What is the future of Bitwig?

[cel4145]

but bitwigs own effects are integrated into bitwig and the grid, they can be per voice etc for poly or voice stacking, modulation of them works better etc, so for those uses its not the same as putting an external plugin after, id love to see an improved saturation/distortion for those uses

there are external midi editors and compositional tools though, while its not as easy as having it in the daw, you wouldn't miss out on any features that require integration like that etc, but im not sure about midi editor vsts that have every feature you want, there are definitely tons of compositional tools though
although the arranger can only be in the daw, what arranger features would you want?

Right. As I said, "there is certainly value in updating the FX plugins." It privileges users who are much more into using the advanced sound design features.

But I think you are wrong. People who are not into advanced sound design capability don't chose a DAW with the idea of using external midi editors and compositional tools. They choose another DAW. Which is sort of the whole point of this conversation about why refining the composing aspects of Bitwig is a good idea.

Anway, it seems like Bitwig should have a wrapper for external plugins such that they could be used (even in a limited capacity) within the grids. There's no feature like that yet? If not, seems like it should be top of the list for people regularly using the grid.

[cel4145]

Alt-click new note follows the grid instead of the previous note.

Basically, you are fighting inside yourself... between how you think it should be and how it is. So of course it feels inefficient to you. If you stop comparing then you can get quite fast using Bitwig and the piano roll cause you are no longer fighting inside.

And of course over time, various workflow improvements will happen... but they are not necessary to enjoy it as is and be creative.

What I hear you saying here is ignore any of the user experience issues and become proficient, and you'll get used to it.

Yes. That's true for any piece of software. But not a good excuse for not improving the user experience.

Plus, it's not really how people evaluate a program that they haven't used before. Any user experience issues are a strike against using the program.

[j wazza]

Right. As I said, "there is certainly value in updating the FX plugins." It privileges users who are much more into using the advanced sound design features.

But I think you are wrong. People who are not into advanced sound design capability don't chose a DAW with the idea of using external midi editors and compositional tools. They choose another DAW. Which is sort of the whole point of this conversation about why refining the composing aspects of Bitwig is a good idea.

Anway, it seems like Bitwig should have a wrapper for external plugins such that they could be used (even in a limited capacity) within the grids. There's no feature like that yet? If not, seems like it should be top of the list for people regularly using the grid.

theres definitely value to bitwig adding compositional tools too, im still not sure exactly which ones you guys want as ive been skimming it, id say bitwig has some great unique compositional tools in the note fx, it can do everything and more with that compared to fl studios piano roll (i used to use that), but when i checked out cubase it had some great tools for that stuff which bitwig lacks

it just sounded like you were saying fx can be substituted, i was just saying they cant always,
per voice effects and unison arent complicated to do though so i wouldnt call it that advanced, its still a thing for sound designers though

i wasn't saying that people choose a daw expecting to use midi editor vsts, i was saying that if there is a midi editor vst with all the features someone wants, you would get all of those features without losing any functionality even if its not native in the daw, which you cant with effects or instruments.
it would still be a hassle so of course people wont buy bitwig planning on doing it all the time, but for occasional use it could be ok, bitwigs midi system makes using midi vsts as easy as using an effect

if bitwig doesnt have what someone wants they dont need to use it, everyones allowed to make feature requests if they do decide to use it, but i see bitwig as made by sound designers for sound designers, or at least for electronic musicians and beat makers, thats its niche, i dont see why a traditional composer would want to use it, not even just because of what it lacks, it would just be overkill. id use cubase, studio one or logic for that

but its true that it would probably sell more if they tried to appeal to both, especially as some people are both composers and sound designers like i said earlier on, but i think bitwigs main focus will always be sound design and electronic music as thats what it was built for, there were already many traditional daws that are fine for traditional composers, so focusing too much on that may mean neglecting the sound design niche it is building, appealing to traditional composers, who already have a daw and wouldn't switch unless bitwig could outdo cubase etc in terms of composition, which is unlikely.
bitwig set out to be different, its a massive modular synth even without the grid, of course it would be ideal if it could be a mixture of traditional/composutional daw and modular synth, if it goes that way im all for it, but im more keen for them developing the modular aspects and making more stuff possible that isnt possible with most daws

i would also love being able to use plugins in the grid

[PhilipVasta]

I love that Bitwig exists because their fresh perspective has resulted in some true innovations. That said, I hope they can find a good compromise between their mad scientist beginnings and more staid, traditional methods. I don't mean that they should stop the former altogether, but I think we're at a good place with regards to having a wide variety of creative devices that cater, for the most part, to people making some form of experimental, electronic, or generative music. So, at some point in the near future, I'd love to see them really shore up scenarios that could be more generally useful, regardless of the style of music you're writing.

I don't want to turn this post into a wish list, but I'll include some of the *types* of things that come to my mind when talking about general usefulness.

-Track freeze. For people using large sample libraries who are writing carefully interconnected lines that may require note data to be continually edited, this becomes important. Using bounce and bounce in place for this purpose leads to a very clumsy and potentially confusing scenario. They're fine for what they are but not a replacement for track freeze.
-Speaking of bounce (not bounce in place), I've never understood why there's no option to have it automatically named and colored as the origin track.
-Ability to selectively hide tracks. Currently you can only hide disabled tracks, and even then, it's all or nothing.
-Ability to turn off automation read mode in automation lanes.
-A few (2 to 4 perhaps) carefully developed themes, light and dark
-Ability to set a scale in a project so that at least sharps and flats are appropriately shown in the note editor. As a music program... seems important.

To me, these all seem like realistic, achievable changes that would significantly enhance the experience for many users, without changing the "direction" of development, whatever that really means. Things I wouldn't expect or believe to be especially reasonable changes would be things like separating tracks from busses, or including a fully-fledged score editor, since those feel more at odds with the core design philosophy.

I don't know. I realize that some of the things I just said may seem contradictory, even. I just think that Bitwig has much more room to grow as a program that helps in the creation of any genre of music than it does with regard to its unique selling points.

[j wazza]

I love that Bitwig exists because their fresh perspective has resulted in some true innovations. That said, I hope they can find a good compromise between their mad scientist beginnings and more staid, traditional methods. I don't mean that they should stop the former altogether, but I think we're at a good place with regards to having a wide variety of creative devices that cater, for the most part, to people making some form of experimental, electronic, or generative music.
...
I just think that Bitwig has much more room to grow as a program that helps in the creation of any genre of music than it does with regard to its unique selling points.

i agree on compromise, and your ideas definitely sound helpful and realistic, they definitely have the right devices for experimental stuff, but the sound quality of a lot of them is quite poor, so it has room to grow in that sense, and as its unique selling point is modular synthesis there is endless room to grow with that, theres no resynthesis, granular etc, not that those are my priority for bitwig

[PhilipVasta]

if bitwig doesnt have what someone wants they dont need to use it, everyones allowed to make feature requests if they do decide to use it, but i see bitwig as made by sound designers for sound designers, or at least for electronic musicians and beat makers, thats its niche, i dont see why a traditional composer would want to use it, not even just because of what it lacks, it would just be overkill. id use cubase, studio one or logic for that

but its true that it would probably sell more if they tried to appeal to both, especially as some people are both composers and sound designers like i said earlier on, but i think bitwigs main focus will always be sound design and electronic music as thats what it was built for, there were already many traditional daws that are fine for traditional composers, so focusing too much on that may mean neglecting the sound design niche it is building, appealing to traditional composers, who already have a daw and wouldn't switch unless bitwig could outdo cubase etc in terms of composition, which is unlikely.
bitwig set out to be different, its a massive modular synth even without the grid, of course it would be ideal if it could be a mixture of traditional/composutional daw and modular synth, if it goes that way im all for it, but im more keen for them developing the modular aspects and making more stuff possible that isnt possible with most daws

i would also love being able to use plugins in the grid

I think I understand your point of view. But one thing I suspect many of us unwittingly do (myself included) is group people into categories because it's convenient. Especially anymore, music is often more of a hybrid of different styles, so I'm not sure that I like the notion that this DAW *should* be for electronic music, or that DAW *should* be for traditional composition. Of course, when a program includes everything but the kitchen sink, it tends to become bloated to its detriment - so from that practical perspective I get it.

I can only speak for myself, but I suspect there are others like me. I grew up taking lessons in classical piano styles, and then I went to college for a degree in music production where contemporary music was very much the norm. I also lean on the techy side of music and enjoy creating sounds from scratch in Bitwig using their devices and modulation system. Yet my music tends to be linear, not loop-based, and I use a variety of orchestral libraries. I think there are probably a fair number of people who don't fall strictly into one neat little category. That's why I think Bitwig, as a DAW, has to be a bit more general-purpose that it is now.

[JHernandez]

Doesn't it kinda suck to be so dependent on "compositional tools" from DAW X, Y & Z at a 140 FPS+ with a pretty theme to get music done? I would be pretty frustrated personally.

I don't know about you all, but I think this thread has been really really productive. I can see Bitwig changing course already. You can tell right from the start that Bitwig's mission was to conform to sell more copies and thanks to this thread their eyes are on the ball again. Amen.

[j wazza]

I think I understand your point of view. But one thing I suspect many of us unwittingly do (myself included) is group people into categories because it's convenient. Especially anymore, music is often more of a hybrid of different styles, so I'm not sure that I like the notion that this DAW *should* be for electronic music, or that DAW *should* be for traditional composition. Of course, when a program includes everything but the kitchen sink, it tends to become bloated to its detriment - so from that practical perspective I get it.

I can only speak for myself, but I suspect there are others like me. I grew up taking lessons in classical piano styles, and then I went to college for a degree in music production where contemporary music was very much the norm. I also lean on the techy side of music and enjoy creating sounds from scratch in Bitwig using their devices and modulation system. Yet my music tends to be linear, not loop-based, and I use a variety of orchestral libraries. I think there are probably a fair number of people who don't fall strictly into one neat little category. That's why I think Bitwig, as a DAW, has to be a bit more general-purpose that it is now.

i get you, i said earlier in the thread that many people are both sound designers and composers and it would be nice if bitwig added some of cubase's features
but many daws dont have any of bitwigs modular sound design features so i meant that it was designed for that purpose, but that doesnt mean it should neglect other features

i dont mean that bitwig *should* be just for sound design and cubase/studio one *should* be just for traditional musicians, i mean that they *are* designed with those as their main purposes and target audience.

i would love it if bitwig adopted some of their compositional features, and those daws adopted some of bitwigs modular features, the new cubase has modulation now which is a step in that direction

even if i wouldn't, what you want from a daw is just as valid as what anyone else wants, although as is, id say ableton is probably more suited to you as a combo of the two

[pdxindy]

The best solution would simply be that Bitwig didn't assume any note length and you could click and drag with the pencil to draw the desired note length, every time.

You can do that...

[pdxindy]

What I hear you saying here is ignore any of the user experience issues and become proficient, and you'll get used to it.

Either that, or use other software... those are the two available choices.

Certainly repeatedly complaining in a user forum when Bitwig devs are unlikely to even read what you are writing accomplishes nothing. Nobody here can address the things you are unhappy about.

If you want to actually reach the Devs, send a feature request to support@bitwig.com

[JHernandez]

if bitwig doesnt have what someone wants they dont need to use it, everyones allowed to make feature requests if they do decide to use it, but i see bitwig as made by sound designers for sound designers, or at least for electronic musicians and beat makers, thats its niche, i dont see why a traditional composer would want to use it, not even just because of what it lacks, it would just be overkill. id use cubase, studio one or logic for that

but its true that it would probably sell more if they tried to appeal to both, especially as some people are both composers and sound designers like i said earlier on, but i think bitwigs main focus will always be sound design and electronic music as thats what it was built for, there were already many traditional daws that are fine for traditional composers, so focusing too much on that may mean neglecting the sound design niche it is building, appealing to traditional composers, who already have a daw and wouldn't switch unless bitwig could outdo cubase etc in terms of composition, which is unlikely.
bitwig set out to be different, its a massive modular synth even without the grid, of course it would be ideal if it could be a mixture of traditional/composutional daw and modular synth, if it goes that way im all for it, but im more keen for them developing the modular aspects and making more stuff possible that isnt possible with most daws

i would also love being able to use plugins in the grid

I think I understand your point of view. But one thing I suspect many of us unwittingly do (myself included) is group people into categories because it's convenient. Especially anymore, music is often more of a hybrid of different styles, so I'm not sure that I like the notion that this DAW *should* be for electronic music, or that DAW *should* be for traditional composition. Of course, when a program includes everything but the kitchen sink, it tends to become bloated to its detriment - so from that practical perspective I get it.

I can only speak for myself, but I suspect there are others like me. I grew up taking lessons in classical piano styles, and then I went to college for a degree in music production where contemporary music was very much the norm. I also lean on the techy side of music and enjoy creating sounds from scratch in Bitwig using their devices and modulation system. Yet my music tends to be linear, not loop-based, and I use a variety of orchestral libraries. I think there are probably a fair number of people who don't fall strictly into one neat little category. That's why I think Bitwig, as a DAW, has to be a bit more general-purpose that it is now.

I came from classical guitar, home grown with some studied people around me, then to electric guitar, metal head, to electronic music and keys (Skinny Puppy got me hooked, Last Rights) in which I do all my own sound design and more or less play "traditionally" into Bitwig, if possible, where I can take that, if want/need, to more experimental grounds or full on crazy. Bitwig works for me but I hear you, I can relate some and generally agree with the view you expressed concerning Bitwig's direction.

I left Logic because imo it's super bloated. When I found Bitwig it felt simple, powerful and clean. Unlike how some feel in this thread, it immediately felt like a piece of software I could easily compose in (and it has been) without a bunch of distractions.

I lucked out honestly. It's almost as if they heard most of my feature wishes, the ones I really cared about, and in time made them come true.

Bitwig is great.

[PhilipVasta]

What I hear you saying here is ignore any of the user experience issues and become proficient, and you'll get used to it.

Either that, or use other software... those are the two available choices.

Certainly repeatedly complaining in a user forum when Bitwig devs are unlikely to even read what you are writing accomplishes nothing. Nobody here can address the things you are unhappy about.

If you want to actually reach the Devs, send a feature request to support@bitwig.com

That's a practical suggestion to be sure, but this is a discussion forum, after all.

[PhilipVasta]

I came from classical guitar, home grown with some studied people around me, then to electric guitar, metal head, to electronic music and keys (Skinny Puppy got me hooked, Last Rights) in which I do all my own sound design and more or less play "traditionally" into Bitwig, if possible, where I can take that, if want/need, to more experimental grounds or full on crazy. Bitwig works for me but I hear you, I can relate some and generally agree with the view you expressed concerning Bitwig's direction.

I left Logic because imo it's super bloated. When I found Bitwig it felt simple, powerful and clean. Unlike how some feel in this thread, it immediately felt like a piece of software I could easily compose in (and it has been) without a bunch of distractions.

I lucked out honestly. It's almost as if they heard most of my feature wishes, the ones I really cared about, and in time made them come true.

Bitwig is great.

Yes! I feel similarly - it's a refreshing change from some overly complex interfaces in other programs. And there's a certain allure to Bitwig that is wonderful and inspiring. That's what keeps me coming back and continuing to pay for upgrades.

[cel4145]

Either that, or use other software... those are the two available choices.

Certainly repeatedly complaining in a user forum when Bitwig devs are unlikely to even read what you are writing accomplishes nothing. Nobody here can address the things you are unhappy about.

If you want to actually reach the Devs, send a feature request to support@bitwig.com

You are confused. This is a discussion about the future direction of Bitwig. If you are uncomfortable with it, you don't have to read it and participate in the discussion. lol

[pdxindy]

You are confused. This is a discussion about the future direction of Bitwig. If you are uncomfortable with it, you don't have to read it and participate in the discussion. lol

I do get confused sometimes... this is not one of them.

I do however, look forward to when you actually start discussing something. Mostly you are just being a jerk.