https://djmag.com/tech/fl-studio-adds-s ... g-new-beta
What's Ableton up to?
-
- addled muppet weed
- 111293 posts since 26 Jan, 2003 from through the looking glass
last i heard, they were organising the christmas party.
-
- Banned
- 278 posts since 6 Oct, 2013 from The Red Eye
Oh. Nevermind. I hate mastering but not bad enough to buy FL. Thanks for the info though.
Ask not what your DAW can do for you, but what you can do with your DAW
-
- KVRAF
- 5444 posts since 15 Feb, 2020
I've been using Live since L2 and used to frequent their forums in the early years, so I've seen plenty of shit threads in my time. But even so, this one's right down there with the worst. Kudos.
On-topic: I think vurt's right, planning xmas party.
On-topic: I think vurt's right, planning xmas party.
I lost my heart in Cap de Creus
-
- KVRAF
- 11316 posts since 18 Aug, 2007 from NYC
Yeah, the direction of the thread is up there.revvy wrote: Sat Oct 07, 2023 8:19 pm I've been using Live since L2 and used to frequent their forums in the early years, so I've seen plenty of shit threads in my time. But even so, this one's right down there with the worst. Kudos.
On-topic: I think vurt's right, planning xmas party.
The idea that companies need to constantly roll out new features is probably why so many companies feel justified in supporting subscription models.
-
- Banned
- 278 posts since 6 Oct, 2013 from The Red Eye
Welcome to modern society.elxsound wrote: The idea that companies need to constantly roll out new features
The idea behind subscription models is to make more money. Imagine that.is probably why so many companies feel justified in supporting subscription models.
Ask not what your DAW can do for you, but what you can do with your DAW
-
- KVRAF
- 11316 posts since 18 Aug, 2007 from NYC
Now you sound like you're on the Slate Digital advertising train "Buying individual plugins is expensive? ? ? wrote: Sat Oct 07, 2023 9:06 pmWelcome to modern society.elxsound wrote: The idea that companies need to constantly roll out new features
The idea behind subscription models is to make more money. Imagine that.is probably why so many companies feel justified in supporting subscription models.
and outdated."
Side note: Did you know Slate Digital was purchased by Audiotonix? I missed that somehow.
Non-stop mergers.
-
- Banned
- 278 posts since 6 Oct, 2013 from The Red Eye
No. I'm too busy watching interviews with sunset strip hair band members talking about back in the day orgies in recording studios.elxsound wrote: Sat Oct 07, 2023 9:28 pm Side note: Did you know Slate Digital was purchased by Audiotonix?
Welcome to modern society.Non-stop mergers.
Right - lll grab me coat.
Ask not what your DAW can do for you, but what you can do with your DAW
-
- KVRian
- Topic Starter
- 545 posts since 4 Apr, 2006
Capture was added in Live 10 and even going through your list, that's not a lot for a company the size of Ableton compare that to all the features that FL has received in the same time span.jules99 wrote: Sat Oct 07, 2023 6:23 pm Let's see. Ableton Live was released on February 23, 2021. It brought comping, group editing, MPE, four new audio effects, Live tempo adaptation, loads of new probability and velocity features for MIDI clips, bigger racks (16 macros, macro snapshots, macro randomization), improved clip editing (multiple midi clips at once, scales settings), three new sound packs, Upright Piano (which is as good as Una Corda or Noire). That was about two-and-a-half years ago.
11.1 came out on February 1, 2022. One year later, 18 months ago. Its main feature was native Apple Silicon compatibility. It also brought one of Live's best (IMO) features, Capture. They also added Shifter, a pretty decent pitch-shifter. Ableton also improved just about every new feature they introduced with 11. And also, all of Cytomic's brilliant filters were significantly improved.
11.2 was released on September 27, 2022 - a bit more than a year ago. It brought AUv3, meaning you could load a lot or brilliant iOS music apps on Live. Other than that, no significant updates or new features, but loads of fixes and little improvements.
11.3 was released on May 23, 2023 - five months ago. It brought Drift and added MPE to every instrument in Ableton (except Operator). It also brought a new Auto-Warp mode.
Now, only a few of these things are as flashy as stem separation, automatic mastering or any AI-based features, instruments or effects. And it does seem the competition is moving faster in some aspects. But it's not like they were lazy or didn't continuously add new stuff since 11.
I don't want Ableton to become bloated, but they're really moving extra slow.
Obvious features like macro morphing still haven't transpired. midi effects still can't be placed on a track, you have to use track routing to use them. hybrid tracks are still a no show. capture hasn't gained retrospective record for audio and those are only features people have been calling for a long time and things I actually would have expected as improvements in the meantime.
melodyne style editing hasn't even been hinted at. a autotune like effect is nowhere to be seen. triggering clips and how you actually use live as a performance tool live hasn't received an update forever. considering their revenue they could have even come up with a way how to string different projects together for live performance like studio one did.
there is no arrangement track, no chord track.
the suite of m4l modulators that live ships with could be improved greatly to bring it in line with bitwig, sure you can make them yourself if you know m4l or search for third party solutions, but most people don't.
sure track separation is maybe not for everybody, but other daws is moving onto AI tools at the moment and Ableton still is playing catch up with what the competition is offering right now at the same price point.
-
- KVRian
- 817 posts since 15 Jun, 2018
I'm not sure how long you have been using Ableton, but it does not seem that long. Because the company has been this slow since the debacle that was version 9, which came out at least 10 years ago.
What I'm saying is if you're still disappointed about Ableton being slow in catching up and in improving features knowing for how long they have been doing it this way, I'm not sure what your point is.
Ableton has been doing things at their own speed and in their own way for a very long time without any considerable loss in market position, judging by their sales position at retailers in DAW lists, which has been second to FL for many, many years. So they don't need to change.
I'm not saying to not make feature suggestions, but I'd suggest finding a way to deal with this by either finding replacement VSTs or switching DAWs. It's getting real tiring having these weekly "I can't believe Ableton still has no XX" or "How come FL still has no XY" threads.
What I'm saying is if you're still disappointed about Ableton being slow in catching up and in improving features knowing for how long they have been doing it this way, I'm not sure what your point is.
Ableton has been doing things at their own speed and in their own way for a very long time without any considerable loss in market position, judging by their sales position at retailers in DAW lists, which has been second to FL for many, many years. So they don't need to change.
I'm not saying to not make feature suggestions, but I'd suggest finding a way to deal with this by either finding replacement VSTs or switching DAWs. It's getting real tiring having these weekly "I can't believe Ableton still has no XX" or "How come FL still has no XY" threads.
-
- KVRist
- 224 posts since 23 Feb, 2013
I am on the opposite side, I really like that they're not going the route of quickly adding whatever the latest gimmick is just to churn out new versions. I agree that there are some things to criticize, especially when it comes to macro control/morphing (would be nice to have something like Audiomulch's Metasurface for morphing between different states/snapshots), although I found a m4l device for that, but I jumped ship from Reaper precisely because the features they add seem well thought out and I like how they approach it. Almost every effect/instrument/workflow tool is good at a base level and relatively flexible, so all forms of synthesis, various distortions/saturations, filters, eqs, there's also convolution, resonators, physical modelling, spectral stuff, modulators, etc. but the focus is mostly on creative usage and they steer away from highly specialized tasks like stem separation, spectral repair, automatic mastering, specific analog emulations, vocal tuning.
In my opinion, the only way to implement those things without it being a bad version of a cutting-edge tool, a gimmick essentially, would be to partner with someone like Izotope or Celemony or Softube, otherwise it would actually be a disservice to their users. There is practically no way that a DAW company will just come out with something more sophisticated than rx for spectral editing/repair, or ozone and online services for automated mastering, or Melodyne for vocal correction, etc.
If you are concerned that whatever DAW you're using does not have something like that currently because it is behind the industry standard/competition, the moment they implement it and people start using it, those users are now setting themselves behind - e.g. instead of learning about mastering "manually" or using whatever are the best automatic mastering tools at the moment, some using FL studio will now resort to its new mastering feature, which I would argue is worse than the two previous options.
Even financially it doesn't really make sense, instead of pushing developers to spend time trying to play half-assed catch-up with the latest tools and spending time on that, and then releasing new versions you have to pay for with that functionality, one could demo the available specialized software and buy the best, leaving daw developers to focus on other things. Of course, once the technology becomes more common it will be easier to implement it widely in different daws to a higher standard, just as all daws have decent eqs and compressors nowadays. Until then, it's far better to put extra effort into whatever the special focus of a certain daw is, like modular capabilities in Bitwig (native modulators, oversampling important), live playing and instrument-like usage of Live, professional mixing/mastering of Protools or Sequoia (here it makes sense to work on native pitch correction and mastering tools), flexibility in audio work and sound design of Reaper, etc. Considering the popularity of FL among beginners and beatmakers, it actually makes sense from their marketing standpoint to do something like automated mastering, regardless of how good it turns out to be.
Btw I agree about chord tracks, but version 11 is hopefully a good sign that they decided to implement some standard compositional features (e.g. comping).
In my opinion, the only way to implement those things without it being a bad version of a cutting-edge tool, a gimmick essentially, would be to partner with someone like Izotope or Celemony or Softube, otherwise it would actually be a disservice to their users. There is practically no way that a DAW company will just come out with something more sophisticated than rx for spectral editing/repair, or ozone and online services for automated mastering, or Melodyne for vocal correction, etc.
If you are concerned that whatever DAW you're using does not have something like that currently because it is behind the industry standard/competition, the moment they implement it and people start using it, those users are now setting themselves behind - e.g. instead of learning about mastering "manually" or using whatever are the best automatic mastering tools at the moment, some using FL studio will now resort to its new mastering feature, which I would argue is worse than the two previous options.
Even financially it doesn't really make sense, instead of pushing developers to spend time trying to play half-assed catch-up with the latest tools and spending time on that, and then releasing new versions you have to pay for with that functionality, one could demo the available specialized software and buy the best, leaving daw developers to focus on other things. Of course, once the technology becomes more common it will be easier to implement it widely in different daws to a higher standard, just as all daws have decent eqs and compressors nowadays. Until then, it's far better to put extra effort into whatever the special focus of a certain daw is, like modular capabilities in Bitwig (native modulators, oversampling important), live playing and instrument-like usage of Live, professional mixing/mastering of Protools or Sequoia (here it makes sense to work on native pitch correction and mastering tools), flexibility in audio work and sound design of Reaper, etc. Considering the popularity of FL among beginners and beatmakers, it actually makes sense from their marketing standpoint to do something like automated mastering, regardless of how good it turns out to be.
Btw I agree about chord tracks, but version 11 is hopefully a good sign that they decided to implement some standard compositional features (e.g. comping).
-
machinesworking machinesworking https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=8505 - KVRAF
- 8025 posts since 15 Aug, 2003 from seattle
Ableton do things their own way, I have ton of complaints I could levy about how they do things, but it's just kicking water uphill. They're one of the most successful DAWs out there, easily in the top four in terms of sales and cash flow.
I'm one to argue against the anti bloat philosophy of DAWs like Live, I can't stand that the click and count in options are as limited as they are, that automation has zero options etc. I get the concept, I just don't agree with it. Then I marvel at the Push integration the seamless audio playback no matter how you push it while tweaking parts that cause glitches in other DAWs, the general speed of working in a DAW that has a KISS philosophy etc.
I think you can't have both, I would love to, but the reality is you either get DAWs like Cubase, DP, Logic, Studio One, and Reaper that add in everything, literally attempt to incorperate every new feature, or you get DAWs like Live that have a workflow that people love, and will not deviate from that.
That said, not having ARA support is just a really dumb move, RX and Melodyne at that level is great.
I'm one to argue against the anti bloat philosophy of DAWs like Live, I can't stand that the click and count in options are as limited as they are, that automation has zero options etc. I get the concept, I just don't agree with it. Then I marvel at the Push integration the seamless audio playback no matter how you push it while tweaking parts that cause glitches in other DAWs, the general speed of working in a DAW that has a KISS philosophy etc.
I think you can't have both, I would love to, but the reality is you either get DAWs like Cubase, DP, Logic, Studio One, and Reaper that add in everything, literally attempt to incorperate every new feature, or you get DAWs like Live that have a workflow that people love, and will not deviate from that.
That said, not having ARA support is just a really dumb move, RX and Melodyne at that level is great.
-
- KVRian
- 817 posts since 15 Jun, 2018
Just to give a more nuanced viewpoint, as I might seem a little fan-boy-ish. I've been using Live since version 6. That period from 6 til 9 was absolutely glorious as they were expanding the clip launcher workflow, adding more instruments and effects, most importantly Max-for-Live.
9 was the first one that they really struggled with in terms of stability. That's why they missed releasing Live 10 when Ableton had its tenth birthday. But 10 needed quite a few updates as well until everything worked as intended.
But 11, especially 11.3, was an absolute disaster. The new auto-warp algorithm made Live next to unusable for weeks and months for far too many people. Combine that with the botched release of Push 3 (I send mine back, too many unfinished features), and Ableton really have to get their shit together.
I'm really hoping that what ever comes next, 11.4, 11.5, or 12 or whatever, is more stable. But experience from the last 3 major releases has been to face at least 6-9 weeks of bugfixes to use the new version as a stable, daily piece of software. That, much more than any new feature, would be my request, my hope.
9 was the first one that they really struggled with in terms of stability. That's why they missed releasing Live 10 when Ableton had its tenth birthday. But 10 needed quite a few updates as well until everything worked as intended.
But 11, especially 11.3, was an absolute disaster. The new auto-warp algorithm made Live next to unusable for weeks and months for far too many people. Combine that with the botched release of Push 3 (I send mine back, too many unfinished features), and Ableton really have to get their shit together.
I'm really hoping that what ever comes next, 11.4, 11.5, or 12 or whatever, is more stable. But experience from the last 3 major releases has been to face at least 6-9 weeks of bugfixes to use the new version as a stable, daily piece of software. That, much more than any new feature, would be my request, my hope.
-
- KVRAF
- 11316 posts since 18 Aug, 2007 from NYC
It was actually live 8: https://www.synthtopia.com/content/2009 ... ve-8-bugs/
Prior to Live 9, there was a new version released almost annually. Live 8 was slightly delayed, and now we see a much longer release cycle.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ableton_Live
I said the same thing in the Cubase thread. People should use whatever DAW they think suits their workflow best. I don’t see a reason why every DAW should have the same exact features when they each have their own focus catered to what they believe is their core user group.
As much as we state our opinions on forums, or social media, we’re not likely the majority of their users.
Prior to Live 9, there was a new version released almost annually. Live 8 was slightly delayed, and now we see a much longer release cycle.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ableton_Live
I said the same thing in the Cubase thread. People should use whatever DAW they think suits their workflow best. I don’t see a reason why every DAW should have the same exact features when they each have their own focus catered to what they believe is their core user group.
As much as we state our opinions on forums, or social media, we’re not likely the majority of their users.
-
- KVRist
- 224 posts since 23 Feb, 2013
elxsound wrote: Sun Oct 08, 2023 5:21 pm I said the same thing in the Cubase thread. People should use whatever DAW they think suits their workflow best. I don’t see a reason why every DAW should have the same exact features when they each have their own focus catered to what they believe is their core user group.
As much as we state our opinions on forums, or social media, we’re not likely the majority of their users.
Agree with this, because for example...
I don't miss any of the additional automation options from Reaper, but was really won over by the way Live 11 incorporated what are essentially automation items, but far better in most situations imo. Same with modulation, which is technically a feature, but practically a useless gimmick in the former.machinesworking wrote: Sun Oct 08, 2023 4:43 pm I'm one to argue against the anti bloat philosophy of DAWs like Live, I can't stand that the click and count in options are as limited as they are, that automation has zero options etc.