Anyone seriously use arrangement?

[Poster]

sorry.. expand on it with a name bar is a bit to simple

how would you put titles in the folded group track in Arrange?
cannot be done unless you enlarge the group track's height, which again defeats the purpose of grouped tracks..

[Machinesworking]

I use it a fair amount.

Big ups for being succinct.

[3phase]

sorry.. expand on it with a name bar is a bit to simple

how would you put titles in the folded group track in Arrange?
cannot be done unless you enlarge the group track's height, which again defeats the purpose of grouped tracks..

just the same way its done with the audio and midi tracks... if live would be well designed from the beginning to the end you would find the same parameter set for audio, midi and group clips.. there would be group clips !

and in ideal they would have an editor window aswell... one for all tracks inside the group..

in the midi clips you would have trasnpose parameter and warp markers..

and and..

the advantages of consiatent design are that that leads to other good designs.. in the end music is a logical thing and easy operation is also related to consistent design...

Live started as a maximal overview program.. it hasent kept up to its own design standarts.. probably they exchanged some good heads and the actuall design teams lacks some of the initial brilliance to take care of such details..
or its just difficult to add all the extra functionality... but especially because of this its important that you hold to your own design conventions wherever possible..

I never will understand why they havent implemented miditracks after theire own initial vision.. and gave us this rudimentary crap every 1980 sequencer can do better..

midi with warp? wow... especially because you manipulate an audio track.. and you might just want to do the same to the associated miditrack.. but how? impossible? i dont like that word for obvious production demands...

beside.. multitrack editing is missing badly in ableton live... all the others can do it... only ugly duckling ableton cant really...

the decission to have an extra feature set for the midi clips makes that rather difficult...

why haven they just used the audio engine for midi data? i think the midi data dont cares if it gets stored in an audio file..

to much cpu? we can run dozends of real time samplerate conversions and have elastic time for audio but the midi is build below the last century standard? now thats inovativ :-/

anyway... the sunspot activity is rising.. maybe that makes the ableton development team brighter and more inspired again..

i think when they started the program it was the last time high...

[nylarch]

Seriously dude. If you spent as much time trying to find a cure for cancer as you do complaining about Ableton we'd all be better off for it.

[Tarekith]

LOL, no kidding. I still don't know why he uses the app. Reminds me of Timur, always complaining about how it "Should Be". Coulda, shoulda, woulda, but it's not. Deal with it or move on already, life's too short to be this stressed out and constantly ranting about a freaking software program.

[3phase]

Seriously dude. If you spent as much time trying to find a cure for cancer as you do complaining about Ableton we'd all be better off for it.

i am fighting the cancer ... live used to be a nice designer software.. it turns more and more into a logic or cubase just with inferior performance.. but just from the genes it would be supposed to be superior..

ther was times this thing really felt like a music instrument and not like computertrouble... by now it feels more like computertrouble than the others.. somehing went wrong ..

the devil is in the details !

[dna598]

ther was times this thing really felt like a music instrument and not like computertrouble... by now it feels more like computertrouble than the others.. somehing went wrong ..

The live paradigm has not changed since it began AFAIK. Session view remains the "instrument". They just added (mainly) midi (!), slicing, and groups.

All essential stuff to pull a logic/cubase user over.

Stability issues aside (which I dont have), How is it no longer the "musical instrument" it used to be?

Is your latency too high?

[Cool Character]

The live paradigm has not changed since it began AFAIK. Session view remains the "instrument". They just added (mainly) midi (!), slicing, and groups.

A lot of the extra stuff they added don't integrate with the paradigm so well, and some even break it.

Just ignore / don't use those parts, you might say. It's not much of a solution for someone who bought Ableton to use MIDI within Ableton's paradigm, though. And even if you could afford to avoid them, sometimes the wonky parts entirely replace another fairly integrated one. Anyway I can totally see what 3phase is saying about Ableton going from an instrument to a disjointed mess. Not that I agree to the same degree he seems to mean it.

[clank72]

Weird...

I only use Arrangement view. I'm a longtime Cubase user and have also given Logic a try. I could think of so many reasons why I don't use Cubase and Logic anymore for producing tracks. The Media browser in Cubase sucks so bad after using Live's browser. Cubase and logic are so bloated, CPU hogs, more features then I need. No built in sampler, Gimmick Instruments like Groove Agent One, EXS24 is so ugly and tedious to use, stupid windows open all the time and get in the way etc etc. No thanks. Those days are over...

+1 Arrangement view here. Use what works best for you.

Another jab at ya about the blatant false statement about CPU usage, typical figures throughout the years on CPU VS Logic and Cubase have Live using 35% more CPU than Logic and 20% more than Cubase. If you were to compare the EXS24 to Lives' Sampler I would guarantee this disparity would be much worse. The EXS is by far the leanest sampler on the market. Plus is literally smokes Sampler in load times, you can browse sample libraries as fast as browsing presets in a synth, and it's not $125 extra or part of a suite you have to buy separately.
Arrange windows in Logic are entirely customizable, meaning all the feature bloat people complain about becomes a bonus. This is exactly the opposite of Live where a wanted feature is a wait for an upgrade and a hope it might get implemented. Of course use what you want to, I'm just saying feature wise, Live has a way to go before it compares to Logic or DP in this part. Again Session has no real rival though.

Never see it. Love my Live!

[SubFunk]

Comparing Live's Arranger to Logicubase is just useless.. Ableton never intended to match it and never will.. People will only be satisfied until the complete feature set of other DAWs is implemented, so if you think Ableton should look like the others you're better off using Logicubase.. Ableton should just improve Live's core and strenghts, not trying to be what others are already doing very well..

totally agree here!

[leedsquietman]

I love Live but as a Cubase user, I can tell you that Live runs at a higher CPU load and higher latency than Cubase, mostly due to it's audio engine design which allows for on the fly drop and drag for Live performance etc (this would cause a dropout in Cubase or most linear DAWS). One thing Ableton could consider would be a hybrid audio engine like in Samplitude, where you can choose the current model for Live performance, or a more traditional model where load and latency can be reduced but trading off the drop and drag on the fly parts, which would suit a lot of studio use where that's not much of an issue.

Cubase also takes less memory (much less on comparable audio tracks and plugins, if using vst3 plugins) unless you stack up multiple stereo convolution reverbs or have done tons of micro editing in Variaudio for pitch correction and left it realtime. The program itself is also only marginally more disk space than Live if you don't install the 4+ GB loop and sample content, these GBs of disk storage of sound content often cause people to say Logic and Cubase are bloated - they aren't without this (and remember, they also do multichannel audio and scoring, have MIDI logical editors and sysex support and more audio formats such as .omf, broadcast wave and mp3 EXPORT etc). Reaper is very lean, but has less MIDI functionality, no scoring and no sound content.


When my projects get heavy (40+ tracks and lots of plugins etc), I usually have to render it out and mix in Cubase, because it will be melting the CPU in Live. Although I generally prefer this anyway, better mixer screens, better dual monitor support (mixer on one screen, arrangement page on 2nd etc). I COMPOSE everything in Live though.

[SubFunk]

Arrange windows in Logic are entirely customizable, meaning all the feature bloat people complain about becomes a bonus.

i do get the complain of Logic or Cubase, etc having bloated pop up windows, but especially in the case of Logic, people tend to forget that you have screen shots (and you can set up plenty of them, if you like) that makes totally up for it and makes working and overview a breeze.

in other words you can create "single window switchable environments" booyah!!!

without any mess at all or the need to resize or mouse around etc, if you don't take advantage of that extremely powerful function, well then it's your own fault!

even the fact that ableton is not able to create single button shortcuts (or even chooseable) for changing views, some dude from the outside has to come along and create the ableschine template that allows to do that a la NI's maschine, shame on ableton, really! (because it shows it's easy doable, and has been requested over and over and over) but that's it, ableton became so utterly arrogant that they expect others to do some of the basic work for free for them. (i just say "testing" you $£^%$*&£$!!!!!!!!!!)

[macmurphy]

i suggest everybody fucks off and makes some music using whatever they feel like using.

[SubFunk]

i suggest everybody fucks off and makes some music using whatever they feel like using.

nothing to argue about, totally correct, but doesn't change the facts!

now back to music



p.s. i am just extremely pissed of about their utter arrogance of late.
that needs to be said.

[clank72]

When my projects get heavy (40+ tracks and lots of plugins etc), I usually have to render it out and mix in Cubase, because it will be melting the CPU in Live. Although I generally prefer this anyway, better mixer screens, better dual monitor support (mixer on one screen, arrangement page on 2nd etc). I COMPOSE everything in Live though.

Wow, a bomb went off in here.

I'm using a 2006 MacPro Quad Core. I've created over 100 tracks with Live and NEVER choked the CPU. I guess everyone works differently. On the other hand I had to make it a habit of constantly watching the CPU/Peak meter in Cubase. Sound familiar? If I load 3 Big VST Instruments, it all goes down. However in Live, I just totally forget about it. I can load 30 Samplers on one track, Have Ivory and GURU and Massive running, Independent Reverbs on each track.. the list goes on. It's also a better composing tool anyway, so it's a cozy balance for me personally. But sorry that's just me.

And whoever made the comment "Live users who are not satisfied until we have all the features of other DAWs". This doesn't apply to me, I'm just happy the way it is. You do not need tons of features to be creative or make good music. After you use Live for a while, going back to Cubase is like a step backward to me.

The problem right now is UAD Plug-ins! Those you have to keep an eye on!

With that said-If I was only doing multi-track recording and mixing/ Recording Bands etc... I would get a nice Cubase or Nuendo setup.

macmurphy wrote:
"i suggest everybody fucks off and makes some music using whatever they feel like using."

That's really what it comes down to.