Why you left Bitwig?

[Biscotto]

And just to put it in a better prospective for a new user evaluating Ableton and BWS:

One instance of Modulat for Ableton (or any built in LFO etc.) can control the entire DAW.

This is not available in BWS and this is astonishing powerful.
It’s not free but...! The power that comes with it is (after thinking a little bit deeper....) way above the rest of the rat race.

It can’t be understood until it is put to use and then... the AH HA! Moment.

I had to add this point in order to allow a new user, without access to Modulat, to understand and to point them to at least explore what’s available thanks to the M4L engine in Ableton and to look at some instructional Modulat video for that aspect of the DAW.

[jamcat]

No one leaves the Cult of Bitwig... alive.

[pekbro]

TBH I would be surprised if Bitwig survives another 5 yrs, their "non-sub" payment plan is not a solid foundation to run a business on. Revenue in that model is too variable and uncertain.

Why you think that? The whole reason behind the "upgrade plan" model was to spread people's payments over time and not concentrate them around big x.0 updates like for other DAWs. This helps a small team to have a pretty consistent cash flow and encourages them to push out meaningful, frequent updates more often, instead of "saving" new features for 0.x. Obviously it's highly subjective whether they've been able to keep their end of the bargain on the latter, but that's gonna be the case always and for every software, because you can't make everyone happy all the time.

I dunno, I just think it's pretty easy to skip versions, in which case the Bitwig crew
doesn't get paid. A lot of it is psychological in that people think they are saving
some money by only waiting for features they personally find valuable. If a lot
of customers do that and I bet there are quite a few (like me), that's a significant
amount of lost revenue. In the least, it's unreliable revenue, which can make budgeting
very difficult. They are a small crew, so maybe it will work out long term, still that's
a lot of risk in financial terms.

BTW: I think they very much do hold out on features to encourage renewals, despite
what they say about it. *shrug

[antic604]

TBH I would be surprised if Bitwig survives another 5 yrs, their "non-sub" payment plan is not a solid foundation to run a business on. Revenue in that model is too variable and uncertain.

Why you think that? The whole reason behind the "upgrade plan" model was to spread people's payments over time and not concentrate them around big x.0 updates like for other DAWs. This helps a small team to have a pretty consistent cash flow and encourages them to push out meaningful, frequent updates more often, instead of "saving" new features for 0.x. Obviously it's highly subjective whether they've been able to keep their end of the bargain on the latter, but that's gonna be the case always and for every software, because you can't make everyone happy all the time.

I dunno, I just think it's pretty easy to skip versions, in which case the Bitwig crew
doesn't get paid. A lot of it is psychological in that people think they are saving
some money by only waiting for features they personally find valuable. If a lot
of customers do that and I bet there are quite a few (like me), that's a significant
amount of lost revenue. In the least, it's unreliable revenue, which can make budgeting
very difficult. They are a small crew, so maybe it will work out long term, still that's
a lot of risk in financial terms.

BTW: I think they very much do hold out on features to encourage renewals, despite
what they say about it. *shrug

Ok, I see. But IMO it's still much safer to have payments spread around the year instead of banking on a big spike every 2-3 years, especially if there's no other revenue stream.

Also I don't really see how their model is encouraging people to skip releases any more than a traditional one - I see people all the time saying they'll skip upgrading S1, Cubase, Live or Reason until version x.1 or x.2 or until the feature they need shows up.

In the end I don't think the financial model matters that much for building a user base. It's what their friends - or favourite artists - are using, why the tutorials, templates and sound packs are made for. Bitwig's modularity and modulation are huge selling points, but only to a small minority of music genres and even smaller minority of people that care about this workflow. You can get 80% there in any DAW and the question has to be asked if the remaining 20% is important - or even noticeable - to audience and/or the artist. Because perhaps in reality it's just waste of time. Very few people in reality will load up Serum, start creating a patch and then despair that they're missing an LFO or Envelope - they'll just accept it and move on, instead of switching to a DAW rhat gives it to them.

And for "plain vanilla DAW stuff" many are way more competent than Bitwig.

[machinesworking]

I dunno, I just think it's pretty easy to skip versions, in which case the Bitwig crew
doesn't get paid. A lot of it is psychological in that people think they are saving
some money by only waiting for features they personally find valuable. If a lot
of customers do that and I bet there are quite a few (like me), that's a significant
amount of lost revenue. In the least, it's unreliable revenue, which can make budgeting
very difficult. They are a small crew, so maybe it will work out long term, still that's
a lot of risk in financial terms.

BTW: I think they very much do hold out on features to encourage renewals, despite
what they say about it. *shrug

I think they do quite well with it actually. Think about it in terms of percentages. How many people who use and love Bitwig are going to go three years without upgrading? I would bet not many, I would bet the average is less than two years. Most DAWs are putting out major versions every 2-4 years lately, charging from $150 to 350 on average.

I just bought Bitwig last year in about December. I bought the upgrade plan when it was on sale a while ago, despite it not running out until November. I will probably only last until the first major update they do that adds something I want, maybe 4 months is my bet.

[dellboy]

Also I don't really see how their model is encouraging people to skip releases any more than a traditional one - I see people all the time saying they'll skip upgrading S1, Cubase, Live or Reason until version x.1 or x.2 or until the feature they need shows up.

If you skip a Cubase upgrade it costs more the next time around.

I have just paid for this years upgrade though and it was a very reasonable £30 in the sale. So if it remains that sort of money year on year I have no problem in supporting them.

The other ones you mention do not penalize you for skipping upgrades though as far as I am aware.

So skipping an upgrade is no big deal which is why I have not bothered with the recent Studio One upgrade.

[antic604]

Also I don't really see how their model is encouraging people to skip releases any more than a traditional one - I see people all the time saying they'll skip upgrading S1, Cubase, Live or Reason until version x.1 or x.2 or until the feature they need shows up.

If you skip a Cubase upgrade it costs more the next time around.

I have just paid for this years upgrade though and it was a very reasonable £30 in the sale. So if it remains that sort of money year on year I have no problem in supporting them.

The other ones you mention do not penalize you for skipping upgrades though as far as I am aware.

So skipping an upgrade is no big deal which is why I have not bothered with the recent Studio One upgrade.

Sure, but how is that relevant to the discussion about Bitwig's upgrade plan somehow being more encouraging to skip upgrades? If anything, what you're saying would mean Bitwig's user have more reasons to upgrade regularly.

[dellboy]

Sure, but how is that relevant to the discussion about Bitwig's upgrade plan somehow being more encouraging to skip upgrades? If anything, what you're saying would mean Bitwig's user have more reasons to upgrade regularly.

I am not sure what you mean - you have lost me there.

To Upgrade from a very old Cubase to the newest version costs a lot.

To upgrade from Bitwig One to Bitwig Three costs the same dosen't it ?

If you fall behind with Cubase upgrades it means you get stuck on an old version forever.

If you fall behind with a Bitwig upgrade zilch happens except you might miss out on some new modulating thingy.

[Biscotto]

I have a paid upgrade that I will probably never use because, like antic604 also mentioned, that Modular endowment of BWS is in most cases not essential in composing music and that’s exactly their focus and the 20% antic refers to could be just about correct or way below.

It’s a great DAW for that intention of design and that creates the cash flow with every little addition to that Model which in the end you may realize it’s not really necessary for your “large picture” creativity and actually a huge distraction, but... you keep paying to be in that game which keeps you entertained for days on end until your project folder it’s loaded with cool stuff but never finished.

For me BWS became a wonderful candy store, I needed a real meal!

Hopefully they will ran out of gadgets and go back on track and perhaps realize that their original mother company, in many ways, is still ahead of the game.

[killmaster]

Personally, Bitwig has the depth and thoughtfulness in just the right places for my work and I can't imagine ever wanting another DAW. It already provides all the potential I need.

[functionform]

I'm a new user, but I can tell you right now, Bitwig should just license Gatekeeper and place it everywhere in Studio. Use it for automation curves (really not snappy enough), use it for a real multi-envelope modulator, use it for sidechaining. It's the fourth leg for Bitwigs animal.

There's no shame in it - Live would be a much less attractive daw without Cytomic's help with filters, eq, compressor. There's more I could say about Bitwigs filter/eq curves as well, but I think most people own pro-q or something similar so its not as necessary. Automation and modulation are core to Bitwig's value prop though so I really think it's something they should consider.

[machinesworking]

I have a paid upgrade that I will probably never use because, like antic604 also mentioned, that Modular endowment of BWS is in most cases not essential in composing music and that’s exactly their focus and the 20% antic refers to could be just about correct or way below.

It’s a great DAW for that intention of design and that creates the cash flow with every little addition to that Model which in the end you may realize it’s not really necessary for your “large picture” creativity and actually a huge distraction, but... you keep paying to be in that game which keeps you entertained for days on end until your project folder it’s loaded with cool stuff but never finished.

For me BWS became a wonderful candy store, I needed a real meal!

Hopefully they will ran out of gadgets and go back on track and perhaps realize that their original mother company, in many ways, is still ahead of the game.

Yeah, no. You insinuate that Bitwig will now rest on the Grid, only improving that area, which is more or less what happened to Live.Ten+ years later and we still see incremental minor improvements to Live.

The mother company being ahead of the game?? To this day, after years of pestering them, you still need to drag the subfolder manually to edit MIDI "full screen", no MPE, and terrible CPU handling. Bitwig beats Live handily in any test I've ever did CPU wise. In Live the Rack switcher is the solution for playing more than one VSTi in a live situation, and it doesn't release CPU, in Bitwig it does.

I switched to Bitwig in the last couple months, and at first it was confusing, and seemed less well thought out etc. but after unlearning Ableton's ways I'm firmly convinced that it's the right choice for most of my work. M4L is pretty much the only advantage Live has to me. The plethora of assignable global key commands, full screen MIDI and audio editor, MPE, resource management, better global and local controller handling, better browser, touch screen support, all of this can't be ignored in favor of what you feel comfortable using.

[Biscotto]

I have a paid upgrade that I will probably never use because, like antic604 also mentioned, that Modular endowment of BWS is in most cases not essential in composing music and that’s exactly their focus and the 20% antic refers to could be just about correct or way below.

It’s a great DAW for that intention of design and that creates the cash flow with every little addition to that Model which in the end you may realize it’s not really necessary for your “large picture” creativity and actually a huge distraction, but... you keep paying to be in that game which keeps you entertained for days on end until your project folder it’s loaded with cool stuff but never finished.

For me BWS became a wonderful candy store, I needed a real meal!

Hopefully they will ran out of gadgets and go back on track and perhaps realize that their original mother company, in many ways, is still ahead of the game.

Yeah, no. You insinuate that Bitwig will now rest on the Grid, only improving that area, which is more or less what happened to Live.Ten+ years later and we still see incremental minor improvements to Live.

The mother company being ahead of the game?? To this day, after years of pestering them, you still need to drag the subfolder manually to edit MIDI "full screen", no MPE, and terrible CPU handling. Bitwig beats Live handily in any test I've ever did CPU wise. In Live the Rack switcher is the solution for playing more than one VSTi in a live situation, and it doesn't release CPU, in Bitwig it does.

I switched to Bitwig in the last couple months, and at first it was confusing, and seemed less well thought out etc. but after unlearning Ableton's ways I'm firmly convinced that it's the right choice for most of my work. M4L is pretty much the only advantage Live has to me. The plethora of assignable global key commands, full screen MIDI and audio editor, MPE, resource management, better global and local controller handling, better browser, touch screen support, all of this can't be ignored in favor of what you feel comfortable using.

So that’s why you left Ableton?
No enough here because here we are focusing on the facts of why we left BWS.
All those positive points you are listing are insufficient to keep many users from leaving BWS and this is the point of this topic.
We are voicing the reasons we left BWS based on the topic intention.
You felt like proving that the topic, and the listed reasons from several users, is in some way unjustified or not fair based on your experience with the software.

I can easily agree with your claims but it would be better placed in a topic titled “Why I stick with BWG”.

We are trying to give an honest account of the reasons why we leaving BWS and I think that Ableton, in my case it’s way superior in workflow for my needs and ahead of the game which IS the reason I’m leaving.

You seems to forget the topic intention and a defense lawyer is not required.
I’m freely leaving the platform with no collateral damage to your client.

If there was a topic “Why I left Ableton” I would have no business being there because I use Ableton. Just saying....

[machinesworking]

So that’s why you left Ableton?
No enough here because here we are focusing on the facts of why we left BWS.
All those positive points you are listing are insufficient to keep many users from leaving BWS and this is the point of this topic.
We are voicing the reasons we left BWS based on the topic intention.
You felt like proving that the topic, and the listed reasons from several users, is in some way unjustified or not fair based on your experience with the software.

I can easily agree with your claims but it would be better placed in a topic titled “Why I stick with BWG”.

We are trying to give an honest account of the reasons why we leaving BWS and I think that Ableton, in my case it’s way superior in workflow for my needs and ahead of the game which IS the reason I’m leaving.

You seems to forget the topic intention and a defense lawyer is not required.
I’m freely leaving the platform with no collateral damage to your client.

If there was a topic “Why I left Ableton” I would have no business being there because I use Ableton. Just saying....

You mention reasons for leaving, none of them are valid IMO. This is KVR, I'm certain you're aware that no topic is off limits in terms of sticking to the subject.

Reasons to stick to Live are really not mentioned by you, and a lot of your reasons for leaving Bitwig are unfamiliarity and assumptions that are actually played out in real life with Live, like the fact that M4L's introduction has significantly slowed down Live itself's development process.

I could name a dozen reasons to stick to Live, none of them would do with the UX or the addition of the Grid in Bitwig, it would be things like movie hosting, the mentioned global nature of the LFO, Jitter in M4L, the actual GUI ( I like the streamlined look ), etc. But when it comes to UX, Bitwig wins that battle, the browser, key commands, navigating the interface, window sets, MIDI editing etc.

Anyway if Live makes you happy, great, but I still think that from what you wrote, it's more like you never really got over that interface shock that anyone has when using a new DAW, after being completely immersed in a particular DAWs way of doing things.

[antic604]

I am not sure what you mean - you have lost me there.

Oh, it's nothing really. I disagreed with @pekbro's point about Bitwig's financial model encouraging people to skip upgrades and your post, while it sounded like you disagreed with me, suggested that for other DAWs it's equally easy - although can get increasingly costly for Cubase - to skip versions, which actually supports my point.

So I think we agree