Let‘s speculate about 6.0

[gulugulufish]

Blender is an artist tool which means most of the community can’t code, yet it supports python scripting and that capability has proven invaluable for both users and the community.

Why? Because it allows extending the features of the application itself. Users can even share their code with others and bundle it up as a plugin. Entire workflows like retopology become so much more powerful compared to what comes out of the box.

The DAW community is so accustomed to a rigid idea of plugins that many don’t even realize what could be possible if you could extend the DAW beyond audio processing plugins like VSTs and CLAP.

Personally I’d love to be able to download new, community driven features for Bitwig and I think those arguing against it are getting too caught up in the coding part.

As only a few noticed when it was reported... Bitwig has a Language called Nitro at it's core. In the past there were some guys who hacked it and published their poc, look here. https://github.com/stylemistake/bitwig-device-hacks and here https://github.com/zezic/bitwig-device- ... /README.md
As of today you can still see some nitro stuff if you stroll through the installation folder and open a zip here and there, but the hack is afaik now no longer possible. The devices are now obfuscated. They seem to have taken deliberate steps to lock that kind of creative hacking out.
If the community does lot's of stuff the down side for bitwig as a company would be that it strips of potential for profit. If for instance a proper "API" would offer a possibility for a real good integration in the DAW like for instance - if you are familiar with old Java IDEs has - eclipse has provided, then we would not sit here and wait for effective piano roll improvements ... they would long be available through community DAW plugins ... but at the same time bitwig as a company might have ceased to exist.

This must be what they were referring to in the recent interview where they mentioned that bitwig has a lower-lever modular system than the grid that they use internally and that all the grid stuff is built on top of

[tumface]

As a reminder, they literally said the next update will feature changes to the piano roll and arranger. So we are getting fundamental workflow updates.

Yes. I'm actually excited for it. Some of their off-the-wall ideas end up being fantastic. They seem good at coming up with ideas I would not have thought of or would disregard as not feasible.

[C-quence]

Yes. I'm actually excited for it. Some of their off-the-wall ideas end up being fantastic. They seem good at coming up with ideas I would not have thought of or would disregard as not feasible.

That's why I like Bitwig so much. It's addicting seeing new releases with features which end up more useful than features of other DAW's.

[coroknight]

Watching a video about the latest Ableton update, it’s funny how adding lfos and envelopes to devices is a feature. Meanwhile Bitwig solved that years ago with the modulator system.

[SamDi]

If your perception is that Bitwig is a Live clone, then yes, your perception is outdated. There was a lot of similarity on initial release. Since then, Bitwig has gone in different directions that have nothing to do with Live. Bitwig is its own DAW.

I think most would use Bitwig, if it wouln't have taken the main features from AL: session and arrangement view, instrument and effect racks and showing this in a dedicated pane and the rather easy workflow compared to a Cubase or Reaper. So yes, this is my view. It's an AL on stereoids and id you think the grid is great and BW is "modular", you may not forget that AL has Max4Live under the hood and you can literally access the whole DAW via a dedicated API much deeper as in BW.

Every DAW has users that are not satisfied with the direction of that DAW or are frustrated that certain features they want are "still not added". But beyond that, in online forums like this, there are plenty of posters who spend more time comparing DAW's, giving advice to companies about what they should do and complaining about what isn't there than they do making music. IMO, online forums are not an accurate representation of real life.

If you mean me, I do make more music and do not use so much time to complain. Look at my amount of posts and compare it with some others

I disagree with the narrative that they are mostly focusing on nerd stuff.

First, the feature that took the most development time in 5.3 was the audio system overhaul. I'd guess that 75% of the development time for 5.3 went to the audio system changes. That's core functionality.

Then they improved the loading time for projects and presets. Is that nerdy stuff or a fundamental improvement?

5.3 also added Bitwig support for Windows Arm. I'd put that in the fundamental feature column too.

Then there were various bug fixes. That is important core work to keep an application stable and reliable. Plus some controller scripts were added. Not nerd features either.

5.3 also had the drum modules and step sequencer. Okay, I suppose someone can call those nerdy, depending on how you define the term. I don't personally consider those nerd stuff as drums and a sequencer are pretty basic musical building blocks.

But regardless, the majority of development time for 5.3 did not go to nerd stuff. It was the same with 5.2 with stuff like:

New Graphics Engine
Plugin Undo
Beat Detection improvements
Object Selection Workflow improvements
New Time Selection functions
Lots of refinements to other existing functions

None of that is nerd stuff and the graphics engine was the biggest consumer of development time.

And I disagree with your opinion that they implement much other than nerd stuff. If a user is paying subscription fee in advance the expectation is, that he will be gratificated with new features, which have an impact on the workflow and improve his life.

Overhauling the audio and graphics engine is not, what I would count to that. Image you'd have to think about updating another DAW to the next version and the feature groeth is for 80% internal stuff or decreasing technical debt. Would you pay for this version to get it?

So you pay for a year hoping getting improvements and what they do:
Under the hood (and technical debt):
-Improve audio
-New graphics engine

No direct benefit:
-Windows ARM support

Improvements:
-Beat Detection improvements
-Object Selection Workflow improvements
-Lots of refinements to other existing functions

Really new feature, which you expect for paying:
-Implement plugin undo, which is said to not working properly
-New Time Selection functions

And:
-Using the money to develop new HW

And so you really don't understand, when people complain after a year of paying, that they get to less? When it comes to real new features, which are visible to the user directly it is much too less and most is from the last 2 years - nerdy stuff. Look what came in 5.1 and 5.2. Mostly new or updated devices.

Watching a video about the latest Ableton update, it’s funny how adding lfos and envelopes to devices is a feature. Meanwhile Bitwig solved that years ago with the modulator system.

Ableton has envelopes and LFOs since ages (I think it came short after M4L arised). Don't know, why they emphasize it now more, but I think it is, because since 12, you can not just automate, but modulate parameters, which is relatively new. As mentioned above. BW did a great job, with offering the modulation and modular stuff with a very flat learning curve. But don't forget that AL can do the same and much more with M4L, though with a much steeper learning curve.

[tumface]

M4L is much worse at modulation than Bitwig's system. It uses an order of magnitude (that's 10x) more CPU and loses timing accuracy and latency compensation in a whole variety of situations. M4L itself is a buggy mess, internally. I try to avoid adding M4L to a project just to do simple modulation.

Not dealing with under-the-hood problems is why Live seemingly has an unfixable problem where it cannot compensate latency for plugins which use VST transport timing information. It's why LFO Tool, Shaperbox, etc. will get out of sync in Live whenever there is latency compensation activated. Bitwig is not bug-free, but they are willing to avoid this kind of ossification and forever-bug-buildup, which I appreciate.

The new graphics engine was a massive improvement for me on both of my computers. I would have paid an entire upgrade cycle fee JUST for that one thing.

[coroknight]

Last time I played with M4L I tried to do some audio routing and discovered M4L has significant limitations when it comes to routing.

In bitwig, routing audio and MIDI have very few restrictions. So while yes it’s true that M4L lets you work at a lower level in the DAW, the DAW still has historic limitations that they haven’t been able to get past.

Another is PDC which was mentioned above.

[pdxindy]

M4L is much worse at modulation than Bitwig's system. It uses an order of magnitude (that's 10x) more CPU and loses timing accuracy and latency compensation in a whole variety of situations. M4L itself is a buggy mess, internally. I try to avoid adding M4L to a project just to do simple modulation.

Plus the modulation workflow in Live sucks and modulators in Live/M4L cannot be per voice.

[pdxindy]

If a user is paying subscription fee in advance the expectation is, that he will be gratificated with new features, which have an impact on the workflow and improve his life.

Overhauling the audio and graphics engine is not, what I would count to that. Image you'd have to think about updating another DAW to the next version and the feature groeth is for 80% internal stuff or decreasing technical debt. Would you pay for this version to get it?

Absolutely I would pay for this version.

I'm not looking for personal gratification from the software. I have no need of a new feature sugar rush. And my life is fulfilled by much more important things than some features in software.

I like making music and Bitwig is a useful tool for me to do that. I pay to use it and am happy to leave the development in the developers hands. If Bitwig, as it is, weren't sufficient for me to satisfy my musical interests, I would use something else. I'm not in a hurry for updates and new features cause I'm focused on the music and enjoying it.

[daviddevilla]

Please, a scale system for the piano roll. I don't understand why it doesn't have one yet. It's the only DAW that doesn't include it. I need it. I love Bitwig, but I'm missing the scale system.

[jarenas]

M4L may be limited in regards to Ableton architecture, but come on, is brilliant in any other way: you can instantly create a new kind of oscillator in gen~ and test it sync'ed with Ableton at the moment, create any kind of filter, which may require 1 sample delay feedback (which at this pace, the Grid may never get), create any kind of convoluted multichannel audio instrument (for instance with an array of 300 oscillators if you want) and modulate each one of them in a precise way, brilliant for instance to play with additive synthesis... It gets as deep as you want, create UIs, even using Javascript... I'll stop here.
I think Bitwig could do a GREAT favor itself if they decided to open Nitro...

[SamDi]

Absolutely I would pay for this version.

I'm not looking for personal gratification from the software. I have no need of a new feature sugar rush. And my life is fulfilled by much more important things than some features in software.

I like making music and Bitwig is a useful tool for me to do that. I pay to use it and am happy to leave the development in the developers hands. If Bitwig, as it is, weren't sufficient for me to satisfy my musical interests, I would use something else. I'm not in a hurry for updates and new features cause I'm focused on the music and enjoying it.

You're just a badass fanboy

I have also no need of new sugar rush as long as I don't pay for it, what I thank god not am doing curretnly. But if I would, as others do for "supporting the developer", I would be completely pissed (as others are). I am fine with it as it is, but if there will be no significant progress, why should I pay? But I wish that they do and I wish them to have success, because even when I expect from them more than you, I am a kind of a fan.

M4L may be limited in regards to Ableton architecture, but come on, is brilliant in any other way: you can instantly create a new kind of oscillator in gen~ and test it sync'ed with Ableton at the moment, create any kind of filter, which may require 1 sample delay feedback (which at this pace, the Grid may never get), create any kind of convoluted multichannel audio instrument (for instance with an array of 300 oscillators if you want) and modulate each one of them in a precise way, brilliant for instance to play with additive synthesis... It gets as deep as you want, create UIs, even using Javascript... I'll stop here.
I think Bitwig could do a GREAT favor itself if they decided to open Nitro...

What do you mean with limited? You have way deeper access to with M4L to the DAW than you have in BW with the grid.

Just have a look on their object model:
https://docs.cycling74.com/legacy/max8/ ... ject_model

It's impressive!

[jarenas]

Absolutely I would pay for this version.

I'm not looking for personal gratification from the software. I have no need of a new feature sugar rush. And my life is fulfilled by much more important things than some features in software.

I like making music and Bitwig is a useful tool for me to do that. I pay to use it and am happy to leave the development in the developers hands. If Bitwig, as it is, weren't sufficient for me to satisfy my musical interests, I would use something else. I'm not in a hurry for updates and new features cause I'm focused on the music and enjoying it.

You're just a badass fanboy

I have also no need of new sugar rush as long as I don't pay for it, what I thank god not am doing curretnly. But if I would, as others do for "supporting the developer", I would be completely pissed (as others are). I am fine with it as it is, but if there will be no significant progress, why should I pay? But I wish that they do and I wish them to have success, because even when I expect from them more than you, I am a kind of a fan.

M4L may be limited in regards to Ableton architecture, but come on, is brilliant in any other way: you can instantly create a new kind of oscillator in gen~ and test it sync'ed with Ableton at the moment, create any kind of filter, which may require 1 sample delay feedback (which at this pace, the Grid may never get), create any kind of convoluted multichannel audio instrument (for instance with an array of 300 oscillators if you want) and modulate each one of them in a precise way, brilliant for instance to play with additive synthesis... It gets as deep as you want, create UIs, even using Javascript... I'll stop here.
I think Bitwig could do a GREAT favor itself if they decided to open Nitro...

What do you mean with limited? You have way deeper access to with M4L to the DAW than you have in BW with the grid.

Just have a look on their object model:
https://docs.cycling74.com/legacy/max8/ ... ject_model

It's impressive!

Yes, of course, it was my fault, I was trying to answer to those who critic M4L for not having per-voice modulation like Bitwig/Grid does and being cumbersome. I agree with these opinions, just tried to make the point that despite these limitations, which again, are very true, M4L is much more capable than doing modulators, which is just one use case. I exposed sound design examples to make my point, and you provided scripting Ableton, which ofc is another very important use case (you just need to look at things like Performance Pack by iftah...)

[SamDi]

Yes, of course, it was my fault, I was trying to answer to those who critic M4L for not having per-voice modulation like Bitwig/Grid does and being cumbersome. I agree with these opinions, just tried to make the point that despite these limitations, which again, are very true, M4L is much more capable than doing modulators, which is just one use case. I exposed sound design examples to make my point, and you provided scripting Ableton, which ofc is another very important use case (you just need to look at things like Performance Pack by iftah...)

Yeah it's good for BW that they have this nice polyphonic modulation together with CLAP, so that it's even easy possible on external instruments.

But that doesn't mean it is not possible for AL. But you have to walk the MPE approach then. When I am not completely wrong (means I'm not 100% sure), then you can drive polyphonic modulations via M4L, MPE and of course the synth has also to be MPE-capable. CLAP or VST3 polyphonic note expressions are unfortunately not supported. And yeah, it's much more complicated to do that.

[pdxindy]

M4L may be limited in regards to Ableton architecture, but come on, is brilliant in any other way: you can instantly create a new kind of oscillator in gen~

Maybe you can... but I'm not a coder. In the years I used Live, I never made a single thing with M4L cause it is too much learning curve for me.