LIVE as a studio tool

itchyvinyl · Post by **itchyvinyl** » Wed Oct 23, 2002 7:53 pm

I've seen the great debate going on about LIVE and its sound quality (or lack of.)
I really don't give a sh*t.
I use LIVE to arrange studio tracks because the the time I spend on other sequencers/samplers timestretching, pitching, syching loops, etc. gets in the way of inspiration and creativity.
The ease and speed of the manipulation in LIVE allows the creativity and inspiration to remain flowing and open - not having to stop in mid creation to calculate timestretching formulas and other grunt work.

I'd rather make 10 tracks with creative flow and suffer a little artifacts in the sound, in the same amount of time it would take to make 1 clean sounding track that wasn't even fun to make because of all the BS you have to wade through just to finish it.

THANK YOU ABLETON for curing my writer's block.

twelve · Post by **twelve** » Wed Oct 23, 2002 9:00 pm

exactly!

ernie5 · Post by **ernie5** » Wed Oct 23, 2002 10:13 pm

Has anyone used Ableton Live as a replacement for multi-track recording software -- DP3, PT, Cubase . . . ???????? I love the interface.

tjwett · Post by **tjwett** » Wed Oct 23, 2002 10:47 pm

in the studio i use Live mainly as a sketchpad. it is simply priceless for getting a track going quickly and jamming on ideas. i also use it for effects and general audio mangling. there are things it can do so easily that other apps can't. i'll usually render out the bits i need and bring them into Logic for arrangement, etc. i need Logic because my setup is 100% virtual and all i have is VST instruments. if Live incorporated VSTi support i would consider using it more for recording purposes. it's just so damn easy and fast. however, the fact that you essentially need to "play" it to record it makes it a little tough for me. i have an awful memory and would surely forget which keys are holding which samples.

dirtystudios · Post by **dirtystudios** » Wed Oct 23, 2002 11:51 pm

i actually did a vocal recording session using live and only live. i've never had a session go so smoothly. we did six takes in just under an hour (including setup and soundcheck). live is all out fucking great for simple tracking. the only thing that wasn't great was editing later. live seemed to be a bit sluggish when handling long (3+ min) clips, but that's my only complaint.

k

p.s. note i said simple tracking. i'm sure that logic/protools/cubase/whatever has more nifty tracking features and is more flexible. i don't wanna start another huge thing on live not having sample level editing, precise v/u metering, vsti support (buy a goddamn midi sequencer! :) ) or robotic arms that massage your tired shoulders after a long day in the studio.

love ya...mean it.

ernie5 · Post by **ernie5** » Thu Oct 24, 2002 1:39 pm

What? No robotic arms? What a rip-off!!!
I do almost all audio recording & would love
to see a good audio multi-tracking program
that was a fluid as Live -- just go thru a MOTU
or RME interface & record all instruments
right into Live & go. Probably not a wise idea,
but very tempting on some level

.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Thu Oct 24, 2002 7:36 pm

ernie why do you say its probably not a good idea, I was hoping that it would be a good idea, could you expand on what you were saying?

ernie5 · Post by **ernie5** » Thu Oct 24, 2002 8:12 pm

First of all -- I don't really know. The problem is that Live isn't really made for studio multitracking, unlike programs like ProTools, DP3, Nuendo, etc ... so those programs will likely accomodate the tracking of drums, guitars, horns, etc ... more naturally & with better sound. As much as I like Live's intuitive interface, it doesn't necessarily have an audio engine that is in the same league as the deeper audio sequencing programs. Perhaps it's a judgment call -- sacrifice sound quality (will Live record in 24-bit????) for ease-of-use, but I simply need to know more. I think Live is made to be used WITH one of these programs as opposed to replacing one. I'd love to hear more anecdotes from people who said "fuck it: i'm recording with Live b/c i love it."

Marc · Post by **Marc** » Fri Oct 25, 2002 2:00 am

ernie5 wrote:First of all -- I don't really know. The problem is that Live isn't really made for studio multitracking, unlike programs like ProTools, DP3, Nuendo, etc ... so those programs will likely accomodate the tracking of drums, guitars, horns, etc ... more naturally & with better sound. As much as I like Live's intuitive interface, it doesn't necessarily have an audio engine that is in the same league as the deeper audio sequencing programs. Perhaps it's a judgment call -- sacrifice sound quality (will Live record in 24-bit????) for ease-of-use, but I simply need to know more. I think Live is made to be used WITH one of these programs as opposed to replacing one. I'd love to hear more anecdotes from people who said "fuck it: i'm recording with Live b/c i love it."

Are you shure about your own comment???
You said:
As much as I like Live's intuitive interface, it doesn't necessarily have an audio engine that is in the same league as the deeper audio sequencing programs.

The sound quality of the audio engine is a question of the sample clock.That´s the reson why Logic has better sound engine than Cubase.

you said:so those programs will likely accomodate the tracking of drums, guitars, horns, etc ???
sound quality is not a question of natural or synth instruments.
I mean...it doesn´t matter if a Sequencer slow down the quality of a flute or a synth sound.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Fri Oct 25, 2002 2:08 am

dirtystudios wrote:i actually did a vocal recording session using live and only live. i've never had a session go so smoothly. we did six takes in just under an hour (including setup and soundcheck). live is all out fucking great for simple tracking. the only thing that wasn't great was editing later. live seemed to be a bit sluggish when handling long (3+ min) clips, but that's my only complaint.

k

p.s. note i said simple tracking. i'm sure that logic/protools/cubase/whatever has more nifty tracking features and is more flexible. i don't wanna start another huge thing on live not having sample level editing, precise v/u metering, vsti support (buy a goddamn midi sequencer! ) or robotic arms that massage your tired shoulders after a long day in the studio.

love ya...mean it.

Yeeah,maybe buy any other Sequencer....if this is the strategy of ableton,I don´t believe they can make alot of money with this opinion.

skinnyjap · Post by **skinnyjap** » Fri Oct 25, 2002 9:55 am

I use Live for all my recording.

Most of my stuff starts out as patterns written on a Machinedrum & a Bass Station, which gets recorded into Live as one jam. I then chop up & arrange this, before playing VSTi synths over the top, via Leigh Marble's wonderful Ugly VSTi Interface, straight into Live. (Look - no MIDI !).

OK, I make electro / down-tempo breaky stuff, rather than orchestral music, but the sound quality is fine to my ears...

shrug

ernie5 · Post by **ernie5** » Fri Oct 25, 2002 4:55 pm

I guess I'm just still a little unclear as to the wisdom of using solely Live to record acoustic instruments. Is there a good reason NOT to?

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Fri Oct 25, 2002 6:17 pm

I'm using Live with Reason much more in my studio than I do MOTU DP3. Even when DP for OS X is finally available, I'll still use Live and Reason Rewired to DP for studio work. To me, Live is just much more inspiring for composition than DP.

ernie5 · Post by **ernie5** » Fri Oct 25, 2002 7:05 pm

But do you use it for midi/synth stuff only or for the recording of live instruments, voices, etc ... ?

dirtystudios · Post by **dirtystudios** » Fri Oct 25, 2002 8:20 pm

hey skinnyjap, does the ugly vsti interface support rewire? i didn't think it did. how do you get it "right into live". if it does i'm an idiot for not using it more often.

k