions can also HELP workflow, just look at how Reason users have been able to overcome obstacles to make some great music.

So yeah, you heard it here first: ABLETON - I WANT MORE RESTRICTIONS within the software.

HeadrickProductions wrote:They just need to take the year or so to rewrite a lot (if not all) the code

why?

dj_blueprint wrote:When you get into things like support for third party vsts, audio units, and max for live it's like opening a pandora's box for problems. It's funny because restrictions can also HELP workflow, just look at how Reason users have been able to overcome obstacles to make some great music.

So yeah, you heard it here first: ABLETON - I WANT MORE RESTRICTIONS within the software.

you know you can restrict yourself dont you?
self control man!

yearlongyeti wrote:I know we are ableton lovers here. But I was wondering if ableton's efforts to make ableton somewhat more reliable and other software platforms incorporating ableton's benefits into their own. Is ableton become alot less prefered and cutting edge (for want of a better description).

besides the fact that they weren't necessarily ahead, just off to their own side, I'd say the fact that other companies are incorporating their designs/ideas means that the others may be catching up... which normally would mean that someone/something is loosing some type of lead, but in this case, its inevitable. Create new thing everybody wants, watch other companies try to mimic... repeat, repeat, repeat... thats what "progress" is about.

imitation is the sincerest form of flattery

there's nothing new under the sun

etc. etc.

HeadrickProductions wrote:Ableton is far ahead of everyone else in terms of workflow, audio manipulation, and performance. That being said they are far behind in stability, as well as a lot of the functions that you find tools, and other main stream daw's.

i hope the stability issue is just a phase.. even if that is a over 1 year long phase by now... and no end in sight.. had a crash with dataloss last week.. again ..every day i try to work with live i will have at least one crash .. at different points.. .. only reson that this is only one crash the week is because i dont use it more often theese days.. just kills the fun...
however.. the new beta has a long changelog.. so they are working on it...


I dont agree that ableton is ahead in terms of wrkflow.. its rather a twice as much moves daw...

the advantage is that you can operate it totally stoned or without much knowledge.. but in relation to a guy that works protools or logic with a dedicated keyboard and all the shortcuts you are riding a snail...
So you wont see Ableton live in professional postproduction where the people are paid by the hour...

Its advanced especially in the area of remote controlability.. there it is ahead of any other software..

it also has creative ways to work with plugs thanks to the racks.. and its pattern based..

after studio vision collapsed there was no pattern based daw on the market anymore..

this more than anything else turns live into a stage sequencer..

the elastic audio was no novum..acid was ther before.. and is still better in many regards..

but in combination with the pattern based sequencing and remote options life is the more advanced stage software..

thats the strong points-... in all other areas they are behind.. thats a sad fact

but.. the other daw´s are basically all around 15 years older than live .. in case of protools there is a high optimisation towards audio editing... and cubase and logic was fully developed midisequencers before they even started with HD recording..

so its quite natural that ableton is behind in this areas.. however by now they should be able to tighten that gap... at least the basics are there now...

when they manage that midi events get recorded at the correct time.. and the program gets ready for timecode.. we finaly can call it a daw.. sofar its still a stage tool that has a strong tendency t crash in the wrong moment or dont likes to get slave synced or start properly when beeing master...

sofar ther was never one version of live that could have been called ready..such things as groove quantize or grouptracks are age old standards one likes to see in a DAW.. but its crashing...

maybe 7 was somehow ready...


But with the others? I can open a logic 4.. and it dont leaves wishes open for an audio production for me..

or logic 5.5 the last pc version.. i know many people that still use it...

logic 4 is over 10 years old now... its not a flaw of ableton live.. ther is no other way than being behind when it comes to the point of replacing the other pro daw´s...

su wrote:

HeadrickProductions wrote:They just need to take the year or so to rewrite a lot (if not all) the code

why?

some say that rewriting is the best way to ensure the old stability with all the new features and allow to add new features in the future without stability problems.. dont know if that is really the case..
but the big amount of issues with L8 and the struggle of ableton to solve them points in that direction.

Nice post replaze..

We're (imo) too into putting everything in place...
I personally don't care wether Live is ahead, behind, to the side, above, below or anywhere else.

All I care about, is that the DAW I use works for me... And for the most part, Live does.. I've tried other DAWs and I like Live the best.. So that's what I use.... Simplez

Hd

Ableton's decision to put all of their focus on fixing bugs looks like they're focusing on primarily trying to maintain their current user base. Of course, they want new customers as well, but making sure that all of their current users have a fully working, as-close-to-bug-free, version of Live 8 seems to be their top priority.

This is a ballsy move, as it delays the release of Live 9 which would drive more sales, but Ableton must feel that making Live 8.x completely robust is more important in the long run than adding the next latest greatest features.

3phase wrote:

su wrote:

HeadrickProductions wrote:They just need to take the year or so to rewrite a lot (if not all) the code

why?

some say that rewriting is the best way to ensure the old stability with all the new features and allow to add new features in the future without stability problems.. dont know if that is really the case..
but the big amount of issues with L8 and the struggle of ableton to solve them points in that direction.

Not sure what that guy "some" is referring to.

But there's a process called code refactoring that might fit the bill. Now I wouldn't call that rewriting, but rather restructuring or rearranging.

I may be splitting hair here, refactoring certainly involves rewriting. It's just that "rewriting" sounds so drastic. Refactoring (or at least analysing if it's needed) is more of a regular part of the coding process. Should be, anyway.

It's much like your home. Now and then, you'll need to rearrange it to better suit your living. Sometimes it's small changes (your record collection grows so you need more book shelves), sometimes big (your girlfriend gets pregnant so half your home studio must be turned into a nursery).

Refactoring is rearranging code to make it better fit the needs. Obviously, adding features (records, babies) will change the needs, thus call for more rearrangements (book shelves, nurseries).

Now when you're on a deadline, refactoring may get pushed down the priority list (I'll move my synths after the baby's born). Problem is, if you add features but don't refactor, you'll end up with code that isn't optimally structured (where's the diapers? under the MS-20!). That may result in performance and stability issues and makes it unnecessarily difficult to find and fix what's wrong.

Thing is, modern code is very modular and steering clear of unwanted interdependencies is an important design goal. Even if the Abes did let things slide, it's not likely that every "module" is messy. Hopefully, what's needed is more like rearranging the furniture, than rebuilding the house from scratch.

Is Live falling behind the competition? I'm not sure what the competition is. What made me switch to Live wasn't that it's better than the rest, but that there's nothing quite like it. Still isn't, IMHO. And I'm sure the Abes are gonna start adding a lot of new features as soon as the code base is nice and tidy again.

3phase wrote:

HeadrickProductions wrote:Ableton is far ahead of everyone else in terms of workflow, audio manipulation, and performance. That being said they are far behind in stability, as well as a lot of the functions that you find tools, and other main stream daw's.

i hope the stability issue is just a phase.. even if that is a over 1 year long phase by now... and no end in sight.. had a crash with dataloss last week.. again ..every day i try to work with live i will have at least one crash .. at different points.. .. only reson that this is only one crash the week is because i dont use it more often theese days.. just kills the fun...
however.. the new beta has a long changelog.. so they are working on it...


I dont agree that ableton is ahead in terms of wrkflow.. its rather a twice as much moves daw...

the advantage is that you can operate it totally stoned or without much knowledge.. but in relation to a guy that works protools or logic with a dedicated keyboard and all the shortcuts you are riding a snail...
So you wont see Ableton live in professional postproduction where the people are paid by the hour...

Its advanced especially in the area of remote controlability.. there it is ahead of any other software..

it also has creative ways to work with plugs thanks to the racks.. and its pattern based..

after studio vision collapsed there was no pattern based daw on the market anymore..

this more than anything else turns live into a stage sequencer..

the elastic audio was no novum..acid was ther before.. and is still better in many regards..

but in combination with the pattern based sequencing and remote options life is the more advanced stage software..

thats the strong points-... in all other areas they are behind.. thats a sad fact

but.. the other daw´s are basically all around 15 years older than live .. in case of protools there is a high optimisation towards audio editing... and cubase and logic was fully developed midisequencers before they even started with HD recording..

so its quite natural that ableton is behind in this areas.. however by now they should be able to tighten that gap... at least the basics are there now...

when they manage that midi events get recorded at the correct time.. and the program gets ready for timecode.. we finaly can call it a daw.. sofar its still a stage tool that has a strong tendency t crash in the wrong moment or dont likes to get slave synced or start properly when beeing master...

sofar ther was never one version of live that could have been called ready..such things as groove quantize or grouptracks are age old standards one likes to see in a DAW.. but its crashing...

maybe 7 was somehow ready...


But with the others? I can open a logic 4.. and it dont leaves wishes open for an audio production for me..

or logic 5.5 the last pc version.. i know many people that still use it...

logic 4 is over 10 years old now... its not a flaw of ableton live.. ther is no other way than being behind when it comes to the point of replacing the other pro daw´s...

I like your logic, makes sense. I have only used tools while being controlled from either an axiom or axiom pro and have never used those keyboards with all the short cuts and the commando controller. That being said I am sure if you inverst in all those that the workflow is much better.

I still feel that for what I need, performance, tweaking audio and simply throwing ideas around in session view that live is the best (For now). BUT like we both said the reliability of live's stability (like the sound of that...just rolls out) is a huge step in the wrong direction.

I wish they could some how splinter the software and have two different applications. Performance focused then a true DAW. I know this is not going to happen but I want to use live on stage without fear.


Thanks 3phaze for the input

In my opinion live is so far ahead that they simply got ahead of themselves, and now are working on solidifying how far out there they have gone. That to me is a beautiful thing.

RonC

HeadrickProductions wrote: I have only used tools while being controlled from either an axiom or axiom pro

You can be controlled by a MIDI keyboard??

Cool Character wrote:

HeadrickProductions wrote: I have only used tools while being controlled from either an axiom or axiom pro

You can be controlled by a MIDI keyboard??

ha ha ha ha....now that I think about it, i think m audio has been controlling me for years