Ableton Forum

I have no doubt they're well aware. it's common and generally part of the job description for software guys to go to developer's conferences to stay abreast of the latest technology, this stuff moves fast.

one thing about this forum that I love is that in any given topic there are people in it that are wickedly informed on it. it pays to read between the lines, some of these guys are really quiet about it. you've shown your own expertise in some areas, I appreciate that. this area? I'm leaning towards the other guys.

Tone Deft wrote:I have no doubt they're well aware. it's common and generally part of the job description for software guys to go to developer's conferences to stay abreast of the latest technology, this stuff moves fast.

one thing about this forum that I love is that in any given topic there are people in it that are wickedly informed on it. it pays to read between the lines, some of these guys are really quiet about it. you've shown your own expertise in some areas, I appreciate that. this area? I'm leaning towards the other guys.

Does that mean you're not in favour of having the relevant software available when the hardware appears on the shelf?

Much like there's so few USB3 soundcard/control surfaces on the market or the fact that only a handful of the major music apps are 64 bit capable.

I don't quite see what there is to gain by going with the status quo. Having such lethargy in anyone's wishlist is holding everyone back when we should be pushing things forward.

Why would anyone want to be a pioneer if it's not going to be encouraged?

Jarvisimon wrote:Does that mean you're not in favour of having the relevant software available when the hardware appears on the shelf?

seriously? you're really asking me this?

Much like there's so few USB3 soundcard/control surfaces on the market or the fact that only a handful of the major music apps are 64 bit capable.

and you blame that on people not posting on soundcard manufacturer's forums about the availability of USB3? you think lay people knew about 64 bit before DAW developers?

I don't quite see what there is to gain by going with the status quo. Having such lethargy in anyone's wishlist is holding everyone back when we should be pushing things forward.

I don't see what there is to gain by pointing a software company's direction based on a forum post by a lay person. I see a lot to lose, I see a CTO that should be laughed out of a job.

Why would anyone want to be a pioneer if it's not going to be encouraged?

you're a lay person claiming yourself to be a guide of pioneers? still can't see the hubris?

hit me up on PM, surely you can tell me how to flash this EPC1 via the FPGA's JTAG port.

Jarvisimon wrote:I don't quite see what there is to gain by going with the status quo. Having such lethargy in anyone's wishlist is holding everyone back when we should be pushing things forward.

Your argument comes across as naive because you assume the reason things aren't happening like you say they should is because of things like "lethargy." First of all, how could you possibly know? Been to some meetings at Ableton HQ? Hired a soothsayer to see into Gerhard Behles's heart?

So if we can go ahead and agree that you can't know that the lack of progress (as you see it) is only the fault of developers dragging their feet, then why not look for some other explanations as to why these things take so long?

Oh wait, you don't have to look far, some explanations have already been posted by others in this thread…

your last post needs more attention than time I can presently afford. It's Friday night and i'm off out.

Will have some answers prepared for you by tomorrow.

Tone Deft wrote:

Jarvisimon wrote:Does that mean you're not in favour of having the relevant software available when the hardware appears on the shelf?

seriously? you're really asking me this?

Yes, this is a serious question.

Tone Deft wrote:

Jarvisimon wrote:Much like there's so few USB3 soundcard/control surfaces on the market or the fact that only a handful of the major music apps are 64 bit capable.

and you blame that on people not posting on soundcard manufacturer's forums about the availability of USB3?

Almost but not quite. I do think had more users made objections as to the unavailability of USB 3 cards, the market would have been different. Public opinion counts for a hell of a lot and had sales of USB 2 stopped, USB 3 units would quickly have appeared on the shelves.

Tone Deft wrote: you think lay people knew about 64 bit before DAW developers?

I've certainly not claimed that, though I am quite certain the majority of the music software industry are unaware of the "Knights Corner" chip. BTW, it's not "knights ferry as I claimed earlier - that is aimed at the science community as far as I can gather.

Tone Deft wrote:

Jarvisimon wrote:I don't quite see what there is to gain by going with the status quo. Having such lethargy in anyone's wishlist is holding everyone back when we should be pushing things forward.

I don't see what there is to gain by pointing a software company's direction based on a forum post by a lay person. I see a lot to lose, I see a CTO that should be laughed out of a job.

My apologies for being a lay person. It's a tag that's unlikely to change any time soon, however, to answer your question, the gains are obvious. The earliest adopters are ahead of the game and get the beneficial reputation for cutting edge design much as Ableton did when Live was released.

Why would anyone be humiliated out of their job for keeping up with technological advancements? I don't think that's ever happened or is ever likely to. It's usually the other way around. Nokia lost their number one position as the leader in phone technology because they didn't forsee the emerging market for smart phones. It's only recently they've ported over to the Windows 7 phone OS because Symbian was out-dated. It's much more likely that the people who previously decided to keep Symbian were booted out of their jobs.

Tone Deft wrote:

Jarvisimon wrote:Why would anyone want to be a pioneer if it's not going to be encouraged?

you're a lay person claiming yourself to be a guide of pioneers? still can't see the hubris?

No, i'm a lay person wanting my favoured software teams to have something ready for when a new technology is released. Don't see hubris, see foresight and more powerful tools.

Tone Deft wrote: hit me up on PM, surely you can tell me how to flash this EPC1 via the FPGA's JTAG port.

Ok, so you're a computer nerd/programmer. I'm not, but seeing as we're all musicians, why shouldn't we benefit from the power of the Knights Corner chip running our favourite applications when it's made available to us?

I think that mid range intel chips are more than adequate for processing music.

GPUs are used for finance - monte carlo simulations and so on.

Intel Xeon processors have been out since 1998... They are still not "available" to us. We are using the term available loosely it seems. If any of us had the money to put forward for these chips we could have one or two, etc... HP teamed with AMD has a 64 core chip available since last summer. Are you planning to purchase it? Probably not if you price them. Consumer class chips get trickle down (some what slow too it seems, even from a perspective of someone who has seen the advances first hand from these technologies.) I think this a mute point for an argument.

stringtapper wrote:

Jarvisimon wrote:I don't quite see what there is to gain by going with the status quo. Having such lethargy in anyone's wishlist is holding everyone back when we should be pushing things forward.

Your argument comes across as naive

I kind of agree with you here. My argument is naive, whilst I would love to see a hardware/software released scheduled together, I actually envisage there to be no software that takes advantage of the new technology for a good five years after we get our hands on it. So, not just is my wishing things were otherwise different, a naive wish but it's also an extremely sad truth that the reality is unlikely to be any different to previous advancements.

stringtapper wrote: because you assume the reason things aren't happening like you say they should is because of things like "lethargy." First of all, how could you possibly know? Been to some meetings at Ableton HQ? Hired a soothsayer to see into Gerhard Behles's heart?

No. The lethargy I mention is that of the consumer whose voice is usually too quiet if it's even heard at all.

stringtapper wrote: So if we can go ahead and agree that you can't know that the lack of progress (as you see it) is only the fault of developers dragging their feet, then why not look for some other explanations as to why these things take so long?

I will not agree to any such thing as I don't think it is only the developers dragging their feet, though I do wish they would be one step ahead when more often they're not. Of course there are several reasons for that, one being that not everyone updates to the newest technology at the same time so they're not always aware of how potentially strong the market is and how can they be? There's no framework in place that accurately gives them the information they need to know.

stringtapper wrote: Oh wait, you don't have to look far, some explanations have already been posted by others in this thread…

I've not been wholly convinced by any given explanations yet and as the point of any argument is to upgrade the other's opinion, i'll stand by mine until someone does.

Moody wrote:Intel Xeon processors have been out since 1998... They are still not "available" to us.

Yes they are. http://www.musiccomputing.com/studioblade

This is the work of a company taking it upon themselves to be innovative. I agree it's not cheap but then it is the most powerful music workstation currently on the market. Still a hell of a lot cheaper and more powerful than the Korg Oasys, which was heralded as a classic upon release.

Also, I definitely had a twin Xeon server computer a short while back but sold it as it was far too noisy for music. Yes, I could have put it all into a quiet case but it was too much hassle for the money. Wish I had now, though it was the older single core Xeon chips so probably best that I didn't.

Moody wrote: We are using the term available loosely it seems. If any of us had the money to put forward for these chips we could have one or two, etc... HP teamed with AMD has a 64 core chip available since last summer. Are you planning to purchase it? Probably not if you price them. Consumer class chips get trickle down (some what slow too it seems, even from a perspective of someone who has seen the advances first hand from these technologies.) I think this a mute point for an argument.

Actually, some people do have the money to buy new technology and even a fully loaded studioblade (£15k ish) is easily within reach of the majority of professional musicians. The likes of us may have to scrimp and save to get there but prices drop with every new generation.

ian_halsall wrote:I think that mid range intel chips are more than adequate for processing music.

GPUs are used for finance - monte carlo simulations and so on.

Intel will be pushing the "Knights Corner" chip as their successor to the "Sandy Bridge". It will be heading our way, not just the bigwigs of science and finance.

Ableton have innovated DAW workflow..
maybe a bit less in bleeding edge hardware support..

other than that...
innovation is a must but you can't innovate without setting boundaries..
and pushing the envelope a bit..
and Ableton does this.. simply not in this field..

so the scenario you wish for ..
(the way I see it..) could only be available
if a 3rd party company (specializing in this field) would approach Ableton and offer a collaboration/their powers..
btw maybe you can "suggest" to a certain company to tap into this potential..

from a business point of view ...it sounds like a risk to me..(for Ableton...
I don't presume to know their inner workings or cash-flow issues)
:
if a company specializing in this type of development should decide to step in..
they'll be the benefactors.. (but maybe it's too small of a market ?)
Ableton pretty much holds their niche nice..and sets the pace..
a growing user-base.. but things are fragile..
L8 had a hard birth...
(I think the next year will bring innovative surprises..
so funny .. I just thought about it latetly..
how nothing exciting has happened in the DAW world since Live8 came out..)

back to the point
if I were to adopt the philosophy of anxiously awaiting Live9+Max6...
even though I have not even scratched the surface with the current versions
that's really counter productive imo..

so ..
in short..I think Ableton DO innovate..
(in fact L8 project shows innovation.. but not implementation skills)
I would rather have them get their shit back together for the time being...
than watch them crash and burn with my GPU..
(btw .. how many fans does it take to cool that monster up?!)

your argument that there are people willing to pay loads of $$ for this stuff..
is basically assumption..
.. using your argument.. maybe Ableton should develop their own OS maybe ?
(I'll refer you to the Formula1 example in the 1st page)
..and it's a bad business move imo
(making your small niche even smaller etc... )
a handful of people dont justify massive development..
unless the user is willing to pay thousands of moneys..
in addition to the thousands he just spent on a new (experimental)GPU and computer..
knowing that he's about to need to ditch his setup 3 years into the future in favor of the next (better) ones..

if you're into this stuff of making music ..
I've learned this..(most of the time
you shouldn't really bother with this crap
(unless you're gonna try and develop yourself...
and in this case..
talk is cheap..)
you'll end up waiting for new technologies.. (and not making music..)
and possibly be disappointed once it arrives..
(you build expectations...)
less frustration dude..

my advice :
get the best tools you can afford NOW to make music..
learn them well..
and let the future be the future..
once it's there you'll be able to open up more instances/freeze less..
sounds like a great future to me !

in the meantime..

Innovation had been done by Sonic Foundry who developed Acid. Ableton just copied it and added session view to it. Don't disregard your big brother.

pencilrocket wrote:Innovation had been done by Sonic Foundry who developed Acid. Ableton just copied it and added session view to it. Don't disregard your big brother.

sorry.. not falling for it..

Stop spamming everywhere noob.