Why you left Ableton?

[oonabe]

BWS is better in routing, modularity, modulation AL is better in MIDI and audio handling

Enough reason for me to stay with Ableton Live

[dtrq]

Not sure how Ableton is better in audio and midi. Bitwig has MPE and non-destructive audio editing, also clip\track view and advanced modulation automation.

[antic604]

Not sure how Ableton is better in audio and midi. Bitwig has MPE and non-destructive audio editing, also clip\track view and advanced modulation automation.

Agree. The only thing Live has over Bitwig in terms of audio editing is stretching clips right on the timeline. On the flip side, you still can't edit audio in Session View, so you have to move stuff between views to advance... Similarly with MIDI - Live has step-recording and Capture over Bitwig, but its multi-track editing is ridiculously basic in comparison, its support for MIDI channels is lacking, doesn't have MPE, no micro-pitch editing, MIDI signal gets cut after the instrument so you need to build complex, multi-track constructs to e.g. send MIDI to audio FX (e.g. StutterEdit, LFO Tool).

But as always, it's important to look at the stuff one's actually using in their production and choose accordingly.

[Vladislav_Gronk]

Lack of proper PDC is a big one. It's honestly infuriating working with any transport-based effect in Ableton if you also happen to have some latent plugins somewhere in the chain.

Bitwig handles that (among other things) much better. I also like that MIDI plugins can be used directly on the channels instead of having to do a bunch of routing, so say you want to use Cthulhu as an arp you just add it before the instrument. Easy peasy.

[pdxindy]

Talk about lacking Midi... Live won't even record Poly Aftertouch data!

[machinesworking]

Funny, I'm not a huge fan of the way Bitwig looks, I don't hate it, it's fairly neutral to me in terms of looks.

I'm not a fan of it's UX though. I'm giving it a solid go after seeing it's CPU results come really even to DP and Logic, even beating Reaper in some cases. What it can do interests me, MPE, Clips and Scenes built in, Möss's great scripts for Push 2, Remote SL III etc.

UX wise, it's got the same sorts of serious issues that you see with old DAWs like DP, PT, Logic etc. the info panel always is owned space wise by the limited color pallet, the input monitoring is not even logical at all, just a ubiquitous MIDI keyboard or waveform that you're supposed to somehow know is input monitoring. Jumping to edit windows to get an audio file to show up behind a MIDI file for reference is a game of "which edit window am I in?". Just opening a VST GUI when you first look at Bitwig is a game of chance, no logical thinking person would predict that the Bitwig team would think what looks like a TV monitor icon in the sub window would be an instrument?? This one just is so far towards WTF?

Don't get me wrong, I'm really liking it so far, but Bitwig while not as bad as Reaper is in line UX wise with some of the weird leftovers from days gone by found in Logic, DP etc. Just a lot of awkward user interface choices for such a modern thinking young company.

[tooneba]

Funny, I'm not a huge fan of the way Bitwig looks, I don't hate it, it's fairly neutral to me in terms of looks.

I'm not a fan of it's UX though. I'm giving it a solid go after seeing it's CPU results come really even to DP and Logic, even beating Reaper in some cases. What it can do interests me, MPE, Clips and Scenes built in, Möss's great scripts for Push 2, Remote SL III etc.

UX wise, it's got the same sorts of serious issues that you see with old DAWs like DP, PT, Logic etc. the info panel always is owned space wise by the limited color pallet, the input monitoring is not even logical at all, just a ubiquitous MIDI keyboard or waveform that you're supposed to somehow know is input monitoring. Jumping to edit windows to get an audio file to show up behind a MIDI file for reference is a game of "which edit window am I in?". Just opening a VST GUI when you first look at Bitwig is a game of chance, no logical thinking person would predict that the Bitwig team would think what looks like a TV monitor icon in the sub window would be an instrument?? This one just is so far towards WTF?

Don't get me wrong, I'm really liking it so far, but Bitwig while not as bad as Reaper is in line UX wise with some of the weird leftovers from days gone by found in Logic, DP etc. Just a lot of awkward user interface choices for such a modern thinking young company.

Speaking of the GUI inconsistency, for example, Simpler which is Live's instrument cramped into match box, execute envelope function sporadically. You are forced to see pitch envelope in Classic mode after you clicked 1shot or Slice mode. It has Amplitude Envelope and Pitch Envelope radio button you can select while there is also Amplitude Envelope and Pitch Envelope title which shows when you clicked that button. Unnecessary redundancy and causes confusion especially in small text limited information flat zero affordance GUI. Same knob suddenly changes the purpose. Envelope is cramped in pitch envelope edit GUI because of the properties showed at the right side of it. Amplitude envelope's scale isn't graphically matched with pitch envelope. More or less their instruments are awkwardly executed while their native effectors feel well designed.

[machinesworking]

Unnecessary redundancy and causes confusion especially in small text limited information flat zero affordance GUI. Same knob suddenly changes the purpose. Envelope is cramped in pitch envelope edit GUI because of the properties showed at the right side of it. Amplitude envelope's scale isn't graphically matched with pitch envelope. More or less their instruments are awkwardly executed while their native effectors feel well designed.

I don't think it has as much to do with Ableton's 2D approach as much as it has to do with the absolute avoidance of color and strict adherence to every freaking plug in looking the same.

I absolutely loath that part of Ableton, my sampler shouldn't look just like my analog synth, and my acoustic modeling synth; it's where Abletons UX breaks down completely.

I given them massive props for the basics though, messing around with demos of 1.5 I instantly got all general functionality of the interface, it's the user experience where Live starts to wear on you. Mousing for everything basically, so the idea of intuitive is paramount, but it never leads to the next level workflow wise, you're always tinkering around the interface to get things done, whereas DAWs like DP and Logic are obtuse up front, but become much faster to operate in over time. I suspect that Bitwig is more like DP and Logic this way.

[tooneba]

Unnecessary redundancy and causes confusion especially in small text limited information flat zero affordance GUI. Same knob suddenly changes the purpose. Envelope is cramped in pitch envelope edit GUI because of the properties showed at the right side of it. Amplitude envelope's scale isn't graphically matched with pitch envelope. More or less their instruments are awkwardly executed while their native effectors feel well designed.

I don't think it has as much to do with Ableton's 2D approach as much as it has to do with the absolute avoidance of color and strict adherence to every freaking plug in looking the same.

I absolutely loath that part of Ableton, my sampler shouldn't look just like my analog synth, and my acoustic modeling synth; it's where Abletons UX breaks down completely.

Yes I mean the way it uses color for suggesting bevel, reflection, sheen, shadow and gradient which can give user affordance without actually mimicking real object in detail. They can give a hint for user its hierarchy, active buttons, clickable menu, text label without cluttering with explanations. Beside that, their instruments have to be cramped in match-box size. Oh dear...

I given them massive props for the basics though, messing around with demos of 1.5 I instantly got all general functionality of the interface, it's the user experience [/size]where Live starts to wear on you. Mousing for everything basically, so the idea of intuitive is paramount, but it never leads to the next level workflow wise, you're always tinkering around the interface to get things done, whereas DAWs like DP and Logic are obtuse up front, but become much faster to operate in over time. I suspect that Bitwig is more like DP and Logic this way.

Generally speaking, when developers pick one imaginable best method and tailor their software around it it will be the fastest and the smoothest to learn and work with, as long as users are utilizing that specific method. But when it comes to other scenarios the tailored software doesn't offer redundancy or depth to it. But from a business perspective, as you should target mass casual crowd rather than geeky niche tech savvy crowd, the former approach may be popular.

[machinesworking]

Yes I mean the way it uses color for suggesting bevel, reflection, sheen, shadow and gradient which can give user affordance without actually mimicking real object in detail. They can give a hint for user its hierarchy, active buttons, clickable menu, text label without cluttering with explanations. Beside that, their instruments have to be cramped in match-box size. Oh dear...

Yeah, I'm not a hater of 2D, I have plenty of 2D software that works great, it's adherence to monochromatic colors along with 2D that make things unmanageable. Pigments has almost zero shadow or gradients and looking at it, the little it has isn't what makes the interface fantastic, it's the logical and thoughtful application of color and and layout of interface elements IMO. Lion is entirely 2D and also decently laid out.

I do think in general an interface is best served with super subtle 3D elements like Pigments is, but it's not necessary. I think Arturias preamps and compressors are great while being totally skeuomorphic, and Live "could" be fine being 2D, Waveform and Echo proves they can do it right, but most of their instruments are bad GUIs for sure.

Generally speaking, when developers pick one imaginable best method and tailor their software around it it will be the fastest and the smoothest to learn and work with, as long as users are utilizing that specific method. But when it comes to other scenarios the tailored software doesn't offer redundancy or depth to it. But from a business perspective, as you should target mass casual crowd rather than geeky niche tech savvy crowd, the former approach may be popular.

Ableton spent a lot of time up front making Live 1.0 intuitive and not filled with hidden menus, not cluttered etc. but they gave themselves a set of UX guidelines and made that into a bible. They spent a lot of time making sure it could be grasped easily, then spent 9 upgrade cycles making it, alien and cargo cult like with it's own set of issues. They went from intuitive and graphically coherent, to something that's IMO perfectly marketed towards tech employees. It has an Apple like UX upfront, and a user friendly object oriented code back end in Max 4 Live. If you work in the web developement or graphics industries tech wise you will probably love Live.
For me it's been an interesting ride, because I was all interested in a DAW specifically designed to use in live performances, but it's not really that. It is, if you work your performances around what Live can do that way. There's nothing inherently easy or better about Live though if you want to simply play a VSTi over backing tracks, and have different VSTi called up for each song etc. other DAWs can pull that off with a lot less clutter.

[antic604]

...Just opening a VST GUI when you first look at Bitwig is a game of chance, no logical thinking person would predict that the Bitwig team would think what looks like a TV monitor icon in the sub window would be an instrument?? This one just is so far towards WTF?

You're grasping at straws here.

The icon obviously represents a "computer window" - the chin is on top, not the bottom; have you ever seen a computer monitor??? Clicking it brings a pop-up window for Bitwig's devices: the VST window for plugin wrapper device and detailed windows for its own native stuff (e.g. oscillascope, eq-5, grid, the synths):

B.png

Meanwhile in Live the same operation is carried out by clicking a "cog" that typically is associated with options/settings, so how THIS is not a WTF moment for you? Not to mention there's lack of consistency, because a bigger window for native devices is invoked with a triangle icon:

A.png

[LeVzi]

I am not sure spending a few months with something denotes the ability to "leave" it, but I dumped Ableton after that long, I absolutely hated the workflow, the GUI, both the clip and linear ways of working.

I know the Ableton loyalists will jump on me, but tbh I just dunno how people work with it.

So I uninstalled ,and never looked back, I wish I could stick with it longer and get used to it, but I simply cannot, Cubase just works so much more to my liking.

[tooneba]

Pigments has almost zero shadow or gradients and looking at it, the little it has isn't what makes the interface fantastic, it's the logical and thoughtful application of color and and layout of interface elements IMO. Lion is entirely 2D and also decently laid out.

Indeed, those visual element can take advantage of human brain which can comprehend 3 dimensional object by nature and add meaning without a word.

Ableton spent a lot of time up front making Live 1.0 intuitive and not filled with hidden menus, not cluttered etc. but they gave themselves a set of UX guidelines and made that into a bible. They spent a lot of time making sure it could be grasped easily, then spent 9 upgrade cycles making it, alien and cargo cult like with it's own set of issues. They went from intuitive and graphically coherent, to something that's IMO perfectly marketed towards tech employees. It has an Apple like UX upfront, and a user friendly object oriented code back end in Max 4 Live. If you work in the web developement or graphics industries tech wise you will probably love Live.

That's an interesting perspective. Imho, it seems that Live has been developed since early on the very logical concept. It is generally relying on the left brain. I remember I got so 'left brain friendly' impression from Live (it means user can spare more brain resource in other things.) and it helped alot when trying to get used to it. I'm sure this aspect is contributing to Live being go-to software for academic field constructing structured course. Speaking of the ableton's m4l obsession it may be this left brain empowered logical concept on steroid.

For me it's been an interesting ride, because I was all interested in a DAW specifically designed to use in live performances, but it's not really that. It is, if you work your performances around what Live can do that way. There's nothing inherently easy or better about Live though if you want to simply play a VSTi over backing tracks, and have different VSTi called up for each song etc. other DAWs can pull that off with a lot less clutter.

I read similar comments in ableton's feature suggestion forum. It is requesting flexibility for traditional pop/rock performance which user can linearly play, verse, bridge, chorus, solos, loops, jumps on linear track.

[oonabe]

Honestly, I hope Ableton doesn't listen to some of the complains here because not everyone wants this to be changed. I really like the 2D design of Ableton Live and its lack of color schemes. For me it is much easier to read and shows a lot more thought on the design part than Bitwig does. Sometimes less is more.

[Trancit]

I am hoping none of any devs will read something here in this latest nonsense episode of why you left your mother ...

Do you guys sometimes think about what your writing???
My sampler shouldn´t look like my analog synth... on this side ...the show GUI icon of Bitwig looks like a TV screen and how should one know what it does... on another side ... wtf...

You really can have problems...