timday wrote: - be able to hot swap AU factory presets, like we could in Live 8. It makes some AUs pretty much unusable that we can't.
You could press hot swap on the Ableton AU wrapper and it would open up the factory presets in the browser. DAWs clearly can find them on some level, in Logic for example the AU wrapper has a preset menu which accesses them, and VSTs in Ableton have a preset drop list that includes hard coded factory presets. No idea why they dropped it for 9 but it might be incompatible with the browser I guess.mholloway wrote:timday wrote: - be able to hot swap AU factory presets, like we could in Live 8. It makes some AUs pretty much unusable that we can't.
Huh..!? I've been using Live since version 7, on a Mac using AU's, and I don't think I've ever been aware of such functionality in 7/8 (and so obviously I never missed it in 9). How did this even work? On what level did Live have access to 3rd party preset banks?
-M
The soft white underbelly of this is that most of these people asking for production features are bedroom producers who will never release anything..stevemac wrote: Whilst a lot of people use it in Live situations, I think we can all agree that the vast majority of users are production focussed. Getting ideas down quickly, experimenting with different ideas / jamming, and then being able to produce it into a finished product.
I'd love to see even more live performance features, that would be great! But we can't forget what most people use the tool for. Additions to both sides are welcome!
Kind of agree and what I was talking before: Live needs to keep being improving at performance to be keep itself ahead, it almost has a monopoly. Its where artist get more value from it.Machinesworking wrote:The soft white underbelly of this is that most of these people asking for production features are bedroom producers who will never release anything..stevemac wrote: Whilst a lot of people use it in Live situations, I think we can all agree that the vast majority of users are production focussed. Getting ideas down quickly, experimenting with different ideas / jamming, and then being able to produce it into a finished product.
I'd love to see even more live performance features, that would be great! But we can't forget what most people use the tool for. Additions to both sides are welcome!
Not saying that's a bad thing, but it's at the heart of a huge problem with Live, and it's dedication to it's customer base. I get that I'm not sounding very sympathetic here, I am, but I think there's a disconnect that happens with Live in particular that doesn't happen with other oddball DAWs like ReNoise and Fruity Loops. With those programs there's this feeling that it's best to have it do what it does well and not attempt to be Pro Tools, Logic, DP, Cubase etc. but somehow easy and intuitive....
^^^ So what we get is Live getting less easy and intuitive, but in no way is it going to catch up to Logic or DP etc. Those programs are a good 15 years older than Live, and although far less intuitive, have had that amount of time to add in little things for mixing down and 50 track productions. Things that Live only sort of pulls off, yet the bedroom producers want. I make the distinction because the more you read about and talk to people who are actually making money off of electronic music they tend to not be very afraid of using more than one DAW for their work: Logic users who use Pro Tools, Live users who use Logic, Cubase users who also work with Reason and Live etc.
So it's this never ending battle for Ableton to keep adding in features that A- the bedroom producer wants because he has a friend that has Cubase etc.. When the other part of their buying audience B- is just wanting Live to be as fun to use as a MPC 1000 etc. My point is they will NEVER satisfy A-, it's not going to happen, but B is possible.
I get it, group A wants a fun DAW that gets a song down quickly after a hard day at work, but what makes live unique is it's performance features, it's ability to play a DAW like a sampler or turntables etc.
Case in point, Racks. Racks are more set up for producers than for performance. There's literally nothing about them that helps a performer conserve CPU when morphing between sounds etc. Nothing in there that contributes to changing presets in VSTs or switching VSTs where there's any CPU saving... Anyway I get it, but it's frustrating, because Live could be so much better if it didn't try to be everymans DAW. Seriously if people need Cubase or Logic features they should use those programs, they're really great DAWs. They suck in live performance though.
Ableton aren't the only ones sucked into this vortex though, looking at Reason, it's IMO stagnating because it's been dragged into being a copy of Logic, Cubase etc.
DAW feature that have been one of the most requested: Record take folders (or any sort help for recording multiple takes) is requested by every big time producer who would like to record with Live. That is the single biggest reason why producers are forced to work with other DAWs when recording.Machinesworking wrote:stevemac wrote: The soft white underbelly of this is that most of these people asking for production features are bedroom producers who will never release anything..
BoddAH wrote:Bedroom producers are the reason businesses like Ableton can even exist and stay profitable. It’s not the handful of professional sound engineers and world-famous producers who make up most of Ableton’s revenue. It’s the millions of bedroom producers who will never make a cent but spend tons of money dreaming of being just like them.
BoddAH wrote:Bedroom producers are the reason businesses like Ableton can even exist and stay profitable. It’s not the handful of professional sound engineers and world-famous producers who make up most of Ableton’s revenue. It’s the millions of bedroom producers who will never make a cent but spend tons of money dreaming of being just like them.
So doesn't that mean that the professionals and famous producers that are inspiring these undisciplined bedroom renters are in fact creating a revenue stream for Ableton?BoddAH wrote:Bedroom producers are the reason businesses like Ableton can even exist and stay profitable. It’s not the handful of professional sound engineers and world-famous producers who make up most of Ableton’s revenue. It’s the millions of bedroom producers who will never make a cent but spend tons of money dreaming of being just like them.
Same thing with any brick and mortar music store. If you ask management (and they are willing to let you in on the secret), 99% of gear purchases are made by hobbyists. (People not making music for a living.) Which means, 99% of anything you see on NAMM is bought by "bedroom producers", really.BoddAH wrote:Bedroom producers are the reason businesses like Ableton can even exist and stay profitable.
Point well made, I think one of the best things Ableton could do is find a way to include multi core support for chains, however that seems very unlikely from happening.Machinesworking wrote:stevemac wrote:
Case in point, Racks. Racks are more set up for producers than for performance. There's literally nothing about them that helps a performer conserve CPU when morphing between sounds etc. Nothing in there that contributes to changing presets in VSTs or switching VSTs where there's any CPU saving... Anyway I get it, but it's frustrating, because Live could be so much better if it didn't try to be everymans DAW. Seriously if people need Cubase or Logic features they should use those programs, they're really great DAWs. They suck in live performance though.
IMO their multi core support seems to be roughly two core support.pinkpaint wrote: Point well made, I think one of the best things Ableton could do is find a way to include multi core support for chains, however that seems very unlikely from happening.
