Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 8:28 AM, Per Boysen<perboysen@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 5:02 PM, Mark Sottilaro<zerocrossing@gmail.com> >wrote: >>> Mark Sottilaro wrote: >>> >>>> I know Per likes Bidule, but although flexible it seemed like a lot of >>>> work to get started, > > Short note: > In Live I like the option of setting up MIDI loops (MIDI clips) and > the option to use Clip Envelopes for long and slow automized changing > of a parameter value. For example you may want the span of a band pass > filter to slowly move just a little up and down the frequencies while > audio passes through the filter. Just one clip (MIDI or Audio Clip) in > Live can hold a huge number of such "musical slides", of just about > any length. So within this single clip you may have a dozen "parameter > value loops" spinning at different lengths at the same time. That's > awesome! It sure is awesome, I use that all the damn time. If only they'd like me run midi clips in the send channels... > But sadly I found that not all parameters in plug-ins, even > Ableton's own plug-ins, show up with all their parameters within > Live's routing system. Have you moved to Live 8? There's a new work around where all parameters are available but you have to set up which ones you want to use. Quite handy actually. > And for the second, I don't like the sound of > Live. I don't even know what you mean by this. Are you claiming that a VST in Bidule sounds different than one in Live? I've tried a bunch of different DAWs and one thing I never noticed was a difference in sound, though I imagine if you're using Live's warp engine that'll degrade those bits. > So this leads to Bidule where you can achieve that moving band > pass example by cabling a synced LFO to affect two parameters (and set > an appropriate scaling). In Bidule every parameter does show up for > routing, given the plug-in developer implements them to be declared to > the host. Ya, check out 8 for that work-a-round. Very useful and you only have to deal with the parameters you're using so it eliminates a lot of clutter. > So in my perspective Bidule is simpler. Stuff you don't need at the > moment you won't have to stare at. And the power under the hood is not > crippled, so you don't have to fear the day you want to do something > that turn out not being supported. It's simpler in the sense that all the "guts" aren't laid out for you at any moment. It's less simple when you want to do something basic and you have to start pulling up the guts and mucking about. I remember I had to do a crazy little configuration to get Mobius to receive host sync where in Live I drag it into a track and if my preset is set to Host Bar it just works with no fuss. I'm sure once you're familiar with it it's easy as pie, but few would deny that the Bidule learning curve is higher than Live's. > > But then I happen to like the Mainstage sound fidelity so much that I > always try to use that host even before I turn to Bidule, knowing that > anything you may build in Bidule can always be opened in another host > as a Bidule plug-int, if first saved as a Group from within Bidule. Well that is the good part eh? Need Bidule's functionality? Run it as a plug-in. I just never found the need for it's functionality. You're setup and music tends to be a lot more experimental than my own though. I'd like to hear examples of the exact same set up (source material, vst) rendered out as audio that sound different from different hosts. I've just never noticed it at all.