max for live | xltronic messageboard
 
You are not logged in!

F.A.Q
Log in

Register
  
 
  
 
(nobody)
...and 288 guests

Last 5 registered
Oplandisks
nothingstar
N_loop
yipe
foxtrotromeo

Browse members...
  
 
Members 8025
Messages 2613474
Today 0
Topics 127502
  
 
Messageboard index
max for live
 

offline sadist from the dark side of the moon on 2009-11-25 08:16 [#02346809]
Points: 8670 Status: Lurker



out now

didn't see a topic about it before.

i for myself am very excited although i haven't used max a
lot before simply being used to reaktor 5 and not really
needing anything else.

but what i hated about reaktor 5 + ableton was binding them
together - either over virtual midi cables, or as a vst that
was a highly inconvenient task. i like the fact that now i
can open up an ableton track and having everything in it
ready after launch.


 

offline Fah from Netherlands, The on 2009-11-25 08:19 [#02346810]
Points: 6428 Status: Regular | Followup to sadist: #02346809



i am looking forward to this, been having some max/msp
classes lately


 

offline Advocate on 2009-11-25 08:29 [#02346811]
Points: 3319 Status: Lurker



this has enormous potential, that's for sure.


 

offline Advocate on 2009-11-25 08:32 [#02346813]
Points: 3319 Status: Lurker



like said in the youtube comments, this could be the only
daw you need.


 

offline sadist from the dark side of the moon on 2009-11-25 08:32 [#02346814]
Points: 8670 Status: Lurker | Followup to Advocate: #02346811



for a few yeah. although i expect just a few people really
being able to do good stuff with it. the same thing with
every "groundbreaking" thinking - monome etc.

for me personally this is something very awesome because i'm
a lot into building midi stuff and instead of having to
reprogram the unit itself i will be able to do various stuff
right in ableton.

i just hope that this will be cpu friendly.


 

offline sadist from the dark side of the moon on 2009-11-25 08:34 [#02346815]
Points: 8670 Status: Lurker



not cracked yet... crap


 

offline Advocate on 2009-11-25 08:39 [#02346818]
Points: 3319 Status: Lurker | Followup to sadist: #02346814



yeah, max is really difficult and time consuming, but it
might be more fun and/or user friendly to play with it
inside live. we'll see.


 

offline Terence Hill from Germany on 2009-11-25 08:40 [#02346820]
Points: 2070 Status: Lurker



it's nice, but a bit of a rip-off innit?

you won't be able to share patches if i understand correctly
- that is you can share them, but they can only be used by
people who also own both Live & M4L. All i'd ever need from
M4L is an OSC wrapper (which probably will be built by
someone really soon) to have complete access to the Live API
from within e.g. Processing, but i'm not going to pay 300
Euros for that.


 

offline hedphukkerr from mathbotton (United States) on 2009-11-25 08:40 [#02346821]
Points: 8833 Status: Regular



yeah if i'm not mistaken max has always had very good copy
protection. i'd expect to wait a while.

but yeah, the things that are coming out specifically for
ableton right now are strongly solidifying it as the daw of
choice for anyone.

a buddy of mine has the new APC and it is amazing how easily
you can get around the software just with that controller
without any custom bindings or anything. it completely
turned around his workflow and now he cranks out like 2
tracks a week.


 

offline Terence Hill from Germany on 2009-11-25 08:49 [#02346828]
Points: 2070 Status: Lurker | Followup to hedphukkerr: #02346821



these dedicated controllers are fun.... i've got a
Launchpad, not using it with Live directly though.. it's
very limited in the standard intended usage, but also made
for being customized for M4L things and usable with anything
through MIDI. It's all very nice, extended midi manipulation
has been really lacking in Live, and now it's out, great.
But these fuckers are just asking too much money.


 

offline sadist from the dark side of the moon on 2009-11-25 11:35 [#02346870]
Points: 8670 Status: Lurker



i don't know. i tried to implement controllers and different
approaches into my workflow but i just always ended up just
using the mouse and fruity loops for best effect. on the
other hand maybe that's why my music is so freaking cold.

on the other hand, when it comes to playing live i always
tried to get the most out of reaktor and different
controllers and make some nice setup.



 

offline Indeksical from Phobiazero Damage Control (United Kingdom) on 2009-11-25 14:42 [#02346900]
Points: 10671 Status: Regular | Show recordbag



I have a jitter related max/msp question. Will any of you be
able to answer it for me?


 

offline Terence Hill from Germany on 2009-11-25 14:50 [#02346902]
Points: 2070 Status: Lurker | Followup to Indeksical: #02346900



maybe a little


 

offline sadist from the dark side of the moon on 2009-11-25 14:50 [#02346903]
Points: 8670 Status: Lurker



not me for sure


 

offline cygnus from nowhere and everyplace on 2009-11-25 15:02 [#02346908]
Points: 11920 Status: Regular



i want operator


 

offline Indeksical from Phobiazero Damage Control (United Kingdom) on 2009-11-25 15:11 [#02346911]
Points: 10671 Status: Regular | Show recordbag



Right I'm working on a music visualiser which takes the pc
audio signal and manipulates various video elements in time
with the sound.

The patch is set up as follows

9 videos loaded in jit.qt.movie objects which go to
jit.chromakey objects where they all get loaded on top of
each other then are output to a jit.gl.videoplane and
jit.window

my problem is with the frame rate. I have re-rendered the
source videos as 640 x 480 photo-jpeg .mov's, tried loading
them in to ram and asyncreading etc etc etc but I still
can't get a frame rate higher than about 12 fps.

Any ideas? I'm on pc by the way and converting to UVYV and
back just seems to fuck up the video window (but I'm
probably doing it wrong). Any ideas on optimisation?


 

offline Terence Hill from Germany on 2009-11-25 15:44 [#02346917]
Points: 2070 Status: Lurker | Followup to Indeksical: #02346911



dunno rly. try to localize the problem, like play back the
videos normally, what fps do you get etc... intuitively i'd
say the it's the source video files' compression.


 

offline Indeksical from Phobiazero Damage Control (United Kingdom) on 2009-11-25 15:48 [#02346920]
Points: 10671 Status: Regular | Show recordbag



Source video files are optimally compressed for max
playback. I could get maybe 1 or 2 fps extra using that
apple codec whose name I don't remember. I think it might be
the number of videos running simultaneously. They run far
faster in movie and imovie objects but of course these can't
be connected to jitter objects and so are ultimately
useless. The videos are only 12 frames long so it might be
time to convert them to big grid jpegs are and using fpic or
whatever and seeing how that pans out.

groovy.


 


Messageboard index