Ableton Forum

what's with all the politics?

what sort of mentality is that?

if you need a drum machine...then you've got some options..

Maschine is hailed as a pretty good one..
there are some more.. options .. from other companies.. each with it's own flaw

and believe me .. almost no company has a 'clean record' with it's customers..
as a company...you probably can't satisfy all the people all the time..
but you can come close..

if you blow out the 600$ on Maschine...
you'll get a (well tested) good DM...with a decent amount of sounds..
and is gonna be supported for at least the next 5yrs..if not more
so you do the math and figure out if you think it's worth it!

I’m willing to bet that Maschine with Komplete 8 integration is going to bring Kore-like functionality but with a lot more options. The only downside will be a serious monetary investment.

yep .. that's definitly a selling point.. the groundwork is already there via the 'kore' project..

3dot... wrote:what's with all the politics?

what sort of mentality is that?

if you need a drum machine...then you've got some options..

Maschine is hailed as a pretty good one..
there are some more.. options .. from other companies.. each with it's own flaw

and believe me .. almost no company has a 'clean record' with it's customers..
as a company...you probably can't satisfy all the people all the time..
but you can come close..

if you blow out the 600$ on Maschine...
you'll get a (well tested) good DM...with a decent amount of sounds..
and is gonna be supported for at least the next 5yrs..if not more
so you do the math and figure out if you think it's worth it!

Yeah, Maschine is much more than just a "drum machine" though. It's actually a full-on workstation/sequencer approaching DAW territory. The key factor being the level of hands-on hardware control that you can't get any other software.

I agree trying to avoid Max4Live discussion is kind of silly... it's another product with which people have found ways to do things that a lot of Live users want.

That said, though, I get the feeling a lot of these questions are about features people expect to find in Live. LFOs on arbitrary parameters, certain routings, smooth curves in automation lanes, MIDI transformations, realtime timestretching of a buffer ("scratching", for example), that sort of thing. Max4Live can do a lot of this with a bit of clever patching, but a lot of it seems to come as a surprise to people when it's not in vanilla Live. It makes the product sound less finished than it is.

I would love it if Ableton were to look at the things people were asking for with M4L and find ways to integrate them into basic Live using their excellent UI. Focus M4L on the real hackers who are trying to do new and unusual things, and who are the kind of people who'd be interested in Max in the first place.

delicioso wrote:

looprication wrote:Fuck Maschine. NI are designing it as an Ableton Live killer. If you truly care about Live and believe in the workflow it provides, steer clear. Plus, it will eventually get abandoned just like (almost) every other great NI product.

What the...?

That's nonsense. Here's what NI said a few months ago:

You choose to believe NI. Fine. Sounds like me when I bought Kore back in the day.

And as far as software companies having a perfect record, NI had an F rating with the Better Business Bureau (glad I checked my facts, they've been upgraded to a GENEROUS D-).

Microsoft have an A+.

Just say know.

Cheers,

-ix

Warrior Bob wrote:I agree trying to avoid Max4Live discussion is kind of silly... it's another product with which people have found ways to do things that a lot of Live users want.

That said, though, I get the feeling a lot of these questions are about features people expect to find in Live. LFOs on arbitrary parameters, certain routings, smooth curves in automation lanes, MIDI transformations, realtime timestretching of a buffer ("scratching", for example), that sort of thing. Max4Live can do a lot of this with a bit of clever patching, but a lot of it seems to come as a surprise to people when it's not in vanilla Live. It makes the product sound less finished than it is.

I would love it if Ableton were to look at the things people were asking for with M4L and find ways to integrate them into basic Live using their excellent UI. Focus M4L on the real hackers who are trying to do new and unusual things, and who are the kind of people who'd be interested in Max in the first place.

Yes those kind of thing are doable but not CPU friendly and useless as being "Live". Costomer wants pro programmer to code it from the ground to impliment them to Live itself.

looprication wrote:

delicioso wrote:

looprication wrote:Fuck Maschine. NI are designing it as an Ableton Live killer. If you truly care about Live and believe in the workflow it provides, steer clear. Plus, it will eventually get abandoned just like (almost) every other great NI product.

What the...?

That's nonsense. Here's what NI said a few months ago:

You choose to believe NI. Fine. Sounds like me when I bought Kore back in the day.

And as far as software companies having a perfect record, NI had an F rating with the Better Business Bureau (glad I checked my facts, they've been upgraded to a GENEROUS D-).

Microsoft have an A+.

Just say know.

Cheers,

-ix

NI is merely a sucking business man keeping sending affiliate ad everywhere on the internet and stalking visiters with cookies. I respect them being purely business man though. They highly knew what the business is.

What I always say to those who respect NI as a business entity: sure. But I'm not in it to get schooled in business. I'm in it for the music.

And on that note, I'm going to go make some noise.

Cheers,

-ix

pencilrocket wrote:

Warrior Bob wrote:I agree trying to avoid Max4Live discussion is kind of silly... it's another product with which people have found ways to do things that a lot of Live users want.

That said, though, I get the feeling a lot of these questions are about features people expect to find in Live. LFOs on arbitrary parameters, certain routings, smooth curves in automation lanes, MIDI transformations, realtime timestretching of a buffer ("scratching", for example), that sort of thing. Max4Live can do a lot of this with a bit of clever patching, but a lot of it seems to come as a surprise to people when it's not in vanilla Live. It makes the product sound less finished than it is.

I would love it if Ableton were to look at the things people were asking for with M4L and find ways to integrate them into basic Live using their excellent UI. Focus M4L on the real hackers who are trying to do new and unusual things, and who are the kind of people who'd be interested in Max in the first place.

Yes those kind of thing are doable but not CPU friendly and useless as being "Live". Costomer wants pro programmer to code it from the ground to impliment them to Live itself.

Yes. I am a customer and would very much like for someone to program every feature I want, but that's not going to happen. And I really do not understand why you say Max is useless for "Live". I've been using it on less powerful machines than I have now for years and it is not a CPU hog. VST's/AU's hog way more CPU most of the time. Adding to that, you can program Max/M4L very "cheaply" if you know what you are doing. Don't understand this argument.

trevox wrote:Yes. I am a customer and would very much like for someone to program every feature I want, but that's not going to happen. And I really do not understand why you say Max is useless for "Live". I've been using it on less powerful machines than I have now for years and it is not a CPU hog. VST's/AU's hog way more CPU most of the time. Adding to that, you can program Max/M4L very "cheaply" if you know what you are doing. Don't understand this argument.

You can understand the reason if you can code program or compare same kind of plugin which both are coded by really professional developer from the gound and are made merely for API. What if Live had been coded in visual programing software for noob rather than C++? You'll know naturally whether you are belong to those people called fanboy or not.

pencilrocket wrote:

trevox wrote:Yes. I am a customer and would very much like for someone to program every feature I want, but that's not going to happen. And I really do not understand why you say Max is useless for "Live". I've been using it on less powerful machines than I have now for years and it is not a CPU hog. VST's/AU's hog way more CPU most of the time. Adding to that, you can program Max/M4L very "cheaply" if you know what you are doing. Don't understand this argument.

You can understand the reason if you can code program or compare same kind of plugin which both are coded by really professional developer from the gound and are made merely for API. What if Live had been coded in visual programing software for noob rather than C++? You'll know naturally whether you are belong to those people called fanboy or not.

I do get your point, though small M4L patches do not hog too much CPU. I guess you would have to be running a LOT to notice the difference on a decent machine. And you cannot please everyone. My number one thing for Ableton to include is something like the midi environment in Logic. I wouldn't use half the M4L patches I have to now if they did.

But back to the original thread - if someone asks a question and M4L is the only solution within Live, I don't think anyone could be considered a Max fanboy for answering and trying to help. If they don't want that answer, fine - say so in the post.

Warrior Bob wrote: I would love it if Ableton were to look at the things people were asking for with M4L and find ways to integrate them into basic Live using their excellent UI. Focus M4L on the real hackers who are trying to do new and unusual things, and who are the kind of people who'd be interested in Max in the first place.

The thing is, there are too many such things IMO. If you're using Live for a complicated live show setup or a big installation, there's really complex control required. From what I can tell, there's a huge range of approaches that people take. Some use OSC with a bunch of network connections, some use MIDI controllers or automation of various kinds. When I see Plastikman's live setup for example, I think it's impressive in terms of scale but I would never choose to build a live show with such a structure, it seems completely unmanageable to me. The nice thing about M4L is that it's very open-ended and Ableton doesn't have to choose solutions for you, you can build your own. That's not a good approach to every problem, but it's really nice when you are doing something that, no matter how you approach, will require a lot of programming of one kind or another.

It's the same thing in terms of sound design I think. Consider something like Robert Henke's granulator. It's really great but it's hard to imagine that Ableton could anticipate every such device and build a native version or a bunch of native modules that would exhaust the possibilities. Sometimes you have an idea for a sound-making thing and you just have to program it because it doesn't exist.

The other alternative is to use something like XCode and write a native version of it, but that's a big step beyond M4L for most non-programmers. Even for programmers who want to get something out quickly rather than build a commercial version.

-Luddy

pencilrocket wrote:

trevox wrote:Yes. I am a customer and would very much like for someone to program every feature I want, but that's not going to happen. And I really do not understand why you say Max is useless for "Live". I've been using it on less powerful machines than I have now for years and it is not a CPU hog. VST's/AU's hog way more CPU most of the time. Adding to that, you can program Max/M4L very "cheaply" if you know what you are doing. Don't understand this argument.

You can understand the reason if you can code program or compare same kind of plugin which both are coded by really professional developer from the gound and are made merely for API. What if Live had been coded in visual programing software for noob rather than C++? You'll know naturally whether you are belong to those people called fanboy or not.

Wow, we got ourselves a real C++ guru here. your world seems pretty black and white to me. For once, there is quite a difference in programming audio effects (audio processing) versus the Max portion (e.g. building controllers, routing MIDI, LFO's and so on) which doesn't require that much CPU. I am not sure there are too many people trying to recreate Aether Reverb (as an example) in M4L.

Ultimately, the right tool for the right job, and you seem not to have grasped the concept of visual programming languages either. Let's see how long it takes you to implement this Excel VBA form with Assembler.

luddy wrote:It's the same thing in terms of sound design I think. Consider something like Robert Henke's granulator. It's really great but it's hard to imagine that Ableton could anticipate every such device and build a native version or a bunch of native modules that would exhaust the possibilities.
-Luddy

It is possible (I think this makes more sense) to bundle granular plugin to their suite package to increase their upgrade price. And also I understood that he is a member of the dev team so it is easy for Ableton to write the plugin in same programing environment as Live's native. But this conjecture can be applied as long as the granular plugin isn't using API which isn't prepared for Live's native plugin itself because of technical obstacle. I don't imagine native pluging has more limitation than vst though. Either way I don't know why they didn't chose write it as vst but m4l. (wow Mr.Henke spent 10 years to build its plugin because he did all inside m4l by himself maybe) Mr.Henke possibly rejected to release from Ableton or Ableton possibly just tried to gain sales of m4l by keeping it in m4l.