Ableton + several maschine instances

I want to create a project mainly for perform acts and control different machine sounds inserted in different channels of Ableton is it possible?
when i tried Ableton can only control 1 Maschine channel even if i change between them

 

i do not recommend more than one instance of Maschine 2 open in Ableton unless it's the Maschine 2 and the Maschine 2 FX plugin.
next, why would you need more than one instance? have you considered mapping individual channels?

 

Oh nice how can i map those individual channels?

 

This tutorial will give you an idea about routing in Ableton, be it a bit dated, it will show you about how to do it generally speaking

 

Why so?

There are many good reasons to use multiple instances.

 

I used up to 4 instances of Maschine in Ableton with no issues. I can switch instances from Studio controller and it is great

 

Hello,

Sorry I have to ask this one million dollar question :
What do you do, with your 4 instances ? What's loaded up, can you briefly describe your workflow ?
I'm very curious/interested, please.

 

I don't see wh

I can only think of one GOOD reason (maybe 2 if its the FX) and that's a live performance. In most other situations it's a gross misuse of processing and fear of committing MIDI to Audio leaving the data as Midi just in the case there happens to be "something you want to change" later.
the Maschine 2 Plugin still has a sequencer so one plugin can still have an entire song composed within it. The only REAL reason, outside of Live Performance is to use a MAschine 2 Plugin and on another Aux, or Sends, or Bus. With this, I can rationalize maybe using multiple Maschine 2 FX plugins but that's a misuse of CPU too.

I feel when you choose to use Maschine with a DAW you are choosing to use the DAW as the primary tool for its Strengths and you are choosing the avoid Maschines weaknesses. in too many cases i see people wanting to use Maschine as the Main tool with a DAW as the side piece and that's backward.

 

yeah, you can, but why do you need to? why not commit to Audio and move on?

 

Was just a matter to test it.
I usually load nomore than 2 instances of Maschine to have the Studio focusing on one, and the Jam focusing on the other.
The studio has the ability to switch between I stances from the controller.
You could imagine using more instances dedicated to different parts of the track. Lots of possible workflow

 

and as we know maschine is not "the best in multithreading stuff things" (using cpu ressources and such). i use multiple instances of maschine in my daw when maschine standalone starts to act up with big projects (underruns / cpu not fast enough blablabla). often this leads to better performance because the daw can then distribute the "workload" - and it does it more efficiently than using one instance of maschine allone...

i often make one instance as "everything drums/percussion" and the other "synthstuff/samplelibraries"....and it works quite well.

 

You seem to have a view that your way of working is the one and only worthwhile way of working with music and that other workflows have no merit. Odd, but I'm glad for you that you've got a workflow that works well for you. Others do too, with or without using multiple instances of MASCHINE, but it might surprise you that they might be different from yours.

You mention "misuse of CPU", which is misleading, as some DAWs/hosts process across cores per channel or signal path, so actually having multiple instances would be better for the CPU, spreading the processing.

 

committing to audio is like getting married... there is no going back..

what if you make a mistake?.. what if you want to change something?.. what if things could be better?.. what if this is not the best audio you can get?.. would a different plugin actually get a job and help out financially???...

oh, right.. we are talking maschine.. audio/midi whatever..

 

It's an unpopular opinion, i know. but just because I disagree with you doesn't mean i discredit your approach to anything. you took that offensively on your own,

I don't understand why you feel more things using a CPU's processor is better on a processor, as something using resources multiple times seems to deplete those resources faster, even while spreading the load evenly (Processing power is not the only resource Maschine would need by the way). Enlighten me on that one.

Maybe you all just have super spec'd computers and vast amounts of Ram and processing power, who knows? One person has actually given a real PRACTICAL reason for doing it but i can't tell if anyone has finished a project with this method, or if anyone has any other purpose behind it other than "to see if they can". One person offered ONE reason which is ALRIGHT but even still he could just commit it to audio and used the same instance of Maschine for both drums AND synth. once it's made it's made. you sound like your playing Devils Advocate.
I could totally see if someone, like this guy (https://www.reddit.com/r/maschine/c..._and_mikro/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x), using two controllers in a project for LIVE PERFORMING (as I mentioned live performance was a practical reason to use 2 instances)i am totally opened to the idea, if someone can tell me what doors it unlocks other than tying up resources, but otherwise everyone is literally doing it because they don't want to commit to audio or because they can which I say there is no need to.... i get you can do what you want, but you really don't need to. there is no NEED for multiple instances.

that first line I feels is spot on, and that scares people. so they would rather keep the entire project in midi, and I respect that but don't mascaraed like this is the holy grail of Maschine workflows. it's a misuse of resources

 

Dude this just seems sooooooo cumbersome compared to just running an instance on a midi channel like any other plugin. if you want to run it from a drum rack you can do it like this (make sure you watch the video):