Members Kaux Posted April 30, 2009 Members Share Posted April 30, 2009 Hi guys, I can get Live for a very good price, and I indeed now how inspiring this software is. But i wondered for those of you who are not DJ and not to heavy into loop based music, why did you choose live? and what are its limitations in comparison with the others daws, when you want to mix and make other more "common" tasks? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members assaf Posted April 30, 2009 Members Share Posted April 30, 2009 I do mainly rock and fusion, and I've been looking for alternatives to Cubase at one time, instead of upgrading. After playing around with Ableton's demo for a while I found it was just too odd for me. I guess if you play live it might make sense, but it just seems to make the job of composing linear pieces very difficult, forcing you to think in terms of loops and little sound bits. It could also well be that I just wasn't fluent enough to work comfortably. Either way, it was the upgrade for me. Good luck with finding the DAW that fits you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gus Lozada Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 If you are NOT into 1) Loop-based music2) Live performing3) being a DJ / Producer ... why to get LIVE? For common DAW work, there are way better options. Even for basic MIDI work SONAR/CUBASE are much better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Metrosonus Posted April 30, 2009 Members Share Posted April 30, 2009 live is ideally suited for non linear music styles or providing backing tracks for live performances or improvisations and recording them. it is quite possible to use live for writing rock, jazz or others styles but the approach is vastly different from other DAWs such as cubase or sonar. Live gives you the added option of "playing" your sequences back along with recording something live. If you're a guitarist and you're familiar with jamming along with a drum machine and recording into a 4 track or something, you'll have no problem with live. but if you like that "recording engineer" feel of multitrack studios, you'll be more happier with cubase or something like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Kaux Posted April 30, 2009 Author Members Share Posted April 30, 2009 well, i was jus thinking it could be a good idea to upgrade my live lite to live le. I have been trying the demo, choosing a couple of loops, or indeed making your in the fly, and them messing with them seems to be pretty inspiring. I already have cubase sx2, but some times i fall short of ideas... well i wouldnt buy the full live version, I guess it makes sense if you are into DJing or loops based music like Gus said, but would be too much for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members girevik Posted April 30, 2009 Members Share Posted April 30, 2009 I have observed a lot of laptop artists in the free improv and noise arenas using Live. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Yoozer Posted April 30, 2009 Members Share Posted April 30, 2009 Live beats Cubase SX3 into a pile of dust, because it's not as retarded about the order of effects (you need 4 to change the order directly - otherwise you have to delete the effect and re-open it in another slot). I can directly record and automate anything without building elaborate templates or explaining for the zillionth time that I've got an audio interface with several inputs. But it truly shines in assigning controls; SX3's method of doing that was an exercise in frustation. Also, there's no need for a dongle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Tony Scharf Posted April 30, 2009 Members Share Posted April 30, 2009 I do mainly rock and fusion, and I've been looking for alternatives to Cubase at one time, instead of upgrading. After playing around with Ableton's demo for a while I found it was just too odd for me. I guess if you play live it might make sense, but it just seems to make the job of composing linear pieces very difficult, forcing you to think in terms of loops and little sound bits. It could also well be that I just wasn't fluent enough to work comfortably. Either way, it was the upgrade for me. Good luck with finding the DAW that fits you. I think you missed the TAB key to get to the arrange view. There you can record audio as long linear tracks and dont need to deal with loops at all. Ive done a lot of work in live and linear tracks. It can be done, and its not forced on you in any way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members kooki_sf Posted April 30, 2009 Members Share Posted April 30, 2009 cause time stretching in any other DAW is a complete PITA... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members ShakaCthulu Posted April 30, 2009 Members Share Posted April 30, 2009 Live LE is quite stripped compared to the full version. It's likely you'll want the full version before long. Check out the differences here: http://www.ableton.com/live-le-feature-comparison Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members assaf Posted April 30, 2009 Members Share Posted April 30, 2009 Tony, I didn't miss the TAB key. Today's DAWs are so feature-rich and powerful that any software can support any mode of operation. You *can* work with loops in Cubase, and you *can* do linear work in Live, but they're both designed for different approaches. It's just like the Eskimos have many words to describe different types of snow, while English just has one. You can have a meaningful conversation about snow using English, but wouldn't it be better to stick with Inuit (assuming you've paid 500$ for it already )? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Yoozer Posted April 30, 2009 Members Share Posted April 30, 2009 It's just like the Eskimos have many words to describe different types of snow I know what you mean. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Meatball Fulton Posted April 30, 2009 Members Share Posted April 30, 2009 Why I chose Live: 1. Live 7 will actually run on my laptop, Cubase AI4 (which I also own, came free with some Yamaha hardware) needs a faster machine with more memory2. Live will slave to external MIDI clock, most DAWs want to be the clock master3. Live will run on Macs as well as Windows (unlike Sonar, Acid) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Gribs Posted April 30, 2009 Members Share Posted April 30, 2009 I confess I confess! I have Live and Cubase. I upgraded some version of Live Lite or LE that I got with a controller or something because it was fun and different than Cubase. I didn't get the suite because I am chock-full-o'VSTs already. You can use the arranger in live to launch and play with different MIDI clips hooked into soft synths. I think that many people have more than one DAW, and if you are going to have more than one I think it makes sense to have ones that don't overlap a lot. I think that Live is really fun to use for a one-man jam session, but yeah for really digging into composing and arranging stuff I prefer Cubase. My Cubase 5 update just arrived Tuesday and it looks like Steinberg is adding more features that are similar to Live. They even added an MPC-like virtual pad-triggered VST, a loop mashing thing, and a beat arranger. The new feature I really want to play with though and have not yet learned and dug into is a convolution reverb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gus Lozada Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 Live beats Cubase SX3 into a pile of dust, because it's not as retarded about the order of effects (you need 4 to change the order directly - otherwise you have to delete the effect and re-open it in another slot). I can directly record and automate anything without building elaborate templates or explaining for the zillionth time that I've got an audio interface with several inputs. But it truly shines in assigning controls; SX3's method of doing that was an exercise in frustation. Also, there's no need for a dongle. Hell yeah, I completely missed this I'm just so used to do all that in LIVE and see this as quite natural I forgot this may be THE ONE advantage over any other DAW. Another ones: - It runs on Mac and PC with file compatibility between platforms. - Assigning MIDI controllers to everything is just two clicks away. - It runs as a master ReWire app - It can be ran as a slave ReWire app - It will slave to MIDI control (Meatball Fulton already mentioned this) ... but for DAW work -linear recording/editing- any other current DAW is way better, even for the sole purpose of MIDI. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Metrosonus Posted April 30, 2009 Members Share Posted April 30, 2009 i find it's more fun to sequence with my keyboard or em1 directly into the synth and record into live. i had a huge template made up with all the controllers and midi channels, then i realized i was missing all the fun and spontaneity of working with hardware. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members program_insect Posted May 1, 2009 Members Share Posted May 1, 2009 How do I love thee, Live? Let me count the ways:- really easy to try out variations on arrangements- no-brainer MIDI controller assignments- built-in instruments are good for sketching out ideas and are well integrated into the sequencer- cool clip stuff like parameter automation and the follow feature- runs well on non-top-end machines- really fun to use- really flexible- incredibly well designed software imo- etc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.