max-like graphical view

koneko · Post by **koneko** » Tue Jun 10, 2008 7:03 am

Live grew wide and deep in the last versions updates, so have our appetite for building wider and deeper racks.. only that the current UI is not allowing a free movement through the instruments.

im thinking out loud here, but maybe what Live needs in addition to the session and arrangement view, is a third, more simplified, schematic, boxes + wires view, in the style of reaktor, max/msp and co. maybe limited only to the instrument chains in a track.

its probably just accidental, that the current UI capability/limitation goes hand in hand with the capacities of the current, common CPU. this might have given a good enough reason not to fully unleash the power of Live with such an abstracted modular GUI. but as cpu's grow stronger, i think its time to let it happen.

my guess, its in plan. and it also might have something to do with the co-inspiration of ableton and cycling 74

chapelier fou · Post by **chapelier fou** » Tue Jun 10, 2008 8:23 am

Oh yes , let the racks become modular!

Soma · Post by **Soma** » Tue Jun 10, 2008 1:21 pm

My guess is it is not in plan, but I would love such a feature!

Der_Makrophag · Post by **Der_Makrophag** » Tue Jun 10, 2008 3:02 pm

Yeah. Or anything different that makes complicated Racks less complicated. Or, at least not make them more complicated than they are (as it is now sometimes...)

forge · Post by **forge** » Tue Jun 10, 2008 4:02 pm

Soma wrote:My guess is it is not in plan, but I would love such a feature!

seems fairly logical to me that that is exactly what the C74 partnership will bring

Angstrom · Post by **Angstrom** » Tue Jun 10, 2008 5:06 pm

Machinate · Post by **Machinate** » Tue Jun 10, 2008 10:35 pm

Angstrom wrote:

I'm with Angstrom here. It's not as much modularity I need inside Live, it's more along the lines of an easier way of handling deep racks and long chains...

+ inf.-1

Angstrom · Post by **Angstrom** » Tue Jun 10, 2008 10:53 pm

Yep,
Racks are so powerful, but they do discourage deep programming by being so obtuse.

I would actually like some modular routing. I like the idea of using the filters of Analog on the waveforms of Operator, or using the envelopes and LFOs of Sampler on the macros of a whole other rack.

Poster · Post by **Poster** » Wed Jun 11, 2008 3:15 pm

Angstrom wrote:Yep,
Racks are so powerful, but they do discourage deep programming by being so obtuse.

I would actually like some modular routing. I like the idea of using the filters of Analog on the waveforms of Operator, or using the envelopes and LFOs of Sampler on the macros of a whole other rack.

you almost wish that instead of the 3 AAS instruments they would've adapted AAS Tassman..
same quality plus a modular view and loaaaaaaaaaaaads of mod options..

though that would still leave out native Live devices from the mod matrix..

forge · Post by **forge** » Sun Jun 15, 2008 3:14 am

Poster wrote:
Angstrom wrote:Yep,
Racks are so powerful, but they do discourage deep programming by being so obtuse.

I would actually like some modular routing. I like the idea of using the filters of Analog on the waveforms of Operator, or using the envelopes and LFOs of Sampler on the macros of a whole other rack.
you almost wish that instead of the 3 AAS instruments they would've adapted AAS Tassman..
same quality plus a modular view and loaaaaaaaaaaaads of mod options..

though that would still leave out native Live devices from the mod matrix..

I guess with the C74 collab that might seems a bit pointless though, or at least like too many modular things

Poster · Post by **Poster** » Sun Jun 15, 2008 9:07 am

forge wrote:
Poster wrote:
Angstrom wrote:Yep,
Racks are so powerful, but they do discourage deep programming by being so obtuse.

I would actually like some modular routing. I like the idea of using the filters of Analog on the waveforms of Operator, or using the envelopes and LFOs of Sampler on the macros of a whole other rack.
you almost wish that instead of the 3 AAS instruments they would've adapted AAS Tassman..
same quality plus a modular view and loaaaaaaaaaaaads of mod options..

though that would still leave out native Live devices from the mod matrix..

I guess with the C74 collab that might seems a bit pointless though, or at least like too many modular things

we still don't know what the collab will bring..

if it will actually bring sound generating modules into Live then Tassman would be too much..

but if the collab is all about controlling/routing stuff then I would've liked Tassman very much instead of Ana/Elec/Tens

I demoed Tassman a few days ago and it's an amazing package really, tho looks awful..

edit; why would the Cycling collab bring instruments anyway?
I mean that would bring in some serious competition for Sampler and Operator..
I think it's more likely to be about controlling/routing..

forge · Post by **forge** » Sun Jun 15, 2008 9:11 am

Poster wrote:
forge wrote:
Poster wrote: you almost wish that instead of the 3 AAS instruments they would've adapted AAS Tassman..
same quality plus a modular view and loaaaaaaaaaaaads of mod options..

though that would still leave out native Live devices from the mod matrix..

I guess with the C74 collab that might seems a bit pointless though, or at least like too many modular things
we still don't know what the collab will bring..

if it will actually bring sound generating modules into Live then Tassman would be too much..

but if the collab is all about controlling/routing stuff then I would've liked Tassman very much instead of Ana/Elec/Tens

I demoed Tassman a few days ago and it's an amazing package really, tho looks awful..

edit; why would the Cycling collab bring instruments anyway?
I mean that would bring in some serious competition for Sampler and Operator..

well, yeah that was based on that assumption

cant help thinking thats what it will be though

Soma · Post by **Soma** » Sun Jun 15, 2008 9:26 am

All I really need for good modularity are 4 things,

1) Sends in racks (like drum racks)

2) A set of drag and drop modulators I can freely assign to any parameter (and control parameters on many tracks with the same modulator; could have its own view like macro mapping does)

3) Drag and drop groups, like in my create group from track selection thread

4) A way to make a pattern for just one effect on a track (trigger one pattern for the sound and another to automate different filter/delay patterns). This might mean that a single track might have more than one column for clips. This could be satisfied with the group tracks I think.

koneko · Post by **koneko** » Sun Jun 15, 2008 11:26 am

Soma wrote:All I really need for good modularity are...

4) A way to make a pattern for just one effect on a track (trigger one pattern for the sound and another to automate different filter/delay patterns). This might mean that a single track might have more than one column for clips. This could be satisfied with the group tracks I think.

i also thought about it. maybe a sequencing midi plug, which could finally be a step sequencer too, or just a triggering machine that could be put in front of any instrument and automate things.

reason has something like that, in a more obvious/traditional way. but since we dont have the option to record automation in session, such an "automating machine" could be more than just a work around, but a real useful feature.