Why is Ableton so slow to release updates?

[Trancit]

You're responding to me responding to someone doing just that, and you're off on a tangent, I never said Max4Live was easier, I said it was vastly more powerful, that can't be denied. ...

Tbh you said this in a way to compare M4L and the Grid... and that´s simply not possible...
M4L isn´t just a modular Synth or FX... it´s a complete programming enviroment inside of Ableton...so it would be a better comparison to compare it´s possible devices with Bitwig´s complete Instrument/FX/Modulation section and then I am not so sure (in regards of Audio/Midi) if Max is (much) more powerful...

All this stuff is so crazy to me, you never mentioned video, because it doesn't fit your narrative... and again, I'm in the process of choosing Bitwig over Live, but I'm not unaware or willing to overlook Live's obvious strengths.

It´s not that it doesn´t fit me... but as long as we talking about a Digital AUDIO Workstation a Video part/integration should never be an argument imho...

[Trancit]

While I agree with what you wrote in the first part, I have to disagree with the part I quoted.

That's not really how software development works. You cannot properly compare the development speed of two pieces of software like that. There are so many variables that influence the speed of development that don't say anything about the companies involved, but are rather "the nature of the beast".

Bitwig started from zero, so that had no technical debt to take care of. They were able to make a plan, and build frameworks that would support what they planned. If you have a couple of talented programmers and a solid development plan, that does not necessarily take a long time (as shown by Bitwig). Bitwig also did not have any existing users, so they were not held back by any existing demands or expectations. They were also able to learn from Ableton and could avoid mistakes that Ableton had to make in order to learn. That's the benefit of "not being the first". Also: smaller team = quicker decision-making.

Ableton has "19 years of code" to handle. That is most likely a lot of tech debt. Not only that, they have a hardware product that needs to integrate well with their software, so any change they want to make needs to be cosigned by another team entirely. They have a lot of existing users now that have demands and expectations in terms of compatibility and whatnot. They've also grown with the general demand for their software in terms of staff, so more people means more teams means more coordination efforts between teams. They might have gotten a little bit complacent, I wouldn't even disagree with that.

Personally, I would not draw any conclusions from development speed that could not simply be attributed to the quirks of software development itself.

I don´t know... I never developed any software...
Just from thinking about it, a 30 or 40 times bigger team of employees should imho nevertheless handle an older code and more customer requests faster than a very small team, which update pace didn´t went down even after 6 years and many customers with their own requests...

And I never talked about the preperation time they had before... In these 6 years they were already in business too with many clients and a hell of a buggy piece a software which afforded much fixing, not to forget that they all the time had to maintain a native Linux version on top compared to Ableton...

Anyway... I have the feeling that in very short time they will left Ableton far behind feature and quality wise...
If this will help business wise... I don´t know since Ableton had here the advantage having been already so much time before on the market with this type of DAW and many customers who have invested already a lot into Live, Packs, M4L devices and Push etc... will probably not swap in the first years... maybe later...

PS: I am far away of being a fanboy of Bitwig (I do not even own it atm)!!

[machinesworking]

Tbh you said this in a way to compare M4L and the Grid... and that´s simply not possible...
M4L isn´t just a modular Synth or FX... it´s a complete programming enviroment inside of Ableton...so it would be a better comparison to compare it´s possible devices with Bitwig´s complete Instrument/FX/Modulation section and then I am not so sure (in regards of Audio/Midi) if Max is (much) more powerful...

If you have been following Bitwig since the beginning you would know that they touted the modular environment in Bitwig as fully modular. Where it is now is another story. It's entirely fair to compare features between DAWs, your argument is pretty weak here. Yes M4L is way more powerful. It's also more complicated and simplicity has it's value for sure, but in no way is it an unfair comparison when Bitwig has advertised it in a way that's comparable.

It´s not that it doesn´t fit me... but as long as we talking about a Digital AUDIO Workstation a Video part/integration should never be an argument imho...

Another weak argument, as if most DAWs didn't included SMPTE and other film oriented features before they ever included audio. If you want to get technical about the term DAW we should be comparing Bitwig to Pro Tools and complaining about the lack of audio editing capabilities, but no one does that because most people recognize DAW to mean an audio and MIDI workstation for recording, MIDI composing, live work, and film scoring. Of course it can lack in any of these areas, but you're doing that thing, that football fan thing.

[Dirtgrain]

Given that 10% / 90% figure estimated above, I wonder what percentage of Bitwig users use the Grid to make things that couldn't be made in Ableton Live racks.

Can someone speak to the quality of the Bitwig components also--the filters, for example? Is the Grid on par quality-wise with Halion 6, Reaktor, Mxxx (I'm just throwing out what I think might be comparable)? If Bitwig brings such quality, then I need to give it a second look.

[antic604]

Given that 10% / 90% figure estimated above, I wonder what percentage of Bitwig users use the Grid to make things that couldn't be made in Ableton Live racks.

You can already do more with Bitwig's 'racks' (Layers, Selectors, XY, Splitters - 'containers' as they're called there) than with Ableton racks without ever opening the Grid.

[Distorted Horizon]

Can someone speak to the quality of the Bitwig components also--the filters, for example?

Btw can anyone tell, who has made bitwigs instruments, fx, filters and compressor etc? Surge guy works for bitwig so guess it's safe to guess that he's done something.

Just thinking because ableton has built in stuff made by applied acoustics, cytomic, etc..

[revvy]

Anyone who claims BW started from zero in terms of development is living in fantasy land.

Anyway, enough BW frothing on an Abes thread. I

think Abe's dev speed is based on them learning a lesson after the well-documented fiascos that have already been mentioned. As somebody who's biggest DAW spend over the years has been with Live, I'm happy with their 'slow' progress.

[antic604]

Btw can anyone tell, who has made bitwigs instruments, fx, filters and compressor etc? Surge guy works for bitwig so guess it's safe to guess that he's done something.

Just thinking because ableton has built in stuff made by applied acoustics, cytomic, etc..

Claes is one of the FOUNDERS of Bitwig not just "works for" them, so I'm assuming he wrote / co-wrote / designed most of the devices and you can actually see a lot of Polysynth in Surge (which was released before Bitwig). I mean he created Live's Multiband Compressor AND the OOT preset:

viewtopic.php?f=259&t=540751

I believe the 3rd party stuff (filters, AAS synths) were added to Live further on in its life, I don't think they were there from the start? I believe both were only added in v9 or so.

[antic604]

Anyone who claims BW started from zero in terms of development is living in fantasy land.

It wasn't me who said this, but it was said in the sense of working off of "clean slate", so they could write their code without the baggage of old systems & dependancies that you can't get rid of without breaking compatibility. Plus they could also design it from the ground up for the technologies that were on the horizon, like MPE, VST3, touch screens, high-DPI screens, etc.

Sort of like Studio One is a "clean slate" re-write of Cubase.

[revvy]

If the S1 guys used to work for Cubase before then maybe yes, similar (I have no idea of their history)

[machinesworking]

I believe the 3rd party stuff (filters, AAS synths) were added to Live further on in its life, I don't think they were there from the start? I believe both were only added in v9 or so.

AAS was closer to 6 or 7 can't remember, it was before 8 for sure. The filters have always been there. Just my opinion, but I already feel the Bitwig stuff is easier to get good results from. I already owned the AAS collection before Live got them so it was never that great to me.

[antic604]

If the S1 guys used to work for Cubase before then maybe yes, similar (I have no idea of their history)

Yes, they did.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Studio_One_(software)

[Trancit]

I believe the 3rd party stuff (filters, AAS synths) were added to Live further on in its life, I don't think they were there from the start? I believe both were only added in v9 or so.

AAS was closer to 6 or 7 can't remember, it was before 8 for sure. The filters have always been there. ...

With "filters" I think he means the Cytomic filters which were added in V9 if I remember correctly...

[thecontrolcentre]

I believe the 3rd party stuff (filters, AAS synths) were added to Live further on in its life, I don't think they were there from the start? I believe both were only added in v9 or so.

AAS was closer to 6 or 7 can't remember, it was before 8 for sure. The filters have always been there. ...

With "filters" I think he means the Cytomic filters which were added in V9 if I remember correctly...

The suite introduced in v7 brought the AAS stuff. The cytomic filters were added in v9 and improved in v10.

[mgw38]

They take a lot of time beta testing the upcoming versions of the program...

Really? Why is each newer version less stable? (can’t say about v10 cause i got off the train)

They make it easy to participate in the beta testing program and new beta version come out quite frequently. I actually prefer their approach not having official releases every other week.