Sound I/O Persistency when loading Groups

Discussion in 'MASCHINE Area' started by Florian G @ NI, Jan 5, 2017.

  1. Scaper7

    Scaper7 Forum Member

    Messages:
    636
    No ... if I'm running Maschine VST in Live, I don't use multiple groups. Just as easy to run another instance/drumrack/channel if needed, with the benefit of neatly grouped output channels, metering etc in Live/Push2. In practice 16 channels of Maschine sound is usually ample. I run all other VSTi on their own individual channels in Live.

    I can imagine a setup where group buttons would select/edit multiple single group instances running on seperate Live channels ... this would make good sense in a DAW workflow
     
    Last edited: Jan 10, 2017
  2. Mr36

    Mr36 NI Product Owner

    Messages:
    6,827
    Really nice idea. I'd actually like to see this possible as MASCHINE currently is i.e., quick shortcuts (via modifier button) to directly switch between instances. It would make using multiple instances more attractive and feel more integrated.

    I appreciate that you wouldn't and how you describe your workflow with MASCHINE makes sense, but I think others would certainly expect to still be able to use multiple Groups in a single instance, even if it is limited somehow (e.g., 8 Groups). This is why I think something along the lines of using the power of MIDI ports (e.g., one per Group) and increasing the audio I/O would offer a really powerful and, importantly, flexible option.
     
  3. Scaper7

    Scaper7 Forum Member

    Messages:
    636
    yes for sure
     
  4. Dj Ravix

    Dj Ravix New Member

    Messages:
    3
    Cause More Problems than Not Being Usable at all without spending Hours to set up the Darn Package
    So I Agree on that the settings should be savable (And loadable at any moment)
    However I do not have the time to dive in to it to get something out of it
    I Just need the darn thing to work And not have to get somebody coming over here with an MPC to use that instead (I Actually did that most of the time)

    It Would be Much easier if they just made a Secondary Plugin version Specially for using it in "DAW Mode" without the Sequencer or any stuff that is already done by your DAW
    They also could setup the transport controls to control he DAW Directly (Yeah I know this could be setup From Controller Editor) There would be much more benefit in having such A Version Next to the original since it would become a go to Plugin instead of being ignored because of having to set everything up
     
    Last edited: Jan 10, 2017
  5. CakeAlexS

    CakeAlexS NI Product Owner

    Messages:
    3,544
    Boo ... Hiss... Etc.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  6. CakeAlexS

    CakeAlexS NI Product Owner

    Messages:
    3,544
    • Like Like x 1
  7. Spazoo

    Spazoo NI Product Owner

    Messages:
    1,725
    i vote for a 3,0 rewrite and this time make it a daw.

    or at least have a proper daw mode.
     
    • Funny Funny x 2
  8. dreddiknight

    dreddiknight NI Product Owner

    Messages:
    994
    You're a baaaad man...
     
    • Funny Funny x 3
  9. Scaper7

    Scaper7 Forum Member

    Messages:
    636
    interesting reading this and a few related threads. Seems a majority of people are working with a preferred DAW of some kind, with the combination of Live9 and Maschine being a particularly popular choice. Most responses are about the pressing need for serious DAW integration

    While updating the sequencer is a great idea, developing a killer DAW integration mode is a far more interesting prospect for me (and a few others by the sound of responses). I would just love to open Maschine on any DAW track of a project and not transfer any data anywhere all the way though to the final mix. I'm imagining a hybrid Control/MIDI mode with pads sending notes to DAW tracks and control/edting/browsing etc still being fully functional from the controller

    Like it or not, NI ... ingeniously integrating Maschine into the Ableton/Push environment would be so killer it's not funny ... even with the current integration limitations it's a great combination of hardware/software/plugin/host. Lifting some of the limits (like i/o issue) and develop a few integration enhancements (like exclusive 'groups per instance') would be so happening for Live users. Would be hard to have Push2 and not have Maschine alongside it.

    additional thought: would be great to have Maschine's swing control knob apply the same swing via Live's 'global groove amount' (addressing custom swing/groove maps in Live - doing this already using ext MIDI rotary) ... so much potential for sophisticated integration in my opinion

    not to mention that these hardware/software systems are being developed in the same town ... I wonder if these guys know each other? you'd think so ...
     
    • Like Like x 1
  10. Scaper7

    Scaper7 Forum Member

    Messages:
    636
    makes me think we could shout them all some beers, a nice lunch and whatever ... they could have a good time, eating, drinking, smashing out a few ideas together ... you'd imagine half the Live devs would have Maschine and half the Maschine devs would run Live too ... so much to chat about

    but seriously, I could see great gains from these companies collaborating a little. NI has the sound library that Live doesn't ... while Live has the flexible DAW environment that Komplete & Maschine don't provide ... a well integrated multi instance MaschineVST/LIVE mode would be the hottest thing going ...

    also ... having given some thought about multi instances and groups (in Live) a little more, i wonder about this approach (?): For any instance you can open as many groups as you like in Maschine. For example, let's open 2 groups on Maschine (instance1) then open next (instance 2) of Maschine ... on this instance of Maschine, groups A,B still show as being used and we're free to use C,D etc ... this approach would mean that the Maschine controller remains 'constant' state with access to any instance or group via group buttons on hardware (with outputs logically routed to DAW group). This setup would allow the flexibility to work with single or multiple groups per instance, freely adding groups and instances as you progress.

    when i think about some of these possibilities (if they were ever implemented) i would seriously be tempted to upgrade my Komplete8 and buy a Studio version to sit alongside Push2 ... I could even envisage using Maschine instances as a shell to host/browse/edit/control Komplete VSTs with a setup like that ...

    anyway ... cheers to all those in Berlin putting this stuff out ... much appreciated ... all my favourite toys come from Berlin these days :cool:
     
  11. Mr36

    Mr36 NI Product Owner

    Messages:
    6,827
    They're actually both part of the same umbrella company, it's all just a big music industry conspiracy.

    Seems like another nice idea, though I can see how this could get confusing/complicated. So, in a nutshell, this would essentially allow multiple instances (as plugins) to be used and seem as one (from the controller)? Scenes can already be linked (via MIDI between tracks), but the main issues that spring to mind would be the global parameters e.g., master swing and the arranger. This would be more like a DAW mode. :p
     
  12. Scaper7

    Scaper7 Forum Member

    Messages:
    636
    swing knob affects Maschine sequencer MIDI only, hence it would be redundant and available to (cc) control a similar swing set up in Live ... a relatively simple matter, doable with current Live groove pool setup and a MIDI rotary control

    not sure how you see the 'arranger' is a problem ... I'm describing a setup using Live MIDI clips/tracks only ... no arranger involved ... and yes, i'm describing a DAW integration mode
     
  13. Mr36

    Mr36 NI Product Owner

    Messages:
    6,827
    Yes, true, I was just trying to get my head around what you meant and how it would look and work. And was also thinking how it could work with the current sequencer/arranger as well (i.e., adding optional features as opposed to providing an alternative with new features and without others), for those who do like to use both e.g., sketch in MASCHINE, then use the DAW. An interesting idea for sure though.
     
  14. Scaper7

    Scaper7 Forum Member

    Messages:
    636
    yes ... that's the idea
     
  15. Rens Troost

    Rens Troost NI Product Owner

    Messages:
    37
    FWIW I would love it to be as Scaper7 has suggested. I really like Push2, warts and all; its great for the step sequencer, for the session access, for the fixed-length recording (why thats hard to do from live9 without push is beyond me and very frustrating) not to mention all the other great aspects of ableton around stretching, routing, etc etc but its just not a very good surface for fluent playing on the pads. I'd be thrilled to be abel to use them in a really integrated way. I cant see how it wouldnt sell more maschines, as well.

    But I'll settle for anything that makes it usable in the DAW. Audiomodder has been a big win for me, though it brings its own baggage.

    Rens
     
  16. Mr Mahogany

    Mr Mahogany NI Product Owner

    Messages:
    680
    After reading some of the responses since the 1st page ,I can now forecast what will happen with the idea of making Maschine daw compatible. It seems one poster has taken over this dialogue to shoot down any idea to get this done. This will drive the developers to over think the whole thing and we will get an update that doesnt address daw compatibility at all.

    Bypassing the Maschine Sequencer to record midi into a daw and a daw only is whats been asked for by me since 2014.

    I hope the developers can read this and ignore self appointed forum gate keepers who seem to think all has to be vetted by them. Please just make a simple DAW MODE and dont get bogged down in overthinking this. There can be 10 modes ;please just make one that restores the functionality of 1.8 in terms of recording to a daw. PLEASE !

    Seriously, then you can make Eternal Debate Mode. Special Poster Mode. Prove It To Me Mode, I dont care. Once there is Daw Compatibility ,I'm done here and will never be back.
     
    • Like Like x 3
  17. Mr36

    Mr36 NI Product Owner

    Messages:
    6,827
    Wow. You seem bitter. I'm sorry you've gotten so riled up, that is not the intention of my opinions and discussion about MASCHINE (assuming, of course, your lovely remarks are referring to me).

    Somewhat ironically, though, we both have the same goal as far as this thread's topic is concerned (to get MASCHINE back to being as good if not better than 1.x for using in/with a DAW) but, perhaps even more ironically, you can constantly voice your "DAW mode" and "bypass the sequencer" suggestions, but I shouldn't voice my opinions and wishes if they're in any way different from yours... MASCHINE belongs to NI, of course, so they will ultimately do what they see fit regardless of what I or anyone else says (as the last 5-7 years have largely shown), but on our customer/user level, MASCHINE is as much yours as it is mine and as much mine as it is yours, so why shouldn't I give opinions and discuss them (including the details and what they mean to try to get what fixes/features we get to be as flexible as possible for all users, not just one scenario)?

    The bottom and most important line that seems to have been lost, though, is that we are actually aiming for the same thing. To that end, I've contacted NI directly numerous times, including tech support and individuals, leaving reports of these issues (mostly based on feedback from you and other users). At this point, I'm just waiting for them to act, just like you are. Hopefully it will be the next thing to be fixed before further sequencer/song/whatever work.
     
    Last edited: Jan 13, 2017
  18. jbuonacc

    jbuonacc Forum Member

    Messages:
    72
    for those wanting to bypass the Maschine sequencer, i'd have to ask...

    why do you even use Maschine in the first place?
     
    • Dislike Dislike x 2
    • Like Like x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1
  19. CakeAlexS

    CakeAlexS NI Product Owner

    Messages:
    3,544
    This is a silly comment. People have different WORKFLOWS and do things DIFFERENTLY. Just because you do things your way doesn't mean others should not be allowed to do things their way. Let's say this got implemented, it would NOT effect your workflow whatsoever. So in effect YOU either want to put an end to people's feature requests either for fun, or because you think everybody should be forced to work your way. From my perspective I adopt multiple workflows depending on the job, I want flexibility.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  20. TheAndroid

    TheAndroid NI Product Owner

    Messages:
    100
    I'm on the same boat as @jbuonacc and @Mr36 here : why do you keep talking about bypassing the sequencer ?
    What prevents you from doing it right now ? By default, if you load Maschine as a VST in a DAW, it's just empty and the sequencer has no effect at all. Really guys, I don't want to be rude or appear as the "gate keeper", but what is the problem with the sequencer vs DAW in this case ?
    And what does it have to do with I/O settings ?

    @CakeAlexS can you elaborate a little more ? (or point me to previous posts where you fully explain the problem).
     

Share This Page