Page 2 of 7

Re: APC40 v.s PUSH

Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 4:32 pm
by JuanSOLO
studiologic wrote:
JuanSOLO wrote:
Matt_Quinn wrote:but it's just way too much desk space for me when they perform a lot of the same functions.
The APC40 does very little compared to PUSH.
Like I said, it's gonna collect dust one day.
not sure what this means... but Live 9 will be collecting dust one day too!!!
true.

I was referring to an earlier post.
I have an APC40, Ive done pretty much everything you can do with it using a wide array of workarounds.
I will keep it
I will get PUSH
after that, my APC40 will most likely be in my way.

Re: APC40 v.s PUSH

Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 4:58 pm
by BBR
Something that hasn't been explicitly stated though: Can Push launch clips like the apc40?

Re: APC40 v.s PUSH

Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 5:01 pm
by Alfonso Muchacho
I've got an APC40 and the PUSH is going to sit nicely on the other side of my desk where the Maschine was going to go. For me the APC will handle the mixing and performance side and the Push will handle the production.

Simples

Re: APC40 v.s PUSH

Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 5:05 pm
by BBR
Also something to consider: compared to maschine and traditional drumpads, Push looks like it has significantly smaller pads, which may affect your finger drumming.

Re: APC40 v.s PUSH

Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 5:08 pm
by friend_kami
JuanSOLO wrote:
studiologic wrote:could someone exactly point what the differences are? saying what apc40 lacks push has... what exactly does that mean? or are we talking from a gearlust prospective?
Lots of fucking buttons! Step Sequencing, Browsing, various modes, velocity sensitive pads, better layout (not a-symetrical), LCD screen. Less Laptop mouseclicky, MORE FUN.

It's just lacking Faders, which makes me think we will see other devices.
This one seems very drum centric, which looks GREAT to me.

Remember, they released the APC40, everyone jumped on it, about 3 months later, LAUNCHPAD.

I see a PUSH and an analogue mixer in my future.
push+: all that push has + bank switch buttons and motorised faders. G I V E.
add an multi-io audio interface to that and you can pretty much kick everyone's ass.

Re: APC40 v.s PUSH

Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 5:08 pm
by stringtapper
BBR wrote:Something that hasn't been explicitly stated though: Can Push launch clips like the apc40?
I'm pretty sure that's the whole point, to be able to have "zones" on the grid so you can launch clips and step sequence parts simultaneously.

Re: APC40 v.s PUSH

Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 5:24 pm
by BBR
stringtapper wrote:
BBR wrote:Something that hasn't been explicitly stated though: Can Push launch clips like the apc40?
I'm pretty sure that's the whole point, to be able to have "zones" on the grid so you can launch clips and step sequence parts simultaneously.
yeah, I just looked through the whole Push page and watched the other videos, looks awesome.

Re: APC40 v.s PUSH

Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 6:00 pm
by Matt_Quinn
>Something that hasn't been explicitly stated though: Can Push launch clips like the apc40?

If you’re familiar with Live, Push complements what you already know. Live runs in the background, filling your Set with clips and scenes as you create with Push. You can switch between Push and Live when you’re ready to finalize your song, and you’ll find all of your song materials ready for you in Live’s Session View. Push is also the ultimate performance controller, with pads that can be instantly repurposed into a clip launching grid. And Live’s tight integration with Max for Live lets you customize Push for your own working style, or reprogram it to add new features and workflows.

Re: APC40 v.s PUSH

Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 6:24 pm
by Tunecrew
from a live performance perspective I would personally rather have the APC's faders (despite them being only so-so) than none at all.

Re: APC40 v.s PUSH

Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 6:41 pm
by Matt_Quinn
It looks like the knobs will control track volume, which IMO is even better than faders, since as you scroll through tracks, there won't be a disconnect between where the physical faders are & where the on screen volume is.

Re: APC40 v.s PUSH

Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 7:02 pm
by puzzlefactory
Someone made a good point over on the Maschine forum, that putting the encoders above the lcd screen is a bit of a silly idea as your arms are going to block the view of the screen. :?

Re: APC40 v.s PUSH

Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 7:06 pm
by Matt_Quinn
After working with the APC (and no screen at all) for 3 years, I don't think that will be an issue (for me, at least).

Re: APC40 v.s PUSH

Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 7:08 pm
by mharris
It seems to me that the APC40 is focused more towards controlling transport and mixer functions i.e. dedicated solo, mute, rec, pan and sends per track. The Push is clearly aimed more at composition.

At least that's how I would see myself using the two together.

Its a shame the APC40 is so bulky though. It would be great if the Push could perform the functions that I currently rely on the APC for. Is there any indication that it can do track solo, mute and pan ?

Re: APC40 v.s PUSH

Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 7:10 pm
by mharris
puzzlefactory wrote:Someone made a good point over on the Maschine forum, that putting the encoders above the lcd screen is a bit of a silly idea as your arms are going to block the view of the screen. :?
If you're sat down that's not true at all, try it. You simply look under your wrist, and that's far more ergonomic than trying to look above your hand.

Re: APC40 v.s PUSH

Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 7:12 pm
by Matt_Quinn
I *think* (this is speculation) that the 2 small-ish rows of buttons on top of Push probably function as Record/Track activator buttons. Or some combination of Record/Activate/Solo. I think those keys probably change based on what mode you're in (IE track/device/clip/volume/browse).