Ableton LIVE 10 ... Officially Announced. (plus: Buy LIVE 9 now with 20% discount, get LIVE 10 free)

[whyterabbyt]

Yes, but in fairness, I think that antic meant that there's no reason that the devices could not have been coded, and consequently "compiled", as native live devices.

Hmmm, possibly. That'd be really compiled to me rather than "compiled", if you see what I mean.

But yes, I definitely agree that first-tier native devices would be preferable. My own suspicion, following the various gen-to-hardware compilation toolkits that C74 have released as packages is that this may even be a thing which is coming, though of course that wont be useful for non-gen patches.

What I'd really wish that they would do is release an SDK so that other people could create native devices. It's one of the few platforms where it matters.

It'd be nice, indeed. But they seem to see MAX as the substitute for that, and the C74 acquisition doesnt make me feel like that will change. Maybe if we get UI and LOM equivalents for gen~ in MAX8...

[Spencer Maddox]

There is rumours that Ableton have decided to make Live more like Live performance software and not so much production DAW. And because of this, many well known producers have decided to move away from Live. If the host future is more to Live performance, that makes sense then.. But dunno, rumours are always rumours..

What are the sources of these rumors? If you don't mind me asking.

[keel]

Artist called Soundprank wrote this in may

"Ableton is focusing future R&D less on composer/producer specific features and more on Push and live-performance/beat-based production."

Plus we producers talk a lot about DAW's and so on.. Not the first time when this above text came up, but still like I said, rumours are rumours..

[Spencer Maddox]

True. I guess we will learn soon enough if the Rumors are true or not...

[dogzilla]

Artist called Soundprank wrote this in may

"Ableton is focusing future R&D less on composer/producer specific features and more on Push and live-performance/beat-based production."

But that's just his opinion on why he chose to start using Cubase Pro. It's not what I would call evidence of Ableton's future direction.

[Spencer Maddox]

I mean. I highly doubt ableton at this point would neglect the Composition aspects of their program. I mean. This is Ableton Live after all, this isint some small fish. This is one of there most used programs on the planet. It seems ridiculous that they would risk losing such a gigantic userbase...

[ghettosynth]

Yes, but in fairness, I think that antic meant that there's no reason that the devices could not have been coded, and consequently "compiled", as native live devices.

Hmmm, possibly. That'd be really compiled to me rather than "compiled", if you see what I mean.

LOL, yes, but, I'm really quoting the parent, not using quotes in a sardonic sense.

But yes, I definitely agree that first-tier native devices would be preferable. My own suspicion, following the various gen-to-hardware compilation toolkits that C74 have released as packages is that this may even be a thing which is coming, though of course that wont be useful for non-gen patches.

What I'd really wish that they would do is release an SDK so that other people could create native devices. It's one of the few platforms where it matters.

It'd be nice, indeed. But they seem to see MAX as the substitute for that, and the C74 acquisition doesnt make me feel like that will change. Maybe if we get UI and LOM equivalents for gen~ in MAX8...

That would be progress. Being forced to use ~gen isn't the end of the world if one could actually generate a native live device that did not load Max.

[Uriel Anthony]

Oh, I think everyone knows that! The main complaint is however, that you need to actually run whole MaxForLive if you want to use *simpler* Max devices like the LFO or Envelope Follower, whereas they could easily been "compiled" to be a native Live devices.

well, no. There's no such thing as 'easy compilation' from generic MAX patches to native code.

Yes, but in fairness, I think that antic meant that there's no reason that the devices could not have been coded, and consequently "compiled", as native live devices. Of course, "no reason" is an overstatement, but, I agree with the sentiment that Ableton should have already developed some more efficient native devices for those common cases.

What I'd really wish that they would do is release an SDK so that other people could create native devices. It's one of the few platforms where it matters.

That's a great idea but I seriously doubt Ableton will ever release an end user compiler. It'd just open up a whole can of worms in terms of tech support. They are not liable to troubleshoot problems due to your buggy compiles.

It could be possible this round that Live 10 might actually come with native LFO and Envelope Follower devices since these are probably the most useful/used (and if not, requested) primary functions in any DAW. Fingers crossed?

[antic604]

I mean. I highly doubt ableton at this point would neglect the Composition aspects of their program...

Have you noticed the irony of your statement:

...I mean. This is Ableton Live after all, this isn't some small fish. This is one of there most used programs on the planet.

It's entirely possible that they're further focusing on the live performance side. With regards to the Arrangement View, in versions 8 and 9 - I couldn't be bothered to look into changelogs further - they were either fixing bugs or adding features for Push 1/2. It's easy to extrapolate from that

[Daags]

Artist called Soundprank wrote this in may

"Ableton is focusing future R&D less on composer/producer specific features and more on Push and live-performance/beat-based production."

But that's just his opinion on why he chose to start using Cubase Pro. It's not what I would call evidence of Ableton's future direction.

Absolutely.

Also, the two things are not mutually exclusive .... rolling out more Push features does not mean less focus on composer/producer specific features than has been usual for LIVE.

They are not tied down to operating with some permanently fixed group of people, so that if you develop one area, another area suffers. at least as outside observers looking in, we can't safely make such assumptions just because Push is getting some ... push.

lets just wait to see the features. and I won't be comparing composer feature development to Push feature development, I'll be comparing composer feature development to previous major versions of LIVE .... if there's a dip in development judging it that way, then sure ... it might be safe to speculate they are distinctly shifting away from this area.

LIVE has always been a balance of producer specific and performer specific features .... it's just that Push has given that performer side of things a hardware component.

[Spencer Maddox]

I mean. I highly doubt ableton at this point would neglect the Composition aspects of their program...

Have you noticed the irony of your statement:

...I mean. This is Ableton Live after all, this isn't some small fish. This is one of there most used programs on the planet.

It's entirely possible that they're further focusing on the live performance side. With regards to the Arrangement View, in versions 8 and 9 - I couldn't be bothered to look into changelogs further - they were either fixing bugs or adding features for Push 1/2. It's easy to extrapolate from that

Yes I see the irony there...
I don't get it from my perspective. I feel like its a bad buisness decision. But that's just me. Mabye there is a method behind it.

[Daags]

Yes, but in fairness, I think that antic meant that there's no reason that the devices could not have been coded, and consequently "compiled", as native live devices.

Hmmm, possibly. That'd be really compiled to me rather than "compiled", if you see what I mean.

LOL, yes, but, I'm really quoting the parent, not using quotes in a sardonic sense.

But yes, I definitely agree that first-tier native devices would be preferable. My own suspicion, following the various gen-to-hardware compilation toolkits that C74 have released as packages is that this may even be a thing which is coming, though of course that wont be useful for non-gen patches.

What I'd really wish that they would do is release an SDK so that other people could create native devices. It's one of the few platforms where it matters.

It'd be nice, indeed. But they seem to see MAX as the substitute for that, and the C74 acquisition doesnt make me feel like that will change. Maybe if we get UI and LOM equivalents for gen~ in MAX8...

That would be progress. Being forced to use ~gen isn't the end of the world if one could actually generate a native live device that did not load Max.

when I wish for native LFO's as opposed to M4L ones ... I'm not wishing for abstraction. I'm wishing for LFO's that aren't the utter cpu pigs that M4L provides.

soooo... I'm not au faut enough with gen to know if what you're both discussing here would have a positive, significant, impact on CPU use. But if it wouldn't ... I'm not going to get excited about M4L devices looking, and otherwise behaving like native devices if the CPU hit is more or less the same.

[m03]

Artist called Soundprank wrote this in may

"Ableton is focusing future R&D less on composer/producer specific features and more on Push and live-performance/beat-based production."

Plus we producers talk a lot about DAW's and so on.. Not the first time when this above text came up, but still like I said, rumours are rumours..

Sure, but so many producers amount to little more than a random guy on the internet with an ill-formed opinion and minimal understanding of the tools they're using. Cutting back on "composer/producer" features would be suicidal and a boon to their competitors, so I don't believe that's going to happen.

[Daags]

It could be possible this round that Live 10 might actually come with native LFO and Envelope Follower devices since these are probably the most useful/used (and if not, requested) primary functions in any DAW. Fingers crossed?

man, that would be amazing. since I've started using LIVE at version 4, this feature has been requested ... and I've forgotten all the technical prohibitive reasons that were alluded to all these years ... you'd often hear 'undo implications' and 'major re-write' get thrown around though.

as someone who spends 90% of his time in ableton experimenting and designing sounds ... a native, i.e cpu efficient, LFO would just be a godsend. I'm really hoping for it ... but at the same time if it's not delivered I won't be surprised since it hasn't been delivered all these years, despite the constant demand.

the one thing that bodes well for it happening though is Ableton's policy shift after the LIVE 8 debacle ... they shifted from their yearly update cycle to ... what ... 4+ year update cycle. So, in having spent over 8 years (possibly closer to 9 by the time it's released) getting from LIVE 8 to LIVE 10, one can only hope they could overcome those development hurdles that have prevented them from implementing a native LFO/modulator previously.

fingers crossed.

[lnikj]

Artist called Soundprank wrote this in may

"Ableton is focusing future R&D less on composer/producer specific features and more on Push and live-performance/beat-based production."

Plus we producers talk a lot about DAW's and so on.. Not the first time when this above text came up, but still like I said, rumours are rumours..

Sure, but so many producers amount to little more than a random guy on the internet with an ill-formed opinion and minimal understanding of the tools they're using. Cutting back on "composer/producer" features would be suicidal and a boon to their competitors, so I don't believe that's going to happen.

Agreed. I'm going with the view that they didn't purchase Cycling 74 just because they want to play with OSC for new controllers.

Then again, this is a typical KVR discussion where a long and developed argument develops pitting various speculations vaguely grounded in extremely tenuous evidence against each other