Objective Differences: Ableton Live 9.5 vs Bitwig?

Audio Plugin Hosts and other audio software applications discussion
Post Reply New Topic
RELATED
PRODUCTS

Post

[DELETED]

Post

[DELETED]

Post

TheoM wrote:
pdxindy wrote:
TheoM wrote:
pdxindy wrote:
TheoM wrote:
ceasless wrote:Okay, if you say so... I was attempting to point out that he might have totally missed the fact that this feature already exists in Bitwig and TheoM's dismissal of Edit view seemed to me to demonstrate that he had not explored it thoroughly.

EDIT: You also seem to completely gloss over my points about new bug vectors and the fact that until recently I also had not explored the Edit view thoroughly.

EDIT 2: And yes, I do consider a workflow issue to be imaginary if that workflow is already possible, just under a different name. But maybe there is some deeply compelling aspect of the Arrange view that is not in the Edit view and I just haven't noticed it myself.

I know about the edit view, and i know the advanced stuff has to be done in there. Thats the whole point, i hate that workflow.. can you grasp that? it's BECAUSE of the mandatory edit view for any resize capabilities and advanced audio editing (if you can call it that ) that i specifically hate bitwig's workflow and would never even consider it.
It is significantly better than Live for speed, fluid workflow and capability.
not for me it's not. Not in any way shape or form. then again, i use cubase and logic (less and less) as my master daw's, and bitwig to me is a *joke* compared to those.
This thread is about Live and Bitwig. And Bitwig is significantly better than Live when it comes to editing.

No it's NOT, not for ME.

What is wrong with you people? Unable to accept that someone prefers another tool over your beloved bitwig?

Editing is better for YOU.. that's fine! Not for ME!

get it?

Don't use Bitwig then. And shut up about Bitwig. If you don't use it you have no legitimate any grievance against it.

It's like telling people off for using condoms when you yourself only practice abstinence.



Also, there's no way that 'hundreds of thousands' of people use Cubase at present. Please be more circumspect about your figures.

And, people use modulation to try and move computer music forwards in potential. Modulation is one of the most important elements of sound, and many programs overlook this. Birdsong is heavily modulated. Pop music maybe not so much.

Post

TheoM wrote:
A lot of you guys care about endless tweaking rather than making actual music...

Tons of popular music is made in PT.. where's the modulation there? for real world music that people buy and listen to, it's irrelevant.

I often wonder how many people here actually do finish , release and sell tracks ?
No matter how you put it , Bitwig can't compete w Live/Logic/Cubase in the fields of professional workflow.
It's more flexible in many other ways, but I just think most people that professionally produce don't need/want those features in their DAW.

Post

zlatan wrote:
TheoM wrote:
A lot of you guys care about endless tweaking rather than making actual music...

Tons of popular music is made in PT.. where's the modulation there? for real world music that people buy and listen to, it's irrelevant.

I often wonder how many people here actually do finish , release and sell tracks ?
No matter how you put it , Bitwig can't compete w Live/Logic/Cubase in the fields of professional workflow.
It's more flexible in many other ways, but I just think most people that professionally produce don't need/want those features in their DAW.
Depends how bad you want the music you make to be...

Live Cubase Logic Pro Tools: all just potential. It's the musician behind the keyboard that makes the difference. I know people who turn out absolute turds on Ableton, and others who make blissful sounds using exactly the same setup.

Bitwig is very new comparatively. But i have no doubt those who can will use it to drop some very beautiful stuff if they so please.

I only like good music. It makes no difference how it's made.

Post

Also, what does selling tracks have to do with anything?

Post

endlessdog wrote:
Depends how bad you want the music you make to be...

Live Cubase Logic Pro Tools: all just potential. It's the musician behind the keyboard that makes the difference. I know people who turn out absolute turds on Ableton, and others who make blissful sounds using exactly the same setup.

Bitwig is very new comparatively. But i have no doubt those who can will use it to drop some very beautiful stuff if they so please.

I only like good music. It makes no difference how it's made.
That's absolutely true from a creative/artistic perspective !

But usually in a professional production environment , people want streamlined tools.
Compare a consumer camera to a professional camera, the consumer cameras have a million tricks that the professional cameras lack ...for a good reason.

Selling your music or services (and have that as your main income) has everything to do with the tools/workflow you choose.

Post

[DELETED]

Post

zlatan wrote:
endlessdog wrote:
Depends how bad you want the music you make to be...

Live Cubase Logic Pro Tools: all just potential. It's the musician behind the keyboard that makes the difference. I know people who turn out absolute turds on Ableton, and others who make blissful sounds using exactly the same setup.

Bitwig is very new comparatively. But i have no doubt those who can will use it to drop some very beautiful stuff if they so please.

I only like good music. It makes no difference how it's made.
That's absolutely true from a creative/artistic perspective !

But usually in a professional production environment , people want streamlined tools.
Compare a consumer camera to a professional camera, the consumer cameras have a million tricks that the professional cameras lack ...for a good reason.

Selling your music or services (and have that as your main income) has everything to do with the tools/workflow you choose.

Well, your comparison holds in so far as cameras require more control the further up the scale of professionalism you get. But again, i know of people turning out beautiful work on a disposable snap camera, so...

Music software requires control to the degree that it doesn't become obstructive to your process. If you had to set every parameter each time you wanted to make a sound, it would get tiresome very quickly.

Fully manual cameras require a large degree of technical knowledge to produce decent well exposed images.

All music software must in some sense automate some of the process for you, as fully manual processing of sound would put off most of the people who buy these products... It would ask far too much of the musician for people to put up with it...

Post

[DELETED]

Post

TheoM wrote:
endlessdog wrote:
Don't use Bitwig then. And shut up about Bitwig. If you don't use it you have no legitimate any grievance against it.

It's like telling people off for using condoms when you yourself only practice abstinence.



Also, there's no way that 'hundreds of thousands' of people use Cubase at present. Please be more circumspect about your figures.

And, people use modulation to try and move computer music forwards in potential. Modulation is one of the most important elements of sound, and many programs overlook this. Birdsong is heavily modulated. Pop music maybe not so much.


listen, stop being abusive. I was on point, on topic in this thread, and you are looking for a fight.

I have EVERY right to air my opinion about bitwig.. not OWNING software does NOT mean i do not get the right to give my opinion in a topic that asks just that.. Bitwig vs ableton. Do you think every one in this topic owns bitwig? How naive are you? Some of us own live others bitwig, others neither.. ALL welcome to voice their opinion here..

And just so you know, if i want to talk about another DAW in this topic, and say "neither - i prefer cubcase".. that is perfectly allowed and WITHIN KVR RULES.

Post reported, hopefully you will get a good slap and stop being such a trouble maker.

as for cubase, you are clueless. The real world user base may even be over a million at this stage. I know logic is, and cubase is close.

Modulation might be one of the most important elemetns of sound, but ever synth plugin i have has it's own modulation. You do NOT need a daw that modulates it's own plugins to create ANY kind of music you want.

There are plenty of tools that will cover all genres, that i can use in any daw.

I do not own a car. Therefore i do not talk about owning a car. I do not tell people what i dislike about the cars i do not own. I do not say that it is my right, despite not paying any road tax, to discuss the merits and demerits of road tax. I do not spend time at the pub complaining about how expensive petrol is these days. It is my right, as far as i see it, to shut the hell up about cars, and let people who deal with cars make all the noise about them.

You have every right by whatever rulebook you stand behind to say whatever your tiny little mind can fart out of your fingers. But i couldn't give a shit who you think you are reporting to. I report to my conscience. It always plays fair.

The title of this topic, if you need to be reminded, is "Objective Differences: Ableton Live 9.5 vs Bitwig?". What objective differences between Live 9.5 and Bitwig are you pointing out exactly by banging on about Cubase?

I believe you are the one who is clueless. So there ner ner ner.

If a million people are using Cubase then music is in for a hard time and i might as well just stick my head in a clod of dirt.

Post

TheoM wrote:btw stretch and pitch shift is so important.. as important as anything else in modern music... If modulation is so essential to make music , i wonder how anyone can make music in bitwig with such awful time stretch? And no rewire to use something else with better stretch? Work that one out.

It's got the worst warp algos of any modern daw.. audible to anyone who knows anything about stretch.

Time stretch is for people who can't play in time. They are the ones who tend to use such features rather than make the effort to correct their own inadequacies.

However did J.S. Bach play in time without timestretch>? Poor old Bach. He must have been dying for such a feature on his big old church organ.

Bach had a big organ. Yes. A big one. And he could play it without timestretch.

I'm sure his wife was thrilled.

Post

[DELETED]

Post

Me: 80 posts (including this one)

You: 20961 posts and counting...


I have a really interesting life thanks, i call it being a musician. It takes up quite a lot of time unfortunately.

Post

[DELETED]

Post Reply

Return to “Hosts & Applications (Sequencers, DAWs, Audio Editors, etc.)”