How to fix Maschine's broken workflow once and for ALL.

Yes, yes, yes. This is what I've been saying . A simple DAW MODE. I'm never going to use the Maschine sequencer, but I ALWAYS want to use Maschine. How hard could it be to make a simple disable sequencer switch so I can work in Cubase?

 

Please stop saying DAW mode a lot of people think that means making Maschine into a standalone DAW . Sequencer toggle on/off switch is the thing

 

I sang that song when I waited for cakewalk to fix cakewalk rapture issues lol.

 

Donald pointing to Hilary's email when he's being asked about tax returns? Anyway cakewalk sure took their time, but those issues are fixed. Here we still wait in NiNi land.

 

Like what he says, I just want group (a, b, c etc) independent start stop points for patterns and the ability to not have a 1bar loops 4x in a 4 bar pattern

Meaning pattern A1 may be a 4 bars starting at 0, and B1 could start at 1 and be 1bar that doesn't force repeat. Just a more useful sequencer area.

Or even B1 over lapping A1 and A2

 

working hard? ... but at what?

it would take all of a week or two fix inputs and outputs so we can use it with any DAW ... in my opinion the single most important fix people are asking for (for years now) ... it's not like anything new has to be developed, yet this fix alone would make such a huge improvement to the vast majority of Mashine users.

NI could fix something like this in weeks if only they had the intention ... but in reality, look at how long it took to implement something as obvious and simple as 'scene length' adjustment

Re: Groovebox video ...
I hear what he's saying. Just happens that Maschine has my least favourite pattern based sequencer I ever used. Ableton's session view and Push are my first choice for pattern based sequencing. I tried for years to like Maschine's sequencer but ... neh ... Push/Live sequencing just eats it for breakfast ...

 

I was pretty careful in considering this to keep backwards compatibility.. That is, the existing way is completely preserved, old projects open, their behavior can be kept - however patterns just have some new parameters. Position and loop. Now they are unlocked to move anywhere in the timeline, independent of scenes.

The highly restrictive SCENE unit that patterns are enclosed in need to be more like "suggestions," markers, or even turned off entirely - with an option to do so.

 

Speaking as a dev it certainly would not take a week, software development is hard and time consuming. Regardless nobody can make that assumption without the code in front of them. However it shouldn't take over 2 years either to fix all the bugs and workflow problems we are facing either.

 

Indeed this can be done without breaking Maschine. Take a look at Geist V1 for instance, you can turn off anything you don't want to use... Song mode, groups (what they call engines), or the sequencer entirely. Their dev team is tiny and they make less money than NI, yet they have managed to handle this.

 

Maschine is a better product than Geist imo.

 

I agree and am on-board with most things in this thread (and your OP, @robertge), but not this part. For a long time, I've been a proponent of multiple Patterns per Scene and a kind of position parameter, as well as several other improvements/enhancements to the Pattern/Scene workflow. However, to me, it should fundamentally remain a Pattern/Scene workflow and nothing proposed here would have to change that.

Multiple Patterns per Scene and turning off Pattern loop both rely on Scenes anyway, but even the position parameter would work well as a way to change where within the vicinity of a Scene's start a Pattern will start (e.g., 1 beat in, 2 1/16 before). Patterns would still be tied to their Scenes, but would have much freer movement from the controller and moving a Pattern with the mouse along the timeline would just intelligently tie it to another Scene (so they would act more like markers, but still be Scenes as we know and use them).

Moreover, not using Scenes to do things and without a viable alternative would likely lead to hardware-based control being harder/impossible and mouse-based workflows and even mouse-only modes, which I don't think would be good for MASCHINE at all. Some things are and always will be better/easier with a mouse, but if there's a good way to implement functionality that can be controlled with the hardware, it should be.

Although I don't think any of these things would break MASCHINE in terms of compatibility etc. (as they are essentially just extensions of what is already there, just infinitely more musical and useful), what could break MASCHINE is if these things aren't implemented well or with one of the main reasons most users invest in and stick with MASCHINE: the controller-centric and (relatively) mouse-free workflow. And I believe such features could easily be controlled by the hardware.

 

Are you Donald Trump? Just wondering... Nobody here is playing top trumps. This isn't a fanboy competition.

 

I am saying this based on my crude knowledge since I am not in the beta group, but I think the song layer is already going in this direction. You basically have now the ability to position patterns anywhere on the timeline, and I am guessing this positioning can be done from the hardware and not just with the mouse (i hope). So, in this case, I don't see the big deal with turning scenes OFF. I am actually hoping that one can work solely in the song layer, if so desired, effectively bypassing scenes.

 

That's not really turning Scenes off though, that's just using another mode/layer/whatever (which is fine and I understand users' desire for that, even though if I wanted to work that way, I wouldn't use MASCHINE). And, as you say, you're guessing we'll be able to control the position of Patterns in the song layer from the controller, but it's not clear whether that will be the case and, importantly, how that will work.

The main point was that these features don't need an extra layer and going that route (as it seems the song layer might be going already, as you say) wouldn't be the best option for MASCHINE in my opinion.

 

It would be quite "hilarious" if the song layer gets introduced without an option to turn it off at this stage, but I get ahead of myself.

 

I do think NI is just bleeding our pockets dry and doesn't want to give us what we want, but I still think that even though JAM and the scene and pattern architecture exist, it doesn't mean that we cannot have much improved sequencer changes... I don't know if it will happen, but they certainly could if NI wanted to. Hopefully it doesn't take until 2018 as Cake said... I hope Ableton and Akai light some more fires under Maschine, and each other to push to make better products faster. It seems like all these companies purposefully take away and don't add features so that they can add them in later ,and so that we pay for the convenience, and are grateful to them when they finally add what should have been in, or added on what should have already been in place from day one. Seems like the only thing that pushes companies is not consumers wants, but rather pushing each other out of the way for market space. I understand this last bit is pretty common sense, I guess it's just disappointing when companies don't consider what consumers want. How difficult would it be to close the sequencer and get rid of even seeing the damn thing when it's being used as a plug in? How hard would it be to keep the routing when switching kits? Change pad colors from the controller? Make the music experience without a controller even somewhat similar to the experience with a controller?

 

If the developers are really working hard:

a- They are incompetent. All we seem to get is Link with the coming update. Ableton developed and opened Links source. (I am pretty sure if NI would have developed Link, they woud burry into NI ecosystem and wouldnt allow anybody else to use it.)

b- They are very less people. One or two?

 

great post...

.
..
...
....
.....
......
Also totally off topic, inaccurate and pointless... but whatever

Actually, CW is doing AWESOME without you, and if we are keeping score, fwiw CW have never taken 6 years to fix one juvenile midi bug , nor have they improved things by removing major functionality...but hey! at least you didn't slam Roland this time

 

This is the total stupidity of NI..

they want you to work totally inside of Maschine, so much so that they cripple what DAW integration did exist... and then... they allow you to link up to a DAW.. but not integrate with it... major wtf'ism

I suspect they are simply considering Maschine to be just a live play device, after all it is what makes the coolest videos.. ..