[SOLVED] Why is ML9's live matrix quite different from other DAWs?

[oldcastle]

Hi,

I noticed that ML9's live matrix is quite different from other DAWs. For example. Ableton doesn't have the tracker header for its Session View; ML9 has it. For me, that is "strange," but it dictates the track type for the entire row. Isn't one of the points of having the Live Matrix to kill this limitation?

04-09-2022_19-47.png

04-09-2022_19-42.png

Please advise if I'm getting something wrong here.

Thanks

[pljones]

Why is different "strange" to you?

[oldcastle]

Simply a poor word choice.

[humanboeing]

I've never thought of it as limitation. I have no experience with Live but from the way you put it and from the screenshots I'd say Mulab makes more sense to me. Answering your question, I don't think the point of clip launcher is to get rid of tracks but to provide a different workflow for jamming and trying ideas on the fly.

[Dionysos]

Ableton's Session view is just rotated by 90° compared with MuLab's. Columns in MuLab map to rows in Live.

There are no limitations inherent to that approach, it just ties in more seamlessly with the regular arranger's layout. Bitwig offers both view orientations, one that aligns with the horizontal arranger, one with the vertical mixer.

[dakkra]

FWIW Bitwig's clip launcher is similar to M9

Bitwig_Studio_a2sHY3WM3O.png

I find it to be quite intuitive this way. It's just a 90 degree rotation from how Live does it.

[fde101]

it dictates the track type for the entire row. Isn't one of the points of having the Live Matrix to kill this limitation?

If you are referring to MIDI vs. audio, then Live has this same "limitation", except that in session view the track is in columns instead of rows. If you look carefully at the mixer section in your Live screenshot, you will find that the first track (column) shows "Audio from" for its recording source, while the others show "MIDI from" - there is one audio track and six MIDI tracks.

FWIW Bitwig's clip launcher is similar to M9

Same with the one in Logic. The one in Digital Performer is set up more like the one in Live (rotated to show tracks as columns).

[humanboeing]

If you are referring to MIDI vs. audio, then Live has this same "limitation"

You can have both midi and audio in the same track in Mulab.

[fde101]

You can have both midi and audio in the same track in Mulab.

Thanks, not true in Live which is what I was referencing, but that does leave me a bit confused on what the original concern was about:

By the way, if you add audio to a track which is initially set up for MIDI, how do you get it to play? It seems that the audio goes into the MIDI instrument just like the MIDI does and is subsequently ignored because the instrument doesn't know what to do with it? I would imagine you would have the same issue going the other way?

it dictates the track type for the entire row. Isn't one of the points of having the Live Matrix to kill this limitation?

[humanboeing]

By the way, if you add audio to a track which is initially set up for MIDI, how do you get it to play? It seems that the audio goes into the MIDI instrument just like the MIDI does and is subsequently ignored because the instrument doesn't know what to do with it? I would imagine you would have the same issue going the other way?

The standard setup for an instrument, either mux or vst, is an event input and audio output. If you'd like to hear the audio and trigger the instrument simultaneously then you have to have an audio input routed to the output, then the audio will pass.

[fde101]

The standard setup for an instrument, either mux or vst, is an event input and audio output. If you'd like to hear the audio and trigger the instrument simultaneously then you have to have an audio input routed to the output, then the audio will pass.

Ah, got it - that makes sense.