Let‘s speculate about 6.0

[coroknight]

I simultaneously hope bitwig is successful with their hardware, and wish they'd move on to 6.0.

Unlike a complex controller like Push which requires a lot of development time for integration with their DAW, Bitwig Connect is simple. I doubt it is taking up developer time or influencing the release date of 6.0

That's not what I meant. They clearly want to show off their new controller, so they're giving it time in the spotlight. I hope it doesn't take up too much time in the spotlight so they can move on to showcasing 6.0.

[coroknight]

It's not unheard of for companies to stagger releases to give each product time to shine.

[duanosforde]

By the way, I would officially support the Piano Roll scripting features pioneered by Polarity. In FL Studio, it's brilliant that any feature I come up with can be coded using ChatGPT—for example, selecting a group of notes in the Piano Roll by splitting the entire content into defined intervals and picking every nth note within each interval.


May-31-2025 12-39-47.gif
Screenshot 2025-05-31 at 12.45.10.png

done in 30sec, and this is already available in AL12 as well, so go for it! (I've learnt Python from here, Learn Python through Music with Ableton Live
https://www.udemy.com/course/learning-p ... leton-live )

Yes, Fully agree, this would be amazing. Also, If I could import my reaper MIDI editor scripts, i'd be in heaven . Or have similar capability in Bitwig.

[xbitz]

^^^ let's say, the solution that would suit Bitwig is pulling in Loomer Architect – basically visual scripting.



context-sensitive, scriptable, and device-capable (so mutable)pattern clips – I’m all for that, AFAIK phrase-based DAW is practically nonexistent — RapidComposer does it, and Renoise can trigger clips from the main sequencer ... I'm not exactly looking for a full-on music IDE, but yepp, never had one of those before* or Clyphx also could be implemented officially



*oops forget it, DAW/IDE, https://www.kvraudio.com/product/hz-by-cannery-coders okay, this might be a bit over the top, but a lighter version of this could work, so same just with visual scripting like Loomer

[tumface]

I'd rather just have a standard text-based scripting language instead of a visual wires-and-boxes one. The scripts people make for Reaper are way more impressive and require less effort than things made with Max for Live, in my opinion. They're also more reliable and break less often, and easier to troubleshoot if they do. The visual scripting languages kind of trick you into thinking the visual part will make the scripting part easier, but usually it just makes it harder once you try to do anything other than a trivial demonstration. (Max is especially kind of a disaster, internally.)

Also, don't confuse my opinion on visual scripting with dataflow or synthesis wires-and-boxes patching. That is very different — it's describing data flow, not steps-and-actions, and works much better. (And Bitwig already has a great one: Grid.)

[coroknight]

My dream is actually a music IDE. Like EMACS for music where you can customize the DAW, and build your own tools/workflow with practically unlimited flexibility. Of course such an app would need a solid UI for people who can't or don't want to code, but still.

[_leras]

The ability to edit clips in the clip launcher and to have clips which contain all my edits, without having to consolidate has become a huge part of the way I work.

I tend have a passive perspective on new features at this point, as long as they don't get in my way. I've had a bunch of fun with Stepwise so I hope they keep doing stuff like that but I feel like they have already implemented all of my big requests.

I am also fairly passive regarding new features as I don't feel I'm missing much. (Probably not using all the possibilities that already exist).

As someone that's not doing any in clip editing in the launcher, I'd be really keen to hear some more details of what sort of things you're using that for if you were ok to share.

[xbitz]

I'd rather just have a standard text-based scripting language instead of a visual wires-and-boxes one. The scripts people make for Reaper are way more impressive and require less effort than things made with Max for Live, in my opinion. They're also more reliable and break less often, and easier to troubleshoot if they do. The visual scripting languages kind of trick you into thinking the visual part will make the scripting part easier, but usually it just makes it harder once you try to do anything other than a trivial demonstration. (Max is especially kind of a disaster, internally.)

Also, don't confuse my opinion on visual scripting with dataflow or synthesis wires-and-boxes patching. That is very different — it's describing data flow, not steps-and-actions, and works much better. (And Bitwig already has a great one: Grid.)

In Ableton Live’s M4L (Max for Live) environment, JavaScript can be used for implementing business logic within patches, so for ex. it can be used

Data structure handling (e.g., arrays, JSON-like objects)
Custom logic implementation (e.g., MIDI routing, parameter processing)
Controlling Max patch elements via JavaScript (e.g., messnamed, outlet, and Max APIs)

etc. https://docs.cycling74.com/userguide/javascript/

I’m not exactly a pro at this—I just wrote one script, a chord voicer and MIDI channel mapper, since, unlike in Live, notes in M4L actually have a channel value, but that was script based, but that was before the LLM era...

btw. Yesterday, I did a half-hour session with FLS’s piano roll, and my conclusion is that it wouldn’t hurt if something like that were integrated into Bitwig.

FLS is mostly fine up to this point—a Channel Rack group with a few patterns, and one piano roll screen, but after that, I’d rather get back to Bitwig as at the end of the video ...Obviously, I’m exaggerating, but in Bitwig, you can do everything except make music, while in FLS, you can only make music(big no for arranging and mixing). So how about combining the two?

[Zikax]

This week smells like Bitwig 6.

[muzicxs]

Obviously, I’m exaggerating, but in Bitwig, you can do everything except make music, ...

This is such a lame take. I know you're exaggerating, so let me exaggerate as well. If you think Bitwig is a DAW you can do everything except make music, then you are not a musician. Any musician would be able to make music in any DAW. Don't blame your tools, blame your skills.

[xbitz]

Obviously, I’m exaggerating, but in Bitwig, you can do everything except make music, ...

This is such a lame take. I know you're exaggerating, so let me exaggerate as well. If you think Bitwig is a DAW you can do everything except make music, then you are not a musician. Any musician would be able to make music in any DAW. Don't blame your tools, blame your skills.

I wasn't trying to bash Bitwig, just wanted to point out the difference in mindset between the two DAWs using as few words as possible

[muzicxs]

I wasn't trying to bash Bitwig, just wanted to point out the difference in mindset between the two DAWs using as few words as possible

You are not the first person bringing this up. Apparently, Bitwig is only for sound designers and noodlers. It's for the modular crowd making noise instead of music.

It's such a low effort take, because it requires no effort to debunk this. What people with this mindset don't understand is that literally every DAW in existence has made trade-offs. You can't have a DAW without trade-offs.

There's not a single perfect DAW for everyone, but there could be a DAW perfect for you.

[pdxindy]

Obviously, I’m exaggerating, but in Bitwig, you can do everything except make music

The main thing I do in Bitwig is make music. Something that can be done in any DAW. You hit record, and start playing

[xbitz]

Obviously, I’m exaggerating, but in Bitwig, you can do everything except make music

The main thing I do in Bitwig is make music. Something that can be done in any DAW. You hit record, and start playing

yepp, jut in FLS everything is buried deep in menus and pop-up windows, except for the piano roll Let me put it this way: FLS is very strong in the first 8 bars, but after that, it falls flat.,,,As long as don’t throw in the first modulator, I’m good with it...Anyway, the promise for this year is that FLS will have a solid arranger and mixer, while BWS will have a great piano roll—one of them has to work out for me, eventually.

[justin3am]

I am also fairly passive regarding new features as I don't feel I'm missing much. (Probably not using all the possibilities that already exist).

As someone that's not doing any in clip editing in the launcher, I'd be really keen to hear some more details of what sort of things you're using that for if you were ok to share.

I use the clip launcher like a pool of audio/MIDI that I can pull from. I will record a bunch of variations of the same part, then pull what I need from those clips to build a composition. Since I can edit directly in the clip, I can also try different variations of the same edit. Or I can just pull a small piece of a recording out of one clip and paste it into another, all without moving a clip into the arranger or consolidating.

I also kinda use the clip launcher to compile takes, so I don't make a mess of the arranger.