why there so few arrangement videos for maschine?

yup, thats the important distinction - patterns NOT scenes.
this way you could stack up all patterns as single midi note clips in LIVE, and trigger them in any order/pattern you want, completey freeform.

the current 'scene' method would require you to create a bunch of predetermined patterns beforehand for every available combination and then somehow remember it

 

Don't forget that the MC-808's sequencer is equivalent to using one Maschine Group. Although the 808 does have recordable tempo changes and track mutes, Maschine has 8 (1.8) or unlimited (2.0) Groups, so in some ways is more powerful than the 808.

 

cool that re-afirms my plan to just get used to working with one group for a bit.

In fact tonight I plan to do just that, make a tune and arrange it live in one sitting, will be good practice I think......

 

That post was a discussion on how older grooveboxes used pattern mode...nothing more and nothing less.

fwiw though, your statement is not correct. Do not confuse 16 sounds in one group of Maschine to 16 parts in the MC-808, where one part can be an entire drum kit.. in the example above the MC-808 is accessing 7 kits * 16 sounds + 9 instruments..ie 121 sounds.. the same setup would take 8 groups in Maschine

 

Using the length and resolution properties, each pattern in Maschine can also have a different time signature. The only thing is that the metronome is always four four.

 

Not quite correct. If you use a standard Maschine kit you are right in that the kit is spread across all 16 pads (tracks) but if you use say an Abbey road kit, the kit is on one pad (track) and to access all the sounds of the kit you have to put that pad into keyboard mode (same as 808). In this respect Maschine is way more powerful and flexible than the 808.

 

I am not sure what your objective is here.. My original post was looking to help the OP with ways and means to use a groovebox and so gave an example... So am not sure why you felt the need to dive in.. Was i comparing the MC-808 to Maschine?.. no. Was i interested in correcting perceived disinformation in your post?. yes.

If you have techniques and recommendations for helping the OP work with patterns into a full track then I am sure he would be most thankful.

 

I apologise if I have offended you in some way. I was fully aware that you were not comparing the 808 to Maschine; I was merely advising that Maschine's sequencer can behave exactly like the 808 using just the one group (barring tempo and mute recording) and confirming that my earlier post was indeed correct and I was not "confusing 16 sounds in one group of Maschine to 16 parts in the MC-808, where one part can be an entire drum kit".

 

Maschine is fine for arrangement imo. If you'd like to learn about arranging dance music, http://www.dancemusicproduction.com/fundamental-6-formal-structure/ this link will bring you to the best DVD I've seen on the topic. It's not a maschine based tutorial, what you learn from this will change the way you arrange in any DAW.

But, like it says, It's for dance/electronic music. Arranging hip hop or pop is bit different. . structure wise.

 

so how did it go LowPass, interested in how the workflow went for you?

 

It actually went pretty well. I managed to get in the studio for about 2.5 hours in the end and I walked out with a 4 minute track. Not the best thing I have done by any stretch and a bit rough around the edges, but seemed to flow to a certain extent.

I basically had all my drum sounds and instruments on group A, there was the beat, one bass line and a couple of lead parts and some sfx and pads, I made a second pattern that kept most things the same but made the drums a little more faster/full and I put this pattern in scene two.

I then just locked it in mute mode and used track mutes and the odd tweak on delays (taking it out of mute mode) to make the tune. I think with more practice It could have sounded better as some of the changes were a bit clunky.

with more time I would have set up macro controls for some of the main effects, which would have helped even more.

My only gripe is that to my knowledge you can't lock it mute mode and still access the macros which is a shame because then I would be able to control everything in one view without having to turn mutes on and off all the time.

That said I think I might be able to come with a work round using some clever routing.

 

My Push came in last night. I spent most of the day jamming on it. I inserted an instance of Maschine so I could do a little back & forth, comparing the two.

My honest opinion... all the things people are complaining about here, could be solved if they switched to Push.

 

I know you said all, but which features does Push account for? I can see it being slightly easier and more direct to audition different combinations of patterns (largely due to having 64 pads instead of 16), but can you record into the arrangement view yet?

Even the Ableton website says the computer is necessary for arrangement:

 

Don't you feel any different when on one or the other, I mean as far as computers go maschine is a beatmachine and push is a push? Dynamics.....

 

My son owns Push and, even though Ableton Live has been central to my music for many years now, I am not particularly drawn to it. Having said that, my son has no great interest in my Maschine.

I think they are really different devices and to me Maschine complements Live in a way that Push does not. Some people will be happier with Push, some people will be happier with Maschine, some people will want both of them and, of course, others will find neither of them to be of any use to them.

 

After messing with it this morning... I think I spoke too soon. It doesn't really solve any of the issues "we" have with Maschine, just presents another list of problems.

I mean, it's great for what it is. I watched the Live event again, where they introduced Push & it does everything they said it would. It just appears people want more.

I can't speak for everyone's expectations & I shouldn't try to "defend" either product. I use Maschine differently from everyone here & for me, it works. It makes it easier to do what I want to do. Lay down guitar/bass parts & build tracks around them. Push does the same thing. Both allow me to do a lot of what I want to do without touching a mouse, or qwerty keyboard.

Very recently I was slaving a Fantom-S (or MV-8800) to an AW4416. Push & Maschine trumps that workflow. The only real difference is with Maschine, I still need a keyboard controller. I haven't learned how to play Push yet either, so I'm still tied to a keyboard.

 

Another thing. Tight integration with Komplete (especially Kontakt) is very important to me. Push has none at all. Maschine's got about 60% of the control I'd like to have. I'll start looking in a few days for a template, or start working on one of my own. Or... learn to substitute it with Maschine, or Live's instruments... which most likely won't be happening. Kontakt is the shizzle.

 

probably because, mostly, a lot of people were having to finish Maschine projects in a full DAW to get everything they wanted out of their maschine track.

 

For me the best way to arrange in Maschine is to do it live off the cuff. I write and basically mix the tune in Maschine. Once I have all my patterns and rough idea of how the live mix will go I go to my daw, send all audio from Maschine to individual tracks and then hit record and jam my arrangement live, feeling it as I go. Aftwerwards I can do some tweaking on the newly recorded audio tracks, and easily remove sections that may have went on to long etc. Not a style of arranging for everyone because of course not al genres would suit that style of arranging.

PS
Most times I use only one group, sixteen pads/sounds. I think this makes live arranging easier than using multiple groups, especially for instant off the cuff muting of tracks/pads whilst you record. And generally its just much more manageable becasue you do have to know whats on those pads and know your session very well before you start the recording/arrangement.

 

cool, i have been playing around with doing this way most the weekend and am finding it to be pretty good. sticking to one group definitely helps.