Upgrade to Live 9 (10) Suite for £191 OR get Bitwig for £265 (on sale)?

[Daags]

This is ridiculous, it is a subscription plan. Just one with a yearly interval. You pay a fee on a regular basis to remain current. Just because you're not compelled to pay doesn't make it "not" a subscription. It is required to maintain a status, Eg. a subscription. Saying that is isn't is a silly argument.

Fee on an interval, that is the definition of a subscription.

hear, hear.

what we are witnessing is just a mild case of cognitive dissonance ... what a thankless job it must be, pissing on people's shoes and trying to convince them it's raining.

soft-selling bitwig studio to others is no easy task with the current licensing scheme in play. but the motivation to soft-sell is clear...

[pdxindy]

2) I don't see how Max's modulation is any more 'endless' than it is in Bitwig?

Max is a Turing complete visual signal programming language. Bitwig has a limited number of simple, closed source devices that can modulate plugin parameters. I hope this helps.

Max is unusable by the vast majority of people for exactly that reason. And if you do not have the skills to create stuff, you depend on a user library full of buggy and half-asses devices.

In practice Bitwig is easier to use, uses less resources and is more real world capable. It is not just the Bitwig modulators...

It is how easy it is to assign them and control them after the fact. Click on a device and the inspector panel will show you all the modulators and under each modulator all the parameters it is modulating. You can add/delete parameters from there and adjust modulation depth (even with the modulators hidden from view for a visually clean interface).

It is that each device can have its own macro controls... in whatever number the user wants.

It is also the nested devices. In Bitwig, want to put a resonator inside the delay path of a Delay device? Just drop it in. The ability to nest devices (including VST's) inside the signal path of other devices is a powerful design tool.

It is the Remote Controls. You can easily and intuitively build Device Pages and Preset Pages. Device Pages will be there for every instance of that device and Preset Pages will be specific to that device preset.

Bitwig is an inviting, fun and fully integrated environment to easily do all sorts of complex stuff. Sure, theoretically Max is more capable, but I would have to be a freakin software engineer and spend who the hell knows how long to do stuff that is fast and intuitive for any user in Bitwig.

Bitwig wins hands down.

[SLiC]

Do you have to subscribe to use Bitwig - NO

Can the people who have Bitwig 1 and didn’t upgrade continue to use Bitwig without subscription - YES

Have they still had bug fixes etc. - YES

Will this be the same if I don’t subscribe with V2 - YES

Do you have to pay to get feature updates - YES, but you get a yearth worth, if you want to call this subscription fill yer boots.

Do I have to pay to get feature updates with Cubase - yes, every single .5 update, you have to keep paying to keep current - is this subscription, it’s exacrly as you describe subscription, paying to stay current (but you don’t pay if you settle on the version you have)

[Daags]

Is the current Bitwig licensing scheme a subscription model ? - YES

[ThomasHelzle]

A subscription needs something to subscribe to, you can't do that with Bitwig, there is no recurring payment plan.
By your definition Cubase is a subscription because they offer regular updates you have to buy to stay current.
And a car is a subscription because you need to refill it when running out of gas.

But I find this whole discussion pretty beside the point - either you like Bitwig or you don't, either it does what you need or it doesn't, either you are willing to pay what they ask for it or you don't.

Cheers,

Tom

[Daags]

By your definition

it's not my definition, pal. subscription is an umbrella term with various models. as i said, bitwig's subscription model is opt-in/opt-out or 'pay as you go'. I don't make the rules. I'm sorry if you don't like it, but a subscription is what it is.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subscript ... ness_model

[pdxindy]

This is ridiculous, it is a subscription plan. Just one with a yearly interval. You pay a fee on a regular basis to remain current. Just because you're not compelled to pay doesn't make it "not" a subscription. It is required to maintain a status, Eg. a subscription. Saying that is isn't is a silly argument.

Fee on an interval, that is the definition of a subscription.

To me and many others, subscription means if you stop paying you lose ability to use it. That is not the case with Bitwig. So Bitwig is not subscription.

There are various types of subscription - in this case it's an opt-in/opt-out or 'pay as you go' subscription. it may not be like other implementations of subscription scheme in the digital world - like Adobe's Creative Cloud - but it is a subscription all the same.

That my friend, is an absolute, objective fact.

What you and your friends like to think does not change that fact, but of course the motivation not to accept this fact is understandble ... in this context subscription is a dirty word, and it's hard to lure people to support your preferred developer while faced with the reality that their licensing scheme is toxic to what is likely a majority of people.

Perhaps you should familiarise yourself with the various types of subscription before telling people what BitWig's licensing scheme isn't.

Maybe you are right... my understand of subscription is like the Adobe model. If other companies are doing something like Bitwig and calling it subscription, well there it is.

For me there is a fundamental difference between a system that forces the user to keep paying to use the software (Adobe) and one that does not (Bitwig). I think that difference is enough to warrant using a different word to describe it. Beyond that I don't really care about how the word is defined/used.

However, you, and pekbro are using the confusion of what 'subscription' means to negatively attack Bitwig and conflate it with something like Adobe. In that sense I would say you are both dishonest and manipulative in talking about this.

If we are going to call the method that Bitwig is using subscription, then I have no problem at all with that sort of subscription. I have no problem with it because the choice of when to pay money is entirely in my hands which is not the case with Adobe. Losing that choice is what I object to in what I call the subscription model. It is that choice that matters, not the definition of a word.

[.jon]

Just call it annual update payment plan. It strictly isn't subscription, but that doesn't IMHO make it any less annoying, and it was a factor when I chose between BWS and Live. Then again, it is a fine daw and I understand the fans who want to support the development by chipping in that annual fee. It isn't much if you've found a daw that really works for you. That is the only thing that counts in the end, it's the crucial interface between your creativity and results. And really more of an intangible, highly subjective thing than simple lists of features others post on forums.

[Daags]

It strictly isn't subscription

there is no strict, i.e. singular, definition of a subscription business model. it is an umbrella term that covers various models, of which bitwig's model is one.

therefore, just call it what it is: a subscription.

or qualify the term with a more specific prefix like 'opt-in/opt-out' or 'pay as you go'

[pdxindy]

Just call it annual update payment plan. It strictly isn't subscription, but that doesn't IMHO make it any less annoying, and it was a factor when I chose between BWS and Live. Then again, it is a fine daw and I understand the fans who want to support the development by chipping in that annual fee. It isn't much if you've found a daw that really works for you. That is the only thing that counts in the end, it's the crucial interface between your creativity and results. And really more of an intangible, highly subjective thing than simple lists of features others post on forums.

I have no intention of chipping in an annual fee. When my 12 months runs out, there is no reason for me to pay again immediately. I will at minimum wait until they release a new update. And if that update does not happen to have something I want feature-wise, I will wait for the following one. My guess is that it will end up being more of an 18 month cycle for me.

Bitwig is on the expensive side for a DAW, but I agree with you... the price is not what is most important... but the tool itself and how it works for you.

[pekbro]

However, you, and pekbro are using the confusion of what 'subscription' means to negatively attack Bitwig and conflate it with something like Adobe. In that sense I would say you are both dishonest and manipulative in talking about this.

Personal attacks, nice... Is your position so weak you need to resort to that? Impressive.

Anyway, call it what you want, that doesn't make it any better.

-Cheers

[Daags]

Maybe you are right... my understand of subscription is like the Adobe model. If other companies are doing something like Bitwig and calling it subscription, well there it is.

For me there is a fundamental difference between a system that forces the user to keep paying to use the software (Adobe) and one that does not (Bitwig). I think that difference is enough to warrant using a different word to describe it. Beyond that I don't really care about how the word is defined/used.

However, you, and pekbro are using the confusion of what 'subscription' means to negatively attack Bitwig and conflate it with something like Adobe. In that sense I would say you are both dishonest and manipulative in talking about this.

wow. that really is rich. YOU are the one who consistently invokes Adobe's model, in structure if not always explicitly by name, in an effort to prove bitwig's model isn't a subscription. you've even done it in the very post you are accusing me of this very behaviour, lol!

I can't speak for pekbro, but I don't like any subscription model for A/V software - period. I never, not even once in my entire history on this board, ever so much as alluded to the idea that bitwig's model was an adobe model ... that is a really kafka-esque accusation on your part considering I have been constantly told by you and slic that 'well, it aint like adobe so it aint subscription' every single time I have referred to bitwig's licensing scheme as a subscription. As if we haven't had this discussion 100 times. You are the guys constantly invoking adobe (in structure if not by name), and somehow I'm supposed to be the shitheel that's 'dishonestly manipulating people' into thinking bitwig's model is the same as adobe's ? ... is there any low you won't stoop to ? I defy you to find so much as one example of me coming even remotely close to conflating adobe's model with bitwig's. Your failings are not mine, if you couldn't see past the adobe subscription model, that is on you. not me. and most likely not pekbro either.

[rod_zero]

The whole software industry relies in selling updates/upgrades periodically, almost all products can stop working at some point, need maintenance to be current with OS and hardware.

Across the industry you have different ways of selling updates, subscription as Adobe is the more Aggressive kind, perpetual licenses with free lifetime upgrades being the other extreme.

In that continuum Bitwig model is closer to the "hard" subscription, the time they give for updates is shorter and the bugs/OS maintenance situation makes things more complex for the consumer to really know how much time his product may work.

I think BW users on windows are more safe, and would be able to hold for longer update cycles, but the ones on Mac might face more pressure if they want to stay in the current macOS, they might have to update annually.

But at the end of the day if the product inspires you and makes you happy and provides value it is a good deal for the user. It is not investment, at the end most do this for fun, pleasure.

I prefer longer development cycles, I am not against subscriptions but they most offer ton of value, or practical to use just a couple of months.

[pdxindy]

Anyway, call it what you want, that doesn't make it any better.

or any worse...

the payment model itself has little to no meaningful difference from say Cubase.

Live went a long time without a paid update because Ableton was busy getting users to buy first Push 1 then Push 2 which has generated a lot of income for them. Being fully invested in Live has not actually been cheap, but that is a choice for the user... as it is in Bitwig. Companies need to get money one way or another. They all do.

[otherl]

I have been using live for many many years and while I love it it is more CPU hungry than reaper, no contest really. ALl the heavy plugins (diva, serum, reaktor) run with way less cpu in reaper.

They don't. Reapers own cpu meter just shows a smaller percentage in its default setting. Actual cpu usage as displayed by windows task manager is even or slightly in favour of Live. This is a simple verifiable fact, and the reason is simple: VST plugins are the programs responsible for the DSP instructions. No daw magic can make those algorithms consume less cpu and still sound the same.

True, no daw can make the VSTs algorithms faster, but they can do their own things faster. With one plugin Live probably can be slightly faster, because...

...here I wanted write about different multi-thread optimizations, and other things, but I just checked with different VSTs, and I couldn't reproduce this at all (with the task manager of course), so I just close this whit my observation, I can use average 30-50% more plugin in my Reaper projects before the crackling, with the same audio device settings. I think this is the common experience with Reaper, so maybe you have a local technical problem (or just a very specific use case).