Ableton Live 4 versus Cubase

[Goa Head]

Thanks for the input peps. I'll play with this demo for a few more days, and see if any inspiration comes while using it. If not, back to my trusty SX.

Cheers.

[Rabid]

I tried every Live demo with every new version and I really don't see what others seem to see in it.
In my eyes it' a very one way directional concept.

May I humbly suggest then that you're still not really getting it?

I can imagine choosing Cubase over Live for various reasons but if you don't see anything interesting in Live you're not looking hard enough.

By responces like this I wonder if there are a lot of people that do not get Cubase or Sonar or Logic. Comparing Live to Cubase is like comparing an electric guitar to a grand piano. Choosing one over the other is not wrong, it is not mis-informed, it is not silly. Different instruments and different purpose. Sonar, Cubase and Logic are all grand pianos. If you learn to play music, some day you will want a nice grand piano sitting in the living room.

Robert

[quincy]

I tried every Live demo with every new version and I really don't see what others seem to see in it.
In my eyes it' a very one way directional concept.

May I humbly suggest then that you're still not really getting it?

I can imagine choosing Cubase over Live for various reasons but if you don't see anything interesting in Live you're not looking hard enough.

By responces like this I wonder if there are a lot of people that do not get Cubase or Sonar or Logic. Comparing Live to Cubase is like comparing an electric guitar to a grand piano. Choosing one over the other is not wrong, it is not mis-informed, it is not silly. Different instruments and different purpose. Sonar, Cubase and Logic are all grand pianos. If you learn to play music, some day you will want a nice grand piano sitting in the living room.

Robert

Sorry to be blunt, but i think thats crap.

You're now trying to say categorically thjat those sequencers are better than live? Thats pretty unfair, if you learnt the workings of Live properly i doubt there's anythnig you can't do with it than you can with Cubase or Logic.

I'd certainly challenge any host have the flexibility of arrangement that session view gives you. How easy would it be to re-arrange your entire song structure in Cubase? In live it would be a relatively trivial task, just try a new arrangement on the fly!

[kuniklo]

By responces like this I wonder if there are a lot of people that do not get Cubase or Sonar or Logic.

I'm sure that's true. The bigger packages take a lot more time to learn.

Anyway, like I said, I think there are plenty of perfectly legitimate reasons why people would prefer Cubase etc. over Live but somebody that thinks there's *nothing* interesting in Live isn't getting it.

[Rabid]

Sorry to be blunt, but i think thats crap.

You're now trying to say categorically thjat those sequencers are better than live? ...

That is not what I said. I did say that it is very different than Sonar, Cubase and Logic. Would you really record and produce a song with five vocal parts and seperate tracks for various drums in Live? If you were given a set of loops and told to remix it would you do it in Cubase? You can mix seperate drums and vocals in Live, and you can do a remix project with loops in Cubase, but if so you are not choosing the best program for the job. Either job.

And I would much prefer to listen to Eddie VanHalen play electric guitar than piano, or the OB-8 he used on Jump.

Robert

[quincy]

Sorry to be blunt, but i think thats crap.

You're now trying to say categorically thjat those sequencers are better than live? ...

That is not what I said. I did say that it is very different than Sonar, Cubase and Logic. Would you really record and produce a song with five vocal parts and seperate tracks for various drums in Live? If you were given a set of loops and told to remix it would you do it in Cubase? You can mix seperate drums and vocals in Live, and you can do a remix project with loops in Cubase, but if so you are not choosing the best program for the job. Either job.

And I would much prefer to listen to Eddie VanHalen play electric guitar than piano, or the OB-8 he used on Jump.

Robert

Yeah i think you coud do those things you say in Live, why not? If you knew the software inside out (as probably you do with Cubase i guess) then you you'd be fine.

I just don't buy that the 2 are so different, as you can do linear recording and arragement in Live as you can in "traditional" sequencers, it works just fine. I could record a long and complicated MIDI part, and then chop and re-arrange in arrangement view. Just as i could with a vocal, or a blend of existing recorded parts from within the program for example.

[SJ_Digriz]

Ok, I tried Live awhile ago and went back to try the new demo. I went through the tutorials. It is still a looping platform. It would make more sense to compare it to Acid than Cubase.

One thing you all talk about is clips and quantizing. Most musicians don't use clip the way you are using the term. I really don't use quantize either. When I record guitar, I usually play for anywhere from 30 to 40 seconds, to several minutes without stopping. I never go back and turn it into clips. I don't change the speed of the track unless I'm going for an effect.

When I play keyboards and record the MIDI track, I use very very loose quantizing 128th at the least if I even turn it on. I DON"T WANT it quantized. I want it how I played it. I don't go back and clip it up. I play again anywhere from 30 or 40 seconds, to several minutes without stopping. I then might go back and add automation to the instrument being played by the MIDI track. But I do VERY minor adjustements to the track itself. Usually nothing more than slight note length changes, or get rid of a clunker.

Here's a test for you, go to a club and record a jazz combo with 32 mics with Live, then do a multi-night merge to create a single best version with bits and pieces from each night? I would rather shoot myself in the head than use Live for that.

Hell, do any kind of multi-input live recording and LIVE SUCKS. Sorry, but thats the case.

Live is a loop tool for people who want to work with small bits and pieces of data and move them around. Cubase is better for those that actually play the instruments they are trying to record. I don't really care about all that arranging crap because I've already arranged the song before I start playing it. I might move 30 or 40 second bridges and stuff, but I want to do that as a hole, not as a tiny bit.

In fact LIVE makes it HARDER to record in a traditional instrumental model.

So, in my opinion, if you are a guitar, keyboard, drummer etc... who wants to record your band, or write songs where you play the songs, I would recommend Cubase, Logic, or Sonar..probably in that order. If you want to loop and play around without being bothered by the old school instrumental model of recording then Live, Acid, Tracktion are probably your boys. There are more apps of both kinds and all of them cross over somewhat.

[Goa Head]

if you learnt the workings of Live properly i doubt there's anythnig you can't do with it than you can with Cubase or Logic.

Folder Tracks
Window Layouts
Full PDC
Advanced MIDI editor/drum editor
External FX input
Better hardware intergration
Group tracks (???)
VST automation ... multiple lanes viewed at once.
Track EQ standard
Multiple pan options
Freeze (???)
Much more advanced mixer
Etc.. Etc.. Etc..

Sure these things aren't options that could stop you from doing like options in Live... Just makes your life 10x easier, and faster.

Dunno if Live is for me.

[DHR53]

Myself, I never could get a workflow down with it, where I could just sit down and crank out a song... I was always fiddling around between the 2 views and trying to get stuff from one view into the other... Like throwing a bunch of paint at the wall, and hoping it looked good after awhile! I'm more of a create a section, then decide what I need next then create that? Linear fixation?? ...I'm sure if I sat down with someone who was really adept at using it, I might go Ah Ha!... But it never happened! ...I may have to revisit it again later?

[quincy]

Live is a loop tool for people who want to work with small bits and pieces of data and move them around. Cubase is better for those that actually play the instruments they are trying to record. I don't really care about all that arranging crap because I've already arranged the song before I start playing it. I might move 30 or 40 second bridges and stuff, but I want to do that as a hole, not as a tiny bit.

If you want to loop and play around without being bothered by the old school instrumental model of recording then Live, Acid, Tracktion are probably your boys. There are more apps of both kinds and all of them cross over somewhat.

Its been said enough times, but you don't have to work with samll bits of audio in Live. Clips are just pieces of audio and MIDI, they can be any length and arranged anyhow you like, with or without f**king around with them.

If you don't want to mess with what you recorded for a few minutes, then don't. No-one is forcing you to use Live as a loop tool.

The point is that the flexibility is there to use as you wish. If you want to use its as a linear recording studio then you can, and if you want to do live performance with phrase-based dance music then you can do that also.

Its very short-sighted to assume that Live is all about simply triggering loops, it can get WAY deeper than that if you so desire.

[SJ_Digriz]

Its been said enough times, but you don't have to work with samll bits of audio in Live. Clips are just pieces of audio and MIDI, they can be any length and arranged anyhow you like, with or without f**king around with them.

If you don't want to mess with what you recorded for a few minutes, then don't. No-one is forcing you to use Live as a loop tool.

The point is that the flexibility is there to use as you wish. If you want to use its as a linear recording studio then you can, and if you want to do live performance with phrase-based dance music then you can do that also.

Its very short-sighted to assume that Live is all about simply triggering loops, it can get WAY deeper than that if you so desire.

Read the rest of my post. You can't properly record, edit and manage long audio segements in an instrumental way. It's not near as good as Cubase at handly that. I didn't say it couldn't. I said it is rediculous to buy it if that's what your primary use is gonna be.

[SJ_Digriz]

Let's put it this way, everyone goes on about Cubases lack of loop management stuff. I have never missed it being there. I have a hard time getting stuff like Live, Tracktion and Acid to do something I want. They make it hard to do what I think is simple stuff. For you its the opposite.

I think Live misses as much about audio and MIDI sequencing as Cubase misses with the Live style song creation environment. They are different utilities completely.

This is a total guess on my part. But it seems to me that most Live users don't tend to be traditional musicians. So out of curiousity, how many of you that use live are musicians? And I mean that in the have played and studied a real instrument and played it in professional live situations? Not in the DJ sense. I'm very very curious. If I'm totally wrong I'd like to know it.

This is not a slam on DJing or dance/club oriented music composition. I just think that people seem to confuse the fact that the tools that are good for one aren't necessarily good for the other.

[Pandamonium Records]

There's a review of Ableton live from the perspective of a full time Cubase user at:- http://www.ozmusicweed.com/modules.php? ... cle&sid=31

[Goa Head]

Let's put it this way, everyone goes on about Cubases lack of loop management stuff. I have never missed it being there. I have a hard time getting stuff like Live, Tracktion and Acid to do something I want. They make it hard to do what I think is simple stuff. For you its the opposite.

I think Live misses as much about audio and MIDI sequencing as Cubase misses with the Live style song creation environment. They are different utilities completely.

I would have to say ... I completely agree.

[shamann]

Strange, you know, but I never knew that playing professionally was the qualifier for being a traditional musician. All this time I've been misled.

I could care less really about Live, but it's sad to see people preach that living in a box is somehow more authentic than any other choice in life.

I agree that Cubase shouldn't be confused for Live, but I have to admit this is the first time I've ever seen anyone suggest Cubase was designed with musicians in mind. And seen as the "grand piano" of software. Ha, what a hoot.

And to preempt: yes I play a "real" instrument (several in fact), yes I've been trained to play them, and yes I think that arrogance masquerading as worldy experience is really just arrogance.

Cheerio,
Steve