Ableton vs Bitwig - pros/cons?

[Caine123]

another vs thread i guess but with the recent newer versions of both and UPGRADE policies i wonder how those compete each other?

i learned so far that NONE has a great piano roll like fl studio, which is a total bummer for me, i work with love with patterns, piano roll and EASY vst inserts. sure i keep fl studio but as i said i wanna test something new and want to read how opinions are!
i wont use logic (no mac), no cubase (i hate steinbergs workflow!), reaper, studio one are also on my checklist.

[rod_zero]

Live has a 1 month trial demo, so I would suggest you download it and test it.

For me the biggest difference is the hybrid tracks and the native modulation system in BW. But i prefer instruments, effects and how Push 2 works with Live.

I also think that in the long term Live will be cheaper, not atracted at all by BW new pricing model.

[mgw38]

The possibilities the native M4L integration brings in Live 10 Suite are enormous. I’m currently playing around with 3rd order Ambisonics, which requires 16 channel
audio, and that just works completely seamless in Live 10 Suite. M4L provides an incredibly powerful API on top of Live. Something to consider.

[Zexila]

Bitwig got nice piano roll editor (layered editing is ace), press Shift+Tab to open it in center, than you can work with automation, MIDI data and whole channel strip at the same time, press Tab to open mixer and clip launcher, go back to main window with Tab, press A to work with automation at the bottom or press D to work with channel trip, add plugins in there from pop up browser or drag&drop from browser on right, once you get around with shortcuts, you can fly trough different views in seconds, this DAW have insanely good default navigation.

Just touch any control on plugin you want to automate it, automation is breeze, PDC is great, click alt and drag line up or down to make curve, again press A to edit it like a boss at the bottom.

Working with clips is great too, better than patterns if you ask me, you have thing going on all the time and you can just activate different clips and try different things, than record that and you got basic arrangement done or drag&drop clips to arrangement, so use clip launching/mixer area for recording and trying stuff out.

Really think Bitwig nailed whole expirence for anyone coming from linear DAW and wanting better workflow, I feel like Live is little weird, not some features, specs and whatever opinion, but workflow is most important, not just features on paper, how well they are implemented, for me Bitwig is ace, Logic user here.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oGmnfntSgd8

Oh yeah, drag sample from browser to channel area (or if you are dropping in mixer/clip launching area, if you drop it in clips area it will be audio, if you drop it little up, it will open in Sampler) and it opens it in Sampler, there's browser in Sampler to preview samples on the fly from all folders and the one your used, star rating system, freakin amazing.

There's tons of other "small" stuff/workflow enhancers, racks, modulators, macros and whatnot, stuff that makes you feel like an artist, not engineer or producer, try both, find your own pros/cons based on your own vision and workflow.

[zentatonic]

Bitwig's audio engine is a lot more robust for me.

[paradiddle]

You definitely should try the demos 1st. Kinda of nonsense here debating which is best as it comes down to personal taste.

No doubt bitwig is powerful but I'm sticking with live. Been using it forever and I love the simplistic interface. I also recently bought a push 2 which I really adore. Great integration. Coupled that with max4live stuff and it's really open ended.

[deastman]

I have an embarrassing number of different DAWs, including Live and Bitwig. While I think Bitwig is technically superior in a number of ways, I’ve been spending most of my time in Live for a few years now. In other words, it doesn’t really matter which DAW you choose. You can make great music in any one of them. Just pick something and fully commit to it.

[pekbro]

I have both as well, personally, I think in the end Live provide's the better overall
experience. Bitwig has some nice ideas, and some that IMO, didn't work out as well
as expected. While I am very fond of their DAW, as a company, I don't like them.

I suspect in the end, Ableton will simply implement many of those ideas and just sit
back and see how long Bitwig can survive financially, something that I suspect, remains
very much in question.

Would I spend $400 on a new Bitwig license, or even continue to pay their maintenance
fees more than on rare occasion?

Unlikely...

[machinesworking]

Live has rewire support, they upped the game by allowing access to Push 2 as a rewire slave. so I can use Live as a drum machine, sample mangler while rewired to Reaper, DP, Logic etc. In general Live's MIDI controller implementation is more to my liking. I'm not a coder, and Bitwig expecting that I or anybody else should code control surface support for things like Novation controllers was plain idiotic IMO.
Yes, Bitwig has some more forward thinking features like MPE support, note expression, plug in sandboxing etc. but both Live and Bitwig are processor heavy CPU pigs. I own hardware sure, and there's this new interest in hardware but I don't think that's the only reason for both companies advertising campaigns showing lots of hardware surrounding their products.

Basically I've used Live for a dozen plus years, but I still will use one of the linear DAWs I mentioned to really flesh something out, both Live and Bitwig fall flat without proper SysEx, VCA faders, advanced MIDI editing, render options, CPU use, and not very customizable key commands. I couldn't imagine using either of them for any length of time on sets of 30+ tracks, just painful comparatively IMO. With that in mind Live plays a lot more nicely with other DAWs than Bitwig does, especially the Live 10 addition of controller support for their Drum Rack etc.

[Kinh]

The only thing that's turning me off Bitwig is clutter and it's insane and somewhat redundant modulation.

Makes me wonder if it was really designed by people who make music because people who make music tend to have a clear idea of what they wanna get out of their heads. The depth of modulation, which is vastly superior to Live to me would be ideal for random results (because of it's vastness) not for creating something that's focused, with intent. It reminds me of something like Glitchmachines or some other random-assed, roll-the-dice plugin. I dont know about you people but I have a pretty good idea of how I want things to sound and dont need modulation to inspire me or divert me elsewhere into the f#ckin' 5th dimension.

So to sum up I say Bitwig is best for experimental music... for people who dont really know what the f#ck they want and like to play rather than make purposeful music. I probably dont have as much fun creating music as others and can see how Bitwig would appeal to the many who do. Personally I dont like randomness, I dont like letting the machine do all the work, I prefer control and Live puts you more in the drivers seat, not only that but adjusts the seat and steering wheel.

[SLiC]

The only thing that's turning me off Bitwig is clutter and it's insane and somewhat redundant modulation.

Makes me wonder if it was really designed by people who make music because people who make music tend to have a clear idea of what they wanna get out of their heads. The depth of modulation, which is vastly superior to Live to me would be ideal for random results (because of it's vastness) not for creating something that's focused, with intent. It reminds me of something like Glitchmachines or some other random-assed, roll-the-dice plugin. I dont know about you people but I have a pretty good idea of how I want things to sound and dont need modulation to inspire me or divert me elsewhere into the f#ckin' 5th dimension.

So to sum up I say Bitwig is best for experimental music... for people who dont really know what the f#ck they want and like to play rather than make purposeful music. I probably dont have as much fun creating music as others and can see how Bitwig would appeal to the many who do. Personally I dont like randomness, I dont like letting the machine do all the work, I prefer control and Live puts you more in the drivers seat, not only that but adjusts the seat and steering wheel.

Of course you don't have to use modulation or randomness in BWS and its hidden when you don't use it...Bitwig can be used exactly like Live if you configure it that way (the clip launcher is near identical), and to be fair you can use MAX in LIve and get all the crazy computer controlled randomness and modulation that you want...I just find BWS modulation simpler and easier to use! You can very simply add an extra ADSR, LFO or step sequencer to any VST you think will benefit from it!

BWS and Live are not necessarily the best choice for structured liner composition, packages like Cubase or Logic will be far better suited to the task.

I think by the end of this year (given the updates every 3 months) Bitwig will get more features that the linear DAWS have , and Live will reamin biast towards 'Live' loop playback (and there is nothing wrong with that, pick something, do it will or try to be a jack of all trades.....BWS will either go more linier or more 'expoerimental' but given the user feature requests I think it will be the former)

[dellboy]

I have been playing with the Bitwig demo, and I find it easier to do basic things which I could never figure out how to do in Live.

I pretty much do everything in the session view. And one very basic thing I am unable to figure out in Live is how to make the scenes play automatically in a sequence of my own choosing,and without input.

This is very easy to do in Bitwig. Click on a scene and in the box tell it what you want the scene to do next. For instance, play next scene , play previous, play random etc.

This one simple feature has me sold because a whole song can be put together without the need for an arrangement view which is sort of cobbled onto Live.

If you want to do full blown linear in an arrangement fashion Bitwig can also do this.

The one big off putting thing for me in Bitwig is not the program, which is hands down better than live for composing,but its the licence terms. Live is far better for me in this regard.

But if the licence method was acceptable,and I had the money to upgrade on an annual basis, I would go Bitwig.

[dellboy]

The only thing that's turning me off Bitwig is clutter and it's insane and somewhat redundant modulation.

I have been demoing Bitwig for the last few days and have no idea what this modulating feature is ?

Have I missed something important ?

[antic604]

Bitwig 2.4 vs. Live 10 Suite

The '+" means Bitwig is (IMO) better, '-" that Live is better:

+ workspace flexibility: you can spread Bitwig up to 3 screens, there's dedicated touch-screen profile (and a specifically designed workflow), even on single screen (like laptop) it's much better, as you can dynamically see or hide device chain / midi & audio editor / automation editor / mixer, you can see clip launcher & linear arrangement at once side by side, so no tedious holding the clip + Tab to copy them over; there are no artificial limitations, eg. that you can only see mixer in session like there is in Live,

+ multi-clip layered editing: Live introduced a similar functionality in v10, but it's nowhere near fully-featured, for example it doesn't cover audio clips (which is great replacement for audio comping!), you can't edit/move notes from several clips together, Live's editor doesn't follow playback, so it always shows the same clips regardless of where you are in the track; in Bitwig, this works like an advanced, customisable magnifying glass,

+ proper full screen: in Live you can hit F11 to go full-screen, but then you lose access to top bar menus, where a lot of functions are still located; in Bitwig - because it's designed from the ground up for touch - there's no top bar menu, instead everything is available either under right-click or in dynamic tiles up top,

+ projects in tabs: each project opens in separate tab, therefore it's very easy to move stuff (clips, device chains, full tracks or their groups) between projects,

+ touch profile: not only is the GUI distilled to the most important elements, but also bigger and fitted with dedicated 'radial menu' workflow that makes it pretty easy (after short adjustment period) draw sketches of tunes, although - for me at least - trackpad & keyboard are still more comfortable to make the finishing touches,

I mean look at this:

Bitwig_Studio_2_Triple_Monitor.png

- the GUI isn't skinnable: if you don't like the default colour scheme and overal design of Bitwig's GUI elements, you're out of luck - for now at least they can't be changed,

+ support for VST3, native bridging for 32/64-bit pluggins, plugin sandboxing: all awesome features, no comment really needed,

+ support for MPE: ie. MIDI Polyphonic Expression, which in simple terms lets you modulate parameters of synth per note, so - for example - 3 notes struck in a chord can each have different filter modulation, different pitch-bend curve, etc.; all Bitwig native instruments support this,

+ proper sidechaining to VST plugins: you just click an icon on VST container and done, so it's not necessary to create a ghost / parallel track and manually route it to the VST,

+ hybrid tracks: this looks like a gimmick at first (ability to have both MIDI & audio on the same track), but it's very useful when you need to do some editing to the sound that's not possbile in MIDI realm - eg. stretch or reverse part of the sequence); it's also a great replacement for lack of Freeze function: you can for example copy the MIDI clip(s) to Clip Launcher and bounce-in-place it/them in the Arranger, or you can group the track & bounce-in-place the region in group track, which 'overwrites' the audio generated by instrument(s) within the group,

+ flexible bounce-in-place: not only you can bounce-in-place instrument (+ all nested effects) on a track or group of tracks, but you can do the same on Sends or Master, thus making Bitwig's equivalent to Live's 'resample' feature much easier & quicker to use - just make a time selection, right-click, choose "bounce in place" and audio clip will be created, that you can manipulate, add effects, etc. making for example global effects very easy,

+ modulators pt. 1: on the surface they look like your typical LFOs, step sequencers, envelope followers, ADS(H)R envelope generators, etc. and they are (+ some much more unique ones, like audio & note sidechains, audio rate, etc.) but it's all in the workflow - it's much easier & faster to add bunch of them to any device (and its nested devices) and modulate any parameter(s) and modulators themselves, you can very easily see the signal they generate & what they do from their small thumbnails (9 of them take the same space on screen as one LFO in Live 10) and the details in the Inspector panel - it's just much more inviting, inspiring & creative than tediously adding separate LFO/Envelope devices in Live,

+modulators pt. 2: although it doesn't seem important at first, there's a very huge advantage of Bitwig's modulators over Live's ones (LFO, Shaper, etc.) - when you add an LFO in Live, it will take over the parameter so you can't automate its level anymore, whereas in Bitwig the LFO modulates the parameter "around" (in relation to) its current value, so you can have eg. filter cutoff going up in time and modulating up & down from that changing level as per LFO. In Live you'd need to automate the LFO's offset to achieve that which is not as intuitive and much less convenient,

+ automation: the options are on par with Live, but since v10 Live has hidden the automation envelopes in separate view, which makes it really difficult to work in automation-heavy projects, when you need to cross-reference automation with MIDI & audio on other tracks; in Bitwig, you just drop down automation lanes below the MIDI/audio track or can edit them in dedicated automation panel (as can be seen in above screenshot),

+/- clip launcher / session view: it's no secret that Bitwig 'copied' the idea from Live, but it's added few twists: 1st, you can have both views on screen simultaneously, 2nd you actually see the MIDI notes & audio waveform within the clip and a line going across as it plays, 3rd there are separate scene launch buttons for grouped tracks, which makes playing eg. different drum clip variations for the same global song scene very easy; on thing that's missing is legato playback,

+/- controller integration: I think Live supports (much) more controllers by default and it handles better things like recognising encoders vs. pots and parameter pickup modes, however it's also pretty easy to create dedicated scripts with Bitwig Controller API and many people do,

+ hardware integration: it's pretty much the same when talking about outboard synths or effects, but Bitwig beats Live hands down when it comes to integration of modular systems, with dedicated CV & Gate devices and modulators, that easily allow to make Bitwig part of (or heart of) modular system,

- DSP performance: performance itself seems similar between both DAWs (eg. you can run the same number of VSTs +/-5% either way), but with Bitwig performance spikes seem to be more frequent and it gets worse when project gets bigger; this is in particular felt on OSX, to lesser extent on Windows and almost not a problem on Linux and is likely related to the fact, that GUI is rendered by the CPU and not offloaded to GPU and the Cairo libraries they're using are least optimised on OSX; devs already have a prototype of GPU-accelerated GUI, so hopefully this will not be a problem anymore,

- native instruments: while Bitwig's Phase-4, FM-4, Polysynth, E-Drums and Drum Machine are very good, versatile and quite powerful especially when layered and made dynamic by Modulators, they're not as versatile of Live 10 Suite's offering, that's covering subtractive (Analog), FM (Operator), wavetable (Wavetable) and physically modelled (Collision, Electric, Tension) synthesis methods; also, Bitwig's Samples is laughably underpowered compared even to Live's Simpler, not to mention Sampler (EDIT: new sampler in Bitwig 2.4 is fire, though - they've added wavetable and granular modes, revamped multisamples & much more)

- native effects: here I think both DAWs are generally on par, with good quality and very usable effects but Live always has something extra: EQ8 is more fully-featured than EQ5 (and not just in # of bands), new Echo is more versatile than Bitwig's delays, there's no one-device multiband compressor in Bitwig (although you can make one using Multiband Splitter and 3 Dynamics devices), there's no Beat Repeater or Convolution Reverb, etc.

- sample & loop content: no contest here, as Live 10 Suite comes with HUGE library of quality content, whereas Bitwig looks pale in comparison (although it gets better all the time),

- Max For Live: while Bitwig's modulation system is definitely superior to Live's LFO/Envelope/Shaper modulator combo, Max For Live opens huge possibilities to edit native devices, creating your own and downloading multitude of free or paid 3rd party stuff, that greatly expands Live features with new instruments, effects, utilities, etc.,

- Capture: added to Live 10 listens to what you play (MIDI only) and records it in a buffer, so you can recall it any time even if Record wasn't enabled - really neat & useful feature missing from Bitwig,

- Push: although it has a surprisingly good 3rd party support in Bitwig, covering maybe 80-90% of functionality that Live has, it simply works much better with Live, especially the integration of the LCD screen which displays device parameters & visualisations, samples, MIDI clips, mixer, etc. which is obviously lacking from Bitwig's script. If Push workflow is something that one feels can work for him/her, then Live is a natural choice because even if Launchpad or Maschine JAM integration for Bitwig is great, it's nowhere near as good as Live & Push,

- tutorials, collaboration opportunities: since Bitwig's been on the market only for 4 years, it's obvious that Live has much more users, therefore there's more tutorials - both free & paid - available and likewise it's much easier to find someone to collaborate with or learn from,

+/- cost: I don't think that buying anything than Live Suite makes sense, so upfront Live would be more expensive, ie. EUR599 vs. EUR 379; however, since v2 Bitwig introduced a quasi-subscription model, where buying a license you get 12 months of free updates (that can also include v3 if it's within that time window) upon which you can still use the last version you have, but won't get new updates until you buy next 12 months - in theory, this encourages Bitwig devs to put out more meaningful features more frequently as they don't have to save them for 'big number' version to get the money from their users; so far it worked great for Bitwig, with huge amount of features added for those that bought (or upgraded to) 2.0, but we'll see how it goes in the future,

+/- target demographic, future: despite being similar in philosophy, especially due to how the devices chain look/work and clip launchers, it seems to me that they're targeting different users: Bitwig aims at sound designers, modular systems users, experimentators liking to tweak and fiddle with stuff; Live on the other hand seems to target beat makers and live performers more and I think this difference will be visible more & more as time goes by and features are getting added to both DAWs.

That's more or less my 0.02$

[jonljacobi]

More like $200 worth! Good stuff. For me Bitwig is better conceptually and better looking, but where the rubber meets the road, I could get things done much more quickly in Live. But Logic is my mainstay.

As far as the future, I think BW has much more headroom. Personally, the 2.x interface sent me to Live, and Live's arranger track sent me to Logic. But I'm track based, not EDM.

Both have some amazing features, and some major annoyances. Dig into the forums.