Ableton Forum

Poster wrote: one man meetings and discussions take less time; you always agree with yourself

I only rarely agree with myself

Seriously though, I think "one-man developers" also listen to their users, and have a variety of needs to meet.

Yeah i get what you mean. I know great one-man developers too. Stiwi (Automat) and Mike (Audiorealism).
They both do very amazing jobs at creating their vision of what their product should be.
But that's one man's vision.

have a look on ext forums on kvr and tell me it's a one ma vision...
of course, Jorgen finally decide what to code or not, but most of the features are intensively tested, then lots of suggestions come to improve the workflow or to go further, we try betas, sometimes Jorgen goes back, etc....

my point with abletons is: the devellopement of features seems slow (from an external point of view) and even worse, if a needed feature is not on the current version, you ll have to wait one more year and maybe spend some more money. all is about frustration: I love my live 4, but some frustrating problems aren't even solved yet in live 6. I know it's all about choosing what have to be coded, what feature has top priority, but hey, for the price of the update+sampler, I can easily buy frooty xxl and lifetime thing...

headquest wrote:

Poster wrote: one man meetings and discussions take less time; you always agree with yourself

Seriously though, I think "one-man developers" also listen to their users, and have a variety of needs to meet.

I was joking
I imagined how a one man board meeting would go:

".. we all agree on this? yeah?.. nobody?.. ok, meeting adjourned.."

Silicon/Silicium wrote: ...have a look on ext forums on kvr and tell me it's a one ma vision...
of course, Jorgen finally decide what to code or not, but most of the features are intensively tested, then lots of suggestions come to improve the workflow or to go further, we try betas, sometimes Jorgen goes back, etc....

my point with abletons is: the devellopement of features seems slow (from an external point of view) and even worse, if a needed feature is not on the current version, you ll have to wait one more year and maybe spend some more money. all is about frustration: I love my live 4, but some frustrating problems aren't even solved yet in live 6. I know it's all about choosing what have to be coded, what feature has top priority, but hey, for the price of the update+sampler, I can easily buy frooty xxl and lifetime thing...

Steady development is not an issue so far as I am concerned - after all, I do use Audition and Reason

What I am less keen on is this scenario:
A product is partly finished, but some of the "vision" the developers have is not finished yet... when the businessman/marketing manager come along and say, in effect, "sorry guys but the pot's looking empty, so we'll have to just release it as it is. Also we'll need to charge and extra $200 for this bit of it, in order to pay our bills for the next few months. You could always have a go at finishing off the things you didn't complete, and we'll charge for them next year."

I'm not saying that is how it has been with Ableton - just that it slightly just a little bit appears that way to me... and that given the tremendous success of Live 5 the business is not more steady by now (as with the Propellerheads, for example, who are a similar sized company working in a similar business environment).

5.1 surround sound is all i want..

sorry i just thought of something else...
where you change the pitch of a clip, i would like that to be laid out like the piano roll.

Poster wrote:

headquest wrote:

Poster wrote: one man meetings and discussions take less time; you always agree with yourself

Seriously though, I think "one-man developers" also listen to their users, and have a variety of needs to meet.

I was joking
I imagined how a one man board meeting would go:

".. we all agree on this? yeah?.. nobody?.. ok, meeting adjourned.."

Off course those one-man developers listen to their users. It's the only way to get honest feedback.
But in the end. They don't have to argue for weeks with Gerhard or Robert

I wont claim to know or understand how Ableton fully works. But i do know that they can put up a pretty decent discussion when it comes to details.
At this point, it's just too late to make major changes. But that doesn't mean that you'll have to wait till Live 7.

Personally i don't believe that Ableton would have been able to start with Live 6 without even thinking about Live 7, 8 and 9...

They have plans. They just need loads of feedback to see which plans get priority...
Don't forget. Bug fixes and improvements have the priority now.

sweetjesus wrote: * last kinks of the arrange slowness to be ironed out

so you're saying this is still there in Live 6? At what CPU load do you start to feel the slow reactions? In Live 5, it was like 60%, with audio drop outs around 80%...

Poster wrote: one man meetings and discussions take less time; you always agree with yourself

ha ha... lots of people don't agree with themselves!

sweetjesus wrote:Live 6 is rocking my world and has more than enough tools for me to make music. But let's say I'm greedy and I already know what I'd like to see in Live 7 so I can make music in the most comfortable way possible.

Here's what I would love to see in Live 7 to consider Live a totally well rounded application.

* Detachable panels which can be configued to show arrangement & session one on each screen. .. multiple waveforms.. . etc..

good.

sweetjesus wrote: * Bezier curve automation

good

sweetjesus wrote: * Script clips (programmin Live .. YUM)

good.

sweetjesus wrote: * support for Battery kits

hmmm, okay.

sweetjesus wrote:
* automatic transient detection and slicing capabilities

okay.

sweetjesus wrote: * slightly more refined piano roll

very good.

sweetjesus wrote: * recording direct to the sampler

very good.

sweetjesus wrote: * overdubbing of clips or the ability to play more than one clip from a track which would then lead to...

good.

sweetjesus wrote:
* clip x fades on the arrange view

very good.

sweetjesus wrote: * some kind of groove manipulation tool for midi (ala groove quantize type scenario)

good.

sweetjesus wrote: * for Live to send info about clip names in slots to midi controllers so I no longer need a computer screen

good.

sweetjesus wrote: * better manipulatio of clip play position

okay.

sweetjesus wrote: * multiple automation parameters for a track in the arrange view

good.

sweetjesus wrote:
* ability to record automation into clips in the session view

very good.

sweetjesus wrote: * last kinks of the arrange slowness to be ironed out

[/quote]
good.

Okay. All good. We will do it. But don`t know when.

Robert

sweetjesus wrote:

ze2be wrote:

DeadlyKungFu wrote:It already supports two mice, I've worked like that before, one wireless keybaord and mouse, another set attached. Great way to work with someone else.

No, what I meen would require some programing: Being able to use two mouse at the same time. One mouse in each hand? Todays OSes is one finger play only! (mouse cursor) Had this thought for many years, still not happening.. I guess it requires OS programing... Musicaly speaking: polyphony! Were still at mono cursor!

It would change a lot of software editing ways. Two people could edit on the same computer at the same time, or you could have one mouse in each hand.

Imagine what you could do in real life with two hands better then with one. Well, you have the qwerty keyboard and controlers, but you cant "touch" everything with it instantly, without pre-programing hotkeys etc.

Its something I would expect on Linux rather then Win/Mac though...

http://cpnmouse.sourceforge.net/

AH! Sweet, sweeet!! Didnt see that link before now!

Perfect for my studio work!! We are usualy two in my studio, and its alway an arse that one have to be the backside driver when it comes to editing. We can have one screen in front of the instruments, and one in front of the midi controllers, AND have each our mouse without moving each other mouse position!

Didnt think this was possible, thank you sweetjesus!

forge wrote: I just would like to keep Live in the live and spontaneous way it is in session, which I dont feel arrange is at the moment - but you need arrange to finish anything

I would like to see the 2 views linked more closely

I see what you meen. And splitting up the arrange and the session on two windows, would help your idea to see what session clip is where in arrange. As it is now, the arranger is so simple to me, that I raraly think of it as more then almost just a track recording ghost master(!), with some editing possibilities. I wouldnt start recording into the arranger like you said, befor id belive everything was ready for going "live" on stage from the session alone. I guess were talking different working methods. Its not a complete DAW yet...

Hi, I haven`t posted for a while, so here goes.

I don`t think people realise just how time consuming and expensive the development process can be. I`m a game developer (for a small Scottish company) by trade and can understand the amount of work and planning and bugfixing that has to go into a commercial product.

I`ve nothing but respect for the Ableton; every year a new version comes with better and more complex features (BTW I`m a hobby user). Sure, bigger companies can implement more in the same time, but do they listen as much to the user base? Someone, somewhere has had to painfully choose which features make it and which are left out. It aint easy.

I look forward to upgrading to and finally using 6.0 when it`s released.

Cheers,

Plonk.

live 6 = dual core

live 7 = 64 bit?

no one for a drum map?

I am contractually obliged to mention recording controllers in session at this point.