Ableton Push: Integrated, Touch-Sensitive Hardware Control for Live

Home :: Reviews of DJ equipment :: Ableton Push: Integrated, Touch-Sensitive Hardware Control for LiveReply
Ableton Push: Integrated, Touch-Sensitive Hardware Control for Live
Posted on: 25.10.2012 by Yuki Gance
Wow this looks like a very cool Ableton controller!

http://createdigitalmusic.com/2012/1...-live-details/

https://www.ableton.com/en/push/
Dorie Scelzo
01.11.2012
Originally Posted by RockingClub
Everyone who wants do ditch Maschine now never REALLY used Maschine in my opinion.
Agreed. It is pretty cool. And I believe it might have some advantages over Maschine for certain types of working/believeing. But I could be wrong just from that video.

At any rate, I'm not ditching my Maschine. It fills what I need it for better than Live does.
Ervin Calvery
01.11.2012
Originally Posted by ApplianceTyrant
With M4L the pads can have poly aftertouch.
How is this done? midiselect -> touchout? Is it as simple as assigning notes to the channel aftertouch of individual channels?

Originally Posted by ApplianceTyrant
Where are you getting you're info on the midi resolution on these controllers?
My information is from tech specs on ableton.com and correspondance with Jesse (the Push project lead at Ableton) Chris, who is also colourblind to some extent and answered some of my questions about using Push with it. Jesse, Chris, David, and others are active on the Ableton community , which is also really excellent.

Originally Posted by ApplianceTyrant
(Not saying you're lying, just genuinely curious.)
I sincerely appreciate the distinction.
Iraida Bonaventure
01.11.2012
Originally Posted by botstein
The pads on Push are much lower resolution, have no poly aftertouch, and are significantly smaller...
With M4L the pads can have poly aftertouch. Where are you getting you're info on the midi resolution on these controllers? (Not saying you're lying, just genuinely curious.)
Dorie Scelzo
30.10.2012
Originally Posted by ksandvik
With Push you are most likely locked to Ableton Live as your main DAW which is the secret goal of Ableton. While many of us producers want more flexibility.
It doesn't seem so secret to me.

Besides, the business model works.
Celine Surico
30.10.2012
Originally Posted by botstein
What makes you believe Push will be locked to Ableton, or that that they have any secret goals?
Why would they be interested to make this to work with other DAWs? Or NI products? I'm sure clever end users will MIDI map the controller to various other DAW functions but don't expect anything like Automap from Ableton.
Ervin Calvery
30.10.2012
Originally Posted by ksandvik
With Push you are most likely locked to Ableton Live as your main DAW which is the secret goal of Ableton. While many of us producers want more flexibility.
What makes you believe Push will be locked to Ableton, or that that they have any secret goals?
Dorie Scelzo
30.10.2012		If you're not done tweaking, you're not ready to mix
Sylvia Greener
30.10.2012
Originally Posted by botstein
As for finishing tracks on Maschine, I don't see how I could, really. Something that seems to show up a lot over at NI's community is "It's thyme for NI to make their own DAW, SERIOUSLY lololololol," and that is really what would be needed in order to finish a track in Maschine, standalone.
ABSOLUTELY!!! +100 there!
Maschine is such a great piece to make musical ideas coming alive but you always come to the point that you quite like what you've got and then want to mix it. You'd like to transfer everything to your DAW but not as bounced audio files! You want to keep every possibility to tweak things! And this is where Maschine is always frustrating...
Ervin Calvery
30.10.2012
Originally Posted by mostapha
That's actually really well thought out, and I agree with their design decision.
Yes, Jesse, Chris and others are really, really, cool to respond to us directly - and made a sweet controller too.

Originally Posted by mostapha
Agreed. Maschine does have it's shortcomings. Using it with any DAW overcomes them pretty much completely. And Live is a great choice because of how it interacts with controllers. Despite their marketing, I don't believe anyone at NI actually intended for tracks to be finished using only Maschine.

I just wrote on another thread about how Ableton + Maschine already has Push-esque coloured scales and such. It's sweet.

As for finishing tracks on Maschine, I don't see how I could, really. Something that seems to show up a lot over at NI's community is "It's thyme for NI to make their own DAW, SERIOUSLY lololololol," and that is really what would be needed in order to finish a track in Maschine, standalone.

Kiyoko Wellisch
02.11.2012		Good thread! I'm very happy to see it sends standard midi. I wonder how the info is sent to the LCD.
Ervin Calvery
01.11.2012		https://community .ableton.com/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=186306

Jesse answers a lot of questions here.
Dorie Scelzo
01.11.2012
Originally Posted by RockingClub
Everyone who wants do ditch Maschine now never REALLY used Maschine in my opinion.
Agreed. It is pretty cool. And I believe it might have some advantages over Maschine for certain types of working/believeing. But I could be wrong just from that video.

At any rate, I'm not ditching my Maschine. It fills what I need it for better than Live does.
Ervin Calvery
01.11.2012
Originally Posted by ApplianceTyrant
With M4L the pads can have poly aftertouch.
How is this done? midiselect -> touchout? Is it as simple as assigning notes to the channel aftertouch of individual channels?

Originally Posted by ApplianceTyrant
Where are you getting you're info on the midi resolution on these controllers?
My information is from tech specs on ableton.com and correspondance with Jesse (the Push project lead at Ableton) Chris, who is also colourblind to some extent and answered some of my questions about using Push with it. Jesse, Chris, David, and others are active on the Ableton community , which is also really excellent.

Originally Posted by ApplianceTyrant
(Not saying you're lying, just genuinely curious.)
I sincerely appreciate the distinction.
Iraida Bonaventure
01.11.2012
Originally Posted by botstein
The pads on Push are much lower resolution, have no poly aftertouch, and are significantly smaller...
With M4L the pads can have poly aftertouch. Where are you getting you're info on the midi resolution on these controllers? (Not saying you're lying, just genuinely curious.)
Evia Nitch
01.11.2012		I'm not ditching it at all. I was really happy with it.

I'm a starter, so I started with Maschine. After I've mastered it I can start looking for a DAW and have another learning curve. Seems to me the push may lead to results a bit faster. But hey, I committed to my maschine, and the learning curve means I have time to save for the Push...
Sylvia Greener
01.11.2012		Everyone who wants do ditch Maschine now never REALLY used Maschine in my opinion.
Ervin Calvery
31.10.2012		I'm not getting rid of my new Maschine. It will play nice with Push.
Evia Nitch
31.10.2012		Why do I want this so much? I have never opened ableton.

I was SO happy with my new Maschine....now they ruined it.....
Kiyoko Wellisch
30.10.2012		I really really want this controller, just not with ableton. Maybe if I wish really hard some code wizard will make a plugin for renoise that gets it all working nicely. (yeah right)
Dorie Scelzo
30.10.2012
Originally Posted by ksandvik
With Push you are most likely locked to Ableton Live as your main DAW which is the secret goal of Ableton. While many of us producers want more flexibility.
It doesn't seem so secret to me.

Besides, the business model works.
Celine Surico
30.10.2012
Originally Posted by botstein
What makes you believe Push will be locked to Ableton, or that that they have any secret goals?
Why would they be interested to make this to work with other DAWs? Or NI products? I'm sure clever end users will MIDI map the controller to various other DAW functions but don't expect anything like Automap from Ableton.
Ervin Calvery
30.10.2012
Originally Posted by ksandvik
With Push you are most likely locked to Ableton Live as your main DAW which is the secret goal of Ableton. While many of us producers want more flexibility.
What makes you believe Push will be locked to Ableton, or that that they have any secret goals?
Celine Surico
30.10.2012		With Push you are most likely locked to Ableton Live as your main DAW which is the secret goal of Ableton. While many of us producers want more flexibility.
Dorie Scelzo
30.10.2012		If you're not done tweaking, you're not ready to mix
Sylvia Greener
30.10.2012
Originally Posted by botstein
As for finishing tracks on Maschine, I don't see how I could, really. Something that seems to show up a lot over at NI's community is "It's thyme for NI to make their own DAW, SERIOUSLY lololololol," and that is really what would be needed in order to finish a track in Maschine, standalone.
ABSOLUTELY!!! +100 there!
Maschine is such a great piece to make musical ideas coming alive but you always come to the point that you quite like what you've got and then want to mix it. You'd like to transfer everything to your DAW but not as bounced audio files! You want to keep every possibility to tweak things! And this is where Maschine is always frustrating...
Ervin Calvery
30.10.2012
Originally Posted by mostapha
That's actually really well thought out, and I agree with their design decision.
Yes, Jesse, Chris and others are really, really, cool to respond to us directly - and made a sweet controller too.

Originally Posted by mostapha
Agreed. Maschine does have it's shortcomings. Using it with any DAW overcomes them pretty much completely. And Live is a great choice because of how it interacts with controllers. Despite their marketing, I don't believe anyone at NI actually intended for tracks to be finished using only Maschine.

I just wrote on another thread about how Ableton + Maschine already has Push-esque coloured scales and such. It's sweet.

As for finishing tracks on Maschine, I don't see how I could, really. Something that seems to show up a lot over at NI's community is "It's thyme for NI to make their own DAW, SERIOUSLY lololololol," and that is really what would be needed in order to finish a track in Maschine, standalone.

Dorie Scelzo
30.10.2012		That thing looks incredible. I'm going to have to play one at some point………I really like Maschine+Pro Tools, but if I get a chance to play on one, I could see this being an upgrade (and moving to Live+PT……'cuz I just can't give up PT for audio).

Originally Posted by BestLegsinHD
found this on the ableton community s in response to encoder/lcd screen placement:
We thought a lot about this, and had many debates. You can't win completely either way -- when the encoders are under the screen, you can't see the screen when sitting down, because the encoder and your hand block the viewing angle to the display. We mocked up both and took the one we thought did best in both sitting and standing positions.

A second influence was that we wanted the buttons beneath the display to interact with the display (i.e. the buttons are used to select devices, mute tracks, etc.). We could have put the buttons above the display, but this would have lead to a much larger unit, as you'd need a PCB above the display, and below, and a PCB board requires room above/below it. As is, we were able to make sure Push fits in your backpack.

Jesse
(Project Manager for Push)
That's actually really well thought out, and I agree with their design decision.

Originally Posted by botstein
I'm not too quick to defend Maschine. I have templates and such up on here for it, most of which use Live to overcome Maschine's shortcomings.
Agreed. Maschine does have it's shortcomings. Using it with any DAW overcomes them pretty much completely. And Live is a great choice because of how it interacts with controllers. Despite their marketing, I don't believe anyone at NI actually intended for tracks to be finished using only Maschine.

Originally Posted by botstein
The pads on Push are much lower resolution, have no poly aftertouch, and are significantly smaller. The mkii's pads are really fantastic. Push looks beautiful but I'm not put at ease by its being engineered by Akai. The MPC Renaissance made me sad, and I'm afraid I won't be playing any MPCs this decade. I honestly believe that one needs to play and instrument before he or she can decide which blows away which.
Agreed. Wholeheartedly. I know of a few working producers who started using Maschine as a coaster when the MPC Renaissance was annoucned. To my knowledge, they also hosted Akai events to play with the thing before it was released. And none of them have bought it.
Ervin Calvery
28.10.2012
Originally Posted by ApplianceTyrant
IMO, it blows away Maschine.
I'm not too quick to defend Maschine. I have templates and such up on here for it, most of which use Live to overcome Maschine's shortcomings.

The pads on Push are much lower resolution, have no poly aftertouch, and are significantly smaller. The mkii's pads are really fantastic. Push looks beautiful but I'm not put at ease by its being engineered by Akai. The MPC Renaissance made me sad, and I'm afraid I won't be playing any MPCs this decade. I honestly believe that one needs to play and instrument before he or she can decide which blows away which.

One detail that applies to about seven percent of men (including myself) is just how well any colour-feedback device works for those with deuteranomaly or other types anomalous trichromatic vision. Because of the way the lights on the mkII happen to be implemented, I can distinguish between 11 different colours (it must be out of 16) on it, and the original Maschine is just orange blue (for once). I was surprised, as the ads on NI's website appeared (to me) to have only four colours. The APC40, which I also have, is miserable - the lights all appear white to me. The Ren is even worse - with the lights off, it appears the same as the APC to me, and with the lights on, it doesn't seem to have any feedback at all.
Sylvia Greener
28.10.2012
Originally Posted by Scaper7
While a lot is made of Maschine's workflow I find the sequencer tedious compared to working in Live. Piecing arrangements together out of scenes, where every one bar fill requires creating a seperate scene and pattern is not my idea of creative workflow at all.
Exactly, that's the point. In the music stuff I produce a lot of uplifter, downshifter FX and special FX are used. To work with them in Maschine and getting them integrated into the musical arrangement is quite hard with Maschine's pattern based kind of working. Some (let's say 4) additional audio tracks (e.g. as additional groups I to L) would really be a game-changer!
Emanuel Kepics
28.10.2012
Originally Posted by RockingClub
I'm still believeing if it also does for me. I still like the workflow of Maschine and its sound library a lot! I believe it wouldn't be easy to abstain from this.
On the other hand, I am not really happy with the integration of Maschine in the DAW. Having to bounce out all the elements and midi clips (seperately) to be able to rearrange everything in the DAW really interrupts my creative workflow...
Yes Maschine is nice, but I suspect Push has the potential to easily cover the same ground. Same as you, I find restrictions working within the Maschine architecture. It wouldn't take much ... a nice collection of Maschine-esque kits in a Live Pack a few clever M4L patches and I suspect my Maschine will be relegated to Traktor MIDI control duties. While a lot is made of Maschine's workflow I find the sequencer tedious compared to working in Live. Piecing arrangements together out of scenes, where every one bar fill requires creating a seperate scene and pattern is not my idea of creative workflow at all.
Michell Wehrmeyer
28.10.2012
Originally Posted by Destiny
Man, that is actually a really good job from Ableton, they're stepping up. I guess this one will battle the Maschine if it all works well. Not sure if I want to ditch my Maschine for it though. And the combined price of
Sylvia Greener
28.10.2012
Originally Posted by ApplianceTyrant
IMO, it blows away Maschine.
I'm still believeing if it also does for me. I still like the workflow of Maschine and its sound library a lot! I believe it wouldn't be easy to abstain from this.
On the other hand, I am not really happy with the integration of Maschine in the DAW. Having to bounce out all the elements and midi clips (seperately) to be able to rearrange everything in the DAW really interrupts my creative workflow...
Iraida Bonaventure
27.10.2012		Mostly production.

Notice all the new features in version 9. Notice how many would directly benefit the DJ...

Not too many, maybe the enhanced browser.

But back on topic, Push looks like a really well thought out controller/instrument. IMO, it blows away Maschine, especially considering the fully featured DAW it's driving.
Ervin Calvery
27.10.2012		Both
Alena Horten
27.10.2012		Not too familiar with Ableton. Is this geared towards producing or DJing?
Chasidy Heckenbach
27.10.2012		wow.... a heap load of velocity sensitive with after touch drum pads with knobs and lcd's damn this looks cool... guess i've been out of the loop for a while as i didn't even know they had announced a live9
Estrella Rozzo
27.10.2012		Man, that is actually a really good job from Ableton, they're stepping up. I guess this one will battle the Maschine if it all works well. Not sure if I want to ditch my Maschine for it though. And the combined price of
Rolanda Clodfelder
26.10.2012
found this on the ableton community s in response to encoder/lcd screen placement:
We thought a lot about this, and had many debates. You can't win completely either way -- when the encoders are under the screen, you can't see the screen when sitting down, because the encoder and your hand block the viewing angle to the display. We mocked up both and took the one we thought did best in both sitting and standing positions.

A second influence was that we wanted the buttons beneath the display to interact with the display (i.e. the buttons are used to select devices, mute tracks, etc.). We could have put the buttons above the display, but this would have lead to a much larger unit, as you'd need a PCB above the display, and below, and a PCB board requires room above/below it. As is, we were able to make sure Push fits in your backpack.

Jesse
(Project Manager for Push)
Nice of them to even reply to this .. not often designers/managers are so clear and up front about such decisions (with the exception of n3m0nic :P )
Bunny Sockel
26.10.2012		selling the s4 and getting this hellooooo push
Laurel Litchko
26.10.2012		found this on the ableton community s in response to encoder/lcd screen placement:
We thought a lot about this, and had many debates. You can't win completely either way -- when the encoders are under the screen, you can't see the screen when sitting down, because the encoder and your hand block the viewing angle to the display. We mocked up both and took the one we thought did best in both sitting and standing positions.

A second influence was that we wanted the buttons beneath the display to interact with the display (i.e. the buttons are used to select devices, mute tracks, etc.). We could have put the buttons above the display, but this would have lead to a much larger unit, as you'd need a PCB above the display, and below, and a PCB board requires room above/below it. As is, we were able to make sure Push fits in your backpack.

Jesse
(Project Manager for Push)

<< Back to Reviews of DJ equipment Reply
  • Page:
  • 1
  • 2
  • >>
  • Total: 55

Copyright 2012-2023
DJRANKINGS.ORG n.g.o.
Chuo-ku, Osaka, Japan

Created by Ajaxel CMS

Terms & Privacy