Support |
It's more laziness on my account. Live is like a fully formed machine that you can make settings in, but it's fairly static. Bidule is like a box of legos that's nothing until you start putting blocks together. It's a totally modular environment. More flexible, I'm sure but Live appealed to my "here's a paradigm you already know" mind. For me, I don't really want anything all that crazy. I haven't found a thing that I want that Live doesn't have built in and easily accessed. Also, one of my first "ideas" was to stick with my G5/Digital Performer set up and only use the XP laptop as a hardware looper synced to it. Live was the only host that seemed to chase MIDI sync well. Bidule was one I tried and I can't remember why but it wasn't happening. I went though a lot of hosts. Live was a clear winner. It was only later that I started to realize how silly it was to split things up between two machines and I stopped having the two synced to each other pretty quickly. By that time I'd already invested in Live with money and time, so there you are. I did reevaluate it recently to see if I was using the right tool for my needs and from what I could find it is. Mark On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 12:46 AM, andy butler<akbutler@tiscali.co.uk> wrote: > Mark Sottilaro wrote: > >> I know Per likes Bidule, but although flexible it seemed like a lot of >> work to get started, > > Would that be because it doesn't have a mixer "hard-wired" into it? > > Isn't that compensated by the complete lack of routing mysteries? > > just askin', > I'd be interested to know. > > andy >