why are live and bigwig the only DAWS to have clip launchers ?

[Protocol_b]

Hey Tapper Mike - Mixcraft! Looks to be something well worth investigating, the price is inviting and they offer a demo. Many thanks! I'll be poking at this one.

[telecharge]

I don't feel strongly about clip launching or loop-based music, and I appreciate they are not necessarily related (though they usually are).

The OP was written from the macOS perspective, so I can't relate, but I can sympathize with wanting particular features in my DAW(s).

[jonljacobi]

Mixcraft is well worth investigating. A real sleeper.

[antic604]

Well, I'm not surprised seeing a lot of whining here from "true musicians" that don't need clip launching to create boxy, repetitive music.

Hey we finally agree ... "true musicians" can create boxy, repetitive music. DJ's need clip launchers to play it back. So we need two types of DAWs, recording based and jukebox based.

I worded it sloppily, because I meant "true musicians" think clip launchers make one create boxy, repetitive music, as opposed to linear DAWs where they create *real* music

Also, as I pointed in my post - clip launchers don't necessarily have to be used to *launch* clips, but as a notepad or scratch pad to come up & try ideas, that are further refined on a proper arranger timeline.

So no, we don't agree because as I said, both types of music ("true" and "boxy, repetitive") can and indeed are created in both types of DAW. The fact that some don't understand how to use clip launchers (other than for launching clips) does not mean they're a bad thing. Also, DJs don't play off of Ableton...

[THE INTRANCER]

Nice mockup -- reminds me of Stagelight and Waveform.

Thanks, I've never really seen these applications, or taken much notice of them when browsing kvr occasionally, so I went to check them out as I was quite intrigued in where the similarities were, and you're right , I can see what you mean.

I'm going to quote myself on the screenshot I posted, as the thread has continued about what is considered a clip launcher by others...it feels odd quoting one's self..but anyway

Here's how the concept works...

____
The Nodal System

The advantages of a node approach over the conventional workspace system we are use to in Studio One 3 / 3.5, is that tracks can be both controlled on a horizontal and vertical basis within a node environment system, independently or in conjunction with the normal sequencing arrangement.

On a vertical basis, it allows tracks within the main sequencer to be organised simply and quickly without having to dive into the sequencer, zooming in and out, and dragging up and down. With the node system, tracks can be re-configured and include an ID which is assigned to them.

The single or grouped tracks within a container node can be reorganised by colour, alphabetically or data-type - eg wave data, note data, automation data etc at track level. This organisation happens in a non destructive way inside the node environment and allows the user complete freedom in how they want to present the track at node level which you typically have with node based systems.

Nodes themselves can be re-configured when selected, presented in different patterns and be save as a user preset. The track node organisation parts can then be then transferred to the main sequencer. The node environment is really split into two parts of which either one or both can be displayed..vie a click of a button. 'The Nodal Track Manager' or 'NTM' and the 'NSM' the Nodal Sequence Manager, the latter of which, I'll come to next.

__

The nodal sequence manager, or 'NSM', works on a horizontal plane but of course can be viewed in any way you wish to display it. When tracks are copied over to the node environment, the clips / events on those tracks are then represented as individual nodes connected by lines and I/O points.The type of data a clip/event contains is identified on each and every node vie a pictorial image and represented colour.

As you can imagine, configuring and managing how these clip/events nodes can be organised to playback, provides more flexibility for the composer. You are also able to access the data contained within the node which you can then edit as you normally would but in the safety of the node framework environment.


The difference between the node system and that of the scratch pad system which follows the similar non-destructive editing process is that you have an overview and complete connectivity system in which to connect and playback parts or sections of track in any way which you desire. Split and set up different playback timings for each node to play back, and to trigger other nodes to stop or play, change the volume, speed up or down, apply volume curves and any other possible parameters which are difficult, time consuming or impossible to do conventionally.

The node system would contain a panel with sliders for controlling how each of these nodes would function as well as vector curve and line displays.

The play position mark of a node or connected nodes is indicated by a descending bar to indicate the time left, (or point in time it is currently) and optionally a numerical value and total time.

A Node Control Track would be transferred to the main sequencer track if nodes are copied from the node environment, with various options such as overriding any other similar sequence data.


The node system provides a different but familiar framework to manage and compose in for a user in essence and new ways to work if they so desire, in perhaps a quicker and more flexible way.

[telecharge]

Nice mockup -- reminds me of Stagelight and Waveform.

Thanks, I've never really seen these applications, or taken much notice of them when browsing kvr occasionally, so I went to check them out as I was quite intrigued in where the similarities were, and you're right , I can see what you mean.

Yeah, Stagelight is more on the consumer side, kind of like MAGIX Music Maker, so not too popular here on KVR. Their background is in hardware, so they've got some chops.

Tracktion Waveform is an up-and-comer. I've seen a number of positive comments about their new MIDI tools.

Here's hoping PreSonus gives you an audience, and offers you guys a solution.

[Tj Shredder]

Ableton invented it and Live became popular because musicians found it awesome.

Clip launching is much older than Ableton. I had been a big fan of Vision and later Studiovision. They made it easy and simple. You could launch sequences by typing letters on the computer keyboard. Back then Emagic implemented something in Logic to make it happen there as well. It might still be in place, but it was complicated to set up, wheras in Vision you simply recorded a sequence, and it was set up already to be played...

The special UI though was brought to us by Ableton...

But back to the original question, why not using Live or Bitwig (much cooler) instead of Logic? I use Max/MSP for my live set... Each task might need a different tool... And when I need those cool Apple synths, I fire up Mainstage and route it into Max or Bitwig or whatever...

[Tj Shredder]

Maybe one day they'll realise a clip can be any damn length you want it to be with the ability to copy tab and paste desired bits back'n'forth between either view non destructively for audio & midi

Bitwig can do all that already...

[jonljacobi]

Ableton invented clips or scenes? No. I remember the concept from a program called Realtime on the Atari ST. And there were/are a host of programs that let you DJ with files. Ableton kind of married several different concepts.

But all due respect for coming up with something rather unique out of all that, and something that works better. And for sticking with the "keep it simple" concept while other DAWs endlessly stuff in new features that step all over the existing ones (Interface-wise).

E.g., instead of adding 20 MIDI and Audio editing features, they come up with "grooves" that can be used for anything from quantizing to humanizing to altering dynamics, or any combination thereof. Freaking brilliant.

Sure it has some lacks, and some things have been done a bit better by other DAWs, but...

[.jon]

Clips, scenes and clip launching as concepts are as old as computer music, from way before your examples, but I was talking about the Session View in Ableton, which did not exist before- as you said, the UI.

[glokraw]

This is one of those questions that assumes that everyone wants the features in, um, question.
I had to google it to even find out what clip launching is. Ergo, I don't. Want clip launching, that is.
I also wonder why every DAW has to have exactly the same feature set, and exactly the same way of doing things. And even the same gui.

Don't you support Daw Neutrality???

[LeVzi]

Well, I'm not surprised seeing a lot of whining here from "true musicians" that don't need clip launching to create boxy, repetitive music.

Hey we finally agree ... "true musicians" can create boxy, repetitive music. DJ's need clip launchers to play it back. So we need two types of DAWs, recording based and jukebox based.

This

[ShawnG]

as a "real musician" I would use my license of Live more if I could set up a situation where I could jam out and have the program record succeeding 8 bar loops continuously so I would end up with a stack of clips that I could then play with in session mode to come up with an arrangement. this would really kick start my inspiration in the writing process. Right now, I kind of use the comping features in my linear DAWs to do similar stuff, but it's way more labor intensive, and a Lot of DAWs make it difficult to drag a comp take into another portion of the timeline. Ableton will allow you to loop and drag sections of a long clip into new clips, but It would be the bomb shizzle for me if there was a way to record clip after clip in one jam session automatically.

my own wish list aside, even if there aren't clip launchers in some DAWs they usually have some sort of arranger track / or reason's block feature to allow for non linear workflows. live clip launching can be fun, but is mostly not necessary for studio production. Live is really designed for a different environment/purpose.

[pdxindy]

as a "real musician" I would use my license of Live more if I could set up a situation where I could jam out and have the program record succeeding 8 bar loops continuously so I would end up with a stack of clips that I could then play with in session mode to come up with an arrangement.

Bitwig does that...

[Echoes in the Attic]

as a "real musician" I would use my license of Live more if I could set up a situation where I could jam out and have the program record succeeding 8 bar loops continuously so I would end up with a stack of clips that I could then play with in session mode to come up with an arrangement.

Bitwig does that...

I've never done that with bitwig, what's the setting for that?