@Hazen what do u mean with mixing stage and comprehensive midi and audio editing? What can Logic do that AL can't do?

Look what I have found here! Kinda funny when he comes to Logic :DDDD

 

And much funnier I found this.:DDD


https://imgur.com/a/QqAeJoY


By the way why I can't put Imgur links here. Or how can I upload images here?

 

I'm actually not interested in bashing Ableton Live - it has some nice features - but given that you have asked.
And you seemed to ask as though you expected no-one to be able to provide an answer...
Read this... These two comments were discussing MIDI handling in Ableton Live
https://audiosex.pro/threads/problems-import-midi.57644/#post-534938
https://audiosex.pro/threads/problems-import-midi.57644/#post-534981
Here's a few extracts...
- "There are several snags in the very limited way that Ableton imports MIDI".
- "MIDI clips in Live can only play on a single MIDI channel" WTF!
It seems like the ability to have just one midi clip, containing multi channel midi, routed through just one instance of a GM compatible multi-instrument and using that to hear multiple instruments, is beyond Ableton LIVE.

For many people Ableton's inability to manage that very traditional handling of MIDI will probably not matter.
But for other people that ridiculous flaw in Ableton Live's MIDI handling is a "game changer" that quite simply writes Live off as almost useless.
Interestingly: I don't know any other DAW that fails this simplest of MIDI requirements.

You asked - there's a real answer.

 

Have you worked with both a "classic DAW" like Cubase, Logic or Studio one on the one hand and Ableton on the other hand? Then you would easily understand my point.

Logic has a much better mixing environment, Ableton is very limited in that regard, in fact there is no dedicated mixer. You essentially use the Session View as a mixer. All the plugins on a channel are displayed in series at the bottom VS a dedicated channel strip with all inserted and send FX displayed and accessible at once.

I also find editing multiple automation parameters in Ableton to be far from optimal, especially due to the way automation lanes are displayed in Ableton. Logic and Cubase (and S1 too probably) handle this much better.

Comprehensive audio editing in Ableton: have you tried to edit multi-channel vocal recordings in Ableton VS Logic? Ableton is great to quickly "warp" musical phrases, but not to intricately edit recorded audio (cut, crossfade, insert silence, nudge etc) in a quick and efficient way. It's just too limited, even though the introduction of comping is a step in the right direction. Ableton does the job, but it's audio and MIDI editing capabilities are very basic compared to general purpose DAWs. That's actually what I like about Ableton as a former Cubase user: Ableton's focus on the most essential featureset you need in the creative process instead of being cluttered with all the stuff you won't need 9 out of 10 times in that initial stage.

I don't think the Ableton team themselves even consider Live a substitute to classic DAWs, they are well aware of the particular strengths of their product and know that for intricate editing and mixing many (semi-) professional users would resort to a) another DAW or b) a professional provider using another DAW anyways. Ableton is great for the core stage of the creative process, not for the refinement and deep editing stage. And it's great for live performances.

 

@Ad Heesive. Thnx 4 the answer.

But I don't understand the use of a midi clip to control different instruments on a single track (If I understood u correctly).

Just create more midi tracks and put instruments on them and individual midi clips. Or for Kontakt, u can also route a lot of midi tracks to one Kontakt instance with a lot of different kinds of instruments loaded.

Maybe I understood u wrong. But I will read the links u posted now.

 

It is not only MIDI handling.
You can add limited piano roll and midi functions (in general) in Ableton.
Even FL piano roll is more powerful by a large margin.

Same with mixer : there is NO dedicated mixer

So YES it can be fast and effective. On specific needs.
NO Ableton can't do what Cubase, Studio One and such can do MIDI/mixer wise on a single click.


Big hybrid orchestral tracks on Ableton is a pain.
Not in S1 or Cubase

 

@Hazen Thank u also for ur response. I worked with Cubase 5.1, Fruity Loops, Logic on PC back then, Samplitude, Sonar, Studio One, and Reaper. But I never got any problems composing and making music to switch to other DAWs back. Maybe I am not a professional in the end.
There is also Digital Performer and Pyramix. Maybe some people need them. But 08/15 ("run-off-the-mill" in German ;)) producers don't need
so much complexity IMHO. Some people need an F1 car for their profession, but u cant drive it on an ordinary street ;)

 

I had the same exact plugins on Live 9, 10 and 11. 11 crashed with stock plugins on multiple machines, multiple releases. 10 crashed at random when editing MIDI. Face it, 10 fucked something up and 11 finished the job. 9 was the peak.

 

When working as a pure sound engineer Ableton is not the ideal tool: not comparable to standard DAWs like Logic, Cubase, Protools.
Ableton's superpower is live performance: I consider it unbeatable when using its session view, (the colored bricks) especially when connected with a dedicated controller: Push2 above all, then Launchpad and MPC40
Lately also Logic is trying to implement a live performance management (live loops feature), but it is lightyears behind from what Ableton can do.

 

I'm sorry but I'm pretty sure you don't know Live. Maybe you did long time ago.
Ableton has moved lightyears from Live minded DAW.
1.The session layout in LIve became a powerful and convenient scratchpad which allows you to play, improvise and then save the idea into arrangement layout where you work around it and develop a story. The process is intuitive and straightforward.
2. The most powerful and versatile sampler ond the market,
3. The most powerful and versatile FX, Instruments and Drum rigs,
4. Best supported midi controllers. By that I mean virtually every major manufacturers working closely with Ableton,
5. The most simple midi mapping
6. Unbeatable straching algorithms and time manipulation,
7. And many other features (realtime midi randomness, M4L which opens a whole world of opportunities).

Ableton is not suited for a "pure sound engineer"?
What the hell has a sound engineer to do with a DAW?

 

I'd have to agree. I think it was a great idea to not put money into a single beautiful gui and make it possible to make your own. And you don't have to crack it if you can't pay. And they have great user forums. Seamless updating , never a problem.
Ableton is more used though.

 

All the features you mentioned are a list of very useful tools for the musician - composer: those are the strong points of Ableton, they are the reason why this DAW is so appreciated.

You ask: Ableton is not suited for a "pure sound engineer"?

No.
Sure, forcing & pushing you can do everything with it , but would become an impractical and time consuming workflow. For example, the delay compensation issue on FX has never been completely resolved, generating annoying out of sync during mixing. Another example: 5.1 mixing. If you have ever tried to create a 5.1 setup you will have realized that Ableton makes your day really complicated, it can certainly be done but it become masochistic, better to use a traditional DAW. Other flaw: Ableton has all the tracks of the mixer in full view, you do not have the possibility to focus only on a chosen group, hiding the others. When you start having a busy project (100+ tracks) this is a key feature to avoid having panic attacks.
These are just some of this DAW's weaknesses, there are many others as well but I don't want to make it too long.
Actually I have never heard of a professional recording studio that uses Ableton Live as primary daw and for a reason: in that kind of environments the sound engineer is asked to be effective and above all fast (because time is money), artists don't go there to chase for inspiration and compose music, but for track voices - instruments and then for mix & mastering. In this type of studios Protools, Cubase, Logic are usually used.

Note:
I use Ableton from its v1 version (year 2001), I think I know what we're talking about.

 

No

 

Ableton is a very different beast compared to FL Studio. Ableton removes the easy to understand GUI for something more streamlined, minimalist, and efficient.

That said, if all you do is make trap beats in FL's sequencer, you're wasting your time with Ableton. If you're looking for something more powerful, I would recommend it. You'll have to get used to spending time actually working on music, and not flipping through countless menus like you do in FL.

Also, Ableton stock effects > FL Studio stock effects, Ableton stock instruments < FL Studio stock instruments.

 

Pure sound engineers use Pro Tools exclusively. There is no other DAW that competes with the raw capabilities of Pro Tools. Musicians, however, use FL, Logic, Live, etc. Pro Tools may do a million things, but it only does a few of those well.

 

great points- although a "DAW is a DAW"... they do have certain flavors. I'm a long time Ableton user, i remember getting a cracked version off my dialup modem... it's what i still use (well version 11), and i love it for creating music.

HOWEVER pretty much all of the criticisms leveled against it are true. oh my god it hurts i can't right click without needing the ableton enhancement thing. the FX delay. you need a work around to freeze groups- WHY? organizing PLUGINS HOLY SHIT A NIGHTMARE. there are only 7 custom categories to use, and you can put vst3s into additional custom folders but then you can't access presets when they're stored like they are with plugin alliances (i can't explain that well.), and VST2/.dll's you have to group so you can save them.... it's far from ideal.

there are definite weaknesses to it. i will say using the piano roll has never really bothered me, i feel that it's a bit of an exaggeration or an embarrassing admission when people shit on it super hard. a grid is a grid pretty much... drawing out a drum sequence with a drum rack in ableton is not very much different than anywhere else. i'm not even gonna try and argue FL studio doesn't have a better sequencer (i haven't used FL studio since 2003 I think. i have a definite bias against it especially considering that was the last time i touched it) but i will argue it can't make TOO MUCH of a difference to work flow, because i can make a drum sequence fucking fast in ableton.

although i use ableton exclusively now back in that same era of 2002ish i learned to make beats using Reason, and because of that when i ended up in someone's studio i wasn't completely fucking lost with shit you don't have to worry about in other daw's- like patching cables. it was a decent way to learn that stuff. i doubt i would use reason now, i even stopped using it rewired on top of ableton. i don't think they ever changed being able to use vst's in it either- yuck.


anyway, despite it's flaws i can't see myself producing beats on any other DAW at this point. I would keep an open mind about like reaper but the idea of relearning all this shit when i don't NEED too doesn't seem very appealing. If I was recording a band or doing more studio engineer shit NO WAY would I use ableton, that sounds just as bad as organizing the plugins. i make multiple styles of tunes for fun, from electronic drum driven stuff to poor man elliot smith guitar vocal stuff and i can't say that with the latter style ableton is doing anything special for me . i will say it does a GREAT job at electronic stuff, and it WORKS for recording just fine. for me being a shitty bedroom producer that's good enough.

 

This is an interesting point.
Protools has a glorious history, all mixer superstars use it: more than a DAW it is a heritage. However, we must say that over time, Protools has reached unrealistic costs (it also has a fee for each update), moreover it is intrinsically complex: the technology in the new DAWs has moved forward and has simplified / improved the workflow.
Undoubtedly progress goes on and generations change too: for these reasons, sound engineers are looking around and, even if Protools remains the standard, I know various recording studios that have switched their primary DAW. What has always resembled Protools is Cubase: those born with Protools feel at home with it. Cubase audio management makes you regret nothing, Cubase midi management on the other hand is more advanced in my opinion. No, Logic does not reach the same level, but I have noticed that it is used in the studios, this is probably due to the generational change, there are sound engineers who do not know what Protools is, and still manage with Logic to come up with excellent products.
I also read that some eccentric recording studios have made the switch to Luna DAW precisely because of its connection with the audio interface.

It would be nice to gather information and open a thread to learn more about which sound engineer used which DAW to mix which hit.
An example: I know for a fact that Skrillex uses Ableton Live to create all of its productions, not sure if his sound engineer mix the stems on Protools then...

 

Ableton's stock instruments aren't that bad but if we're including the Sampler and its stock library then Ableton wins this one. If not then yeah, FL has some very nice soft synths.