The Great BitWig Migration

[regretfullySaid]

Live's Sampler should've been Mach 5 before Mach 5

If Live's Sampler was even half as good as Machfive 3 I would be the biggest fan of Suite ever.

Yeah well I think your opinion is dumb and you smell funny and she got the dna test back and you ain't the baby daddy so you best be movin out or yo face gone get real intimate with tyrone's louisville slugger
bitch

[H20nly]

so it's an integrated set of shortcuts to sets

I will say that Kontakt and Machfive 3, the Samplers I used to swallow up memory like fat guys seem to load memory into RAM and swap files because in both DAWs the initial loading of the sample library was brutally slow and each subsequent load was about 1/5 the time. So if you're going to load large sample libraries into a Live Set during a performance it would be smart to 'preload' all the Sets once as that would probably speed up the loading time significantly. So with Bitwig you have a very visual way of knowing whether you've done this in the form of tabs.
I'd say that's a win for the wig, but only barely.

it's funny to me - the comparison of Bitwig V1 with Live V1.
when Live was released in 2001, it required a minimum of 512 MB of RAM.
an iPhone 4 has that much.

[Machinesworking]

it's funny to me - the comparison of Bitwig V1 with Live V1.
when Live was released in 2001, it required a minimum of 512 MB of RAM.
an iPhone 4 has that much.

Sure, but that does't take away from the fact that there were complex programs that ran on 512mb.
Or that there were full featured DAWs when Live came out, and Ableton took a while to become one.
Mostly, people knocking Bitwig for not being perfect at 1.0 are being unrealistic. IMO if you're buying Bitwig now it's because you want to know the DAW inside out when it's fully mature, not because it's a real competition to Live or Logic, DP etc.

I don't think it will be a real competition to Live until v2.

[Angstrom]

I'm amazed that people think because the year is 2014 and because 16 gb of ram is now common this means that version 1 software should only be launched with every single feature ever implemented or thought of!
Live version 9 still lacks many " industry standard" , " basic" and "pro" features, it's version nine. What a sin!

Yet somehow a version 1 software is expected to include every feature any other competitor ever had and every feature any user ever speculated about. Apparently any history of work, any history of software development, any comparison, is now null, because the year is different. In the year 2100 all DAW software at version 1 will include the totality of the universe. Because of the number of the year and how much ram currently costs. These two figures apparently mean coders can currently write 4000 function per second, it's an exponential curve you see.

Weird internet logic

[H20nly]

Then there's the missing features to complain about that haven't been thought of yet... those features are very important.

[H20nly]

it's funny to me - the comparison of Bitwig V1 with Live V1.
when Live was released in 2001, it required a minimum of 512 MB of RAM.
an iPhone 4 has that much.

Sure, but that does't take away from the fact that there were complex programs that ran on 512mb.
Or that there were full featured DAWs when Live came out, and Ableton took a while to become one.
Mostly, people knocking Bitwig for not being perfect at 1.0 are being unrealistic. IMO if you're buying Bitwig now it's because you want to know the DAW inside out when it's fully mature, not because it's a real competition to Live or Logic, DP etc.

I don't think it will be a real competition to Live until v2.

agreed.
RAM was just the resource I chose... any would work, even screen resolutions.

Unlike all the things that have gone up or gotten faster and larger, the time it takes to crunch some of that code Angstrom mentioned has been reduced. Bigger. Faster. Stronger. Fatter.

[stringtapper]

Live took time to become a full DAW because it wasn't conceived to be one in the first place.

Wasn't the tag line on the early versions of Live something like "Live sequencing instrument"?

[H20nly]

Live sequencing instrument Studio™

[stringtapper]

Live Sequencing Instrument Studio™ Suite® Mothership©

[regretfullySaid]

Remember when they originally called it Ableton LSIS™S®M©?

[eyeknow]

I thought it was originally called acid plus

[regretfullySaid]

I remember when Live first came out and the Grand Comparison of Live vs Acid irked me. Seeing as how Live was bringing Session to the table, the comparison seemed moot. It's like just because they were both looping audio so easily it made them the same. /slap

[eyeknow]

I guess I'm going to have to put a lol smiley on every post I make

The comparison of bitwig one IS reasonable to live in it's current state. They have had years to get it right. Again, too ambitious for todays standards? Oh well.

[Machinesworking]

The comparison of bitwig one IS reasonable to live in it's current state. They have had years to get it right.

So, bBitwig has had roughly 3 years while Ableton has had 14. Yeah that's comparable all right.

[eyeknow]

The comparison of bitwig one IS reasonable to live in it's current state. They have had years to get it right.

So, bBitwig has had roughly 3 years while Ableton has had 14. Yeah that's comparable all right.

So are you saying that for 400 bucks someone should just jump on it and support hoping that they will implement stuff at some unknown point in time?

EDIT: and while I'm at it ( ) allow me to say that I don't have 400 bucks for a product that is behind where we are at NOW. again, if it was too ambitious, that oh well. Why would anyone want a product that doesn't do what live already does for 400 bucks? Did you buy it?

Yeah, I'm a little touchy tonight but I don't see where my thoughts are out of line with reality.