What is Maschine 3.0 for?
Comments
-
This will not necessarily be true. Take sound saving for example, on the M+ it is trivial to save a sound directly on the hardware, whereas I still do not know how to do the same in Maschine desktop with my MK3 controller.
Same goes for "Save as.." function, on the Maschine desktop I need to turn to the computer and use the computer keyboard, whereas I do not need to do it on the M+ standalone. This means that the "controller UI" is already slightly different in certain areas on standalone vs desktop, and I see no reason why such distinctions could not grow further going forward..
3 -
For me the power of the Maschine platform is the seamless integration of hardware (in my case the mk3 controller) and the software. I don't have to look at the computer screen, and work with the mk3 like it's a hardware device. This is exactly the reason why I sold the Push2, and don't use the Push1, because it still requires me to do a lot with the software.
The moment I cannot use the MK3 controller "as standalone hardware" anymore, ie losing the seamless integration, i'm off the Maschine platform, because then it has no added value/USP for me anymore.2 -
Reading this thread the flavour I'm getting is that the Maschine 3.0 software is moving further away from a link to hardware, which is in stark contrast to what has happened to the Kontrol S-Series MK3 keyboards - they have become far more controlling than their software counterpart Komplete Kontrol.
1 -
It might be to get a Lockstate Lane with transition options in the Song-Arranger hopefully.
1 -
Imagine being able to do completely with M+...I always wonder if I'm the only one who would see the idea of using one of the M+'s two screens, to be able to view the spectrum (of Master/Group/Sound) while also using a simple LPF.
Maybe it was also multiband like this Hornet Multifreqs to ensure that people like me who don't have a trained ear can help themselves with their eyes in the early mixing stages.
0 -
Absolutely, changes and new features are really a Win-Win for all.
0 -
I get your point, you shouldn’t NEED the controller, and the mouse is faster but I don’t see why they don’t just give the user an option? It’s still a win win, use the mouse if you want, and controller users who want a hands on feel are also satisfied.
It’s more so for consistent feature parity and will not threaten to fracture the workflow. We’re talking about basic midi editing tools here, they should be able to be executed from the hardware, especially when everything else is so well thought out it seems logical
0 -
I too would like to be able to fully finish tracks within Maschine, to be able to both compose them and mix/produce them within the Maschine environment. However, the Maschine software just isn’t remotely ready to compete with Ableton, Logic Pro, Cubase, Pro Tools, Luna and the many, many other DAWs out there. Both paid and free.
However one aspect where it has got the production side right is in its ability to integrate the hardware into the process. Being able to control faders and plugins directly with the Maschine hardware gives a far more hands on, creative feel to mixing and production than moving a mouse around. It just feels more musical. And it makes things like laying down automation both more musical and more fun (although editing that automation afterwards is no fun at all in Maschine).
So I’d say, if NI want Maschine the Software to become some kind of NI DAW, then actually integrating it more with the hardware (ie Maschine and their keyboards) becomes both creatively valuable and commercially important.
And that choice, to be the best controlling software for the Maschine hardware or mutate into the NI DAW is what this thread is all about.
But if I was going to go down the DAW with hardware route I probably wouldn’t start here.0 -
I think that the Maschine + is right at the heart of this question. It is, essentially a £1,000+ instrument, which I’d expect to have a lifespan and usefulness of, say, a similarly priced guitar or mixing console.
And I would expect it to function in the same way that the Maschine hardware did. So I would hope that all the features that work on the Mk3 would also work on the M+. And with the 3.0 update, I can’t see why stem separation, bouncing and Scene Tempo shouldn’t make it straight to the M+ as these are already integrated into the Mk3. And the M+ will be better with all of these features.But the heart of this discussion is embodied by the M+. If Maschine 3.0 is all about improving the ‘Maschine’ experience, then everything is portable to the M+. If 3.0 is about creating something that exists beyond the hardware, then the M+ risks getting left behind.
2 -
I still do not get the point on this??
If you have a Maschine MK3 OR Mikro, you also need a Loptop or PC/Mac, and there you also have a mouse a big screen. Maschine 3 SW now comes with keyboard shortcuts, so the SW can be used without any Maschine or Kontrol S HW, wich is very nice for people that only have a Mikro but want a faster workflow.
If you have Maschine+, you can connect it to a computer/laptop, use Maschine 3 SW and do everything there.
And do not forget, the new Firmware for M+ with Maschine 3 is not yet published, but will come soon and will probably include all features possible.0 -
I think this is a really interesting discussion to have because many have DAW expectations of Maschine and that's for me really besides the point. For me it's an amazing idea generation and performance tool and that's where the focus for the product should be IMO.
The biggest struggles that I have had and keep having with the product is how to take those ideas and finish them elsewhere. I have worked in a range of different ways and none of them are completely satisfactory and I guess I keep working with Maschine because the idea generation there is such a big part of my workflow and really really gratifying.
I have for instance worked just exporting audio and I have worked with intricate MIDI routings into Ableton. The audio export is great, sometimes, but often I want to retain the ability to keep editing MIDI. The MIDI routings take a long time to make, and it took me months to figure out how to best support my workflow in Ableton. It still isn't perfect, but that's where I've landed.
I guess what I am getting at is that if NI wants to support Maschine as an idea generating tool it would be great if you would put some more work into the integration into other software. I don't have a lot of suggestions and I don't think there's easy solutions, but I would really wish that the MIDI routing was much more drag and drop out of the box instead of hours of tinkering and routing. I am thinking a lot of users out there with less patience than me have simply given up getting it to work inside their DAW of choice, this should be much much simpler.
One thing that still frustrates me to bits for instance is that after I have exported MIDI to Ableton and I want to go back into Maschine to record a new MIDI bit to export, when I start recording the controller jumps around and rerecords all the MIDI it receives from Ableton, I really wish you easily could disable recording of all incoming MIDI from the DAW.
1 -
What is the point?
The point is, What is Maschine 3.0 for?Is it intended to increase the functionality of the Maschine hardware, allowing me to do more things with the hardware, or is it intended to be some post-hardware software that isn’t remotely as good as the DAW I’ve been using for years?
If Maschine is to become some dis-integrated music software (which is the choice NI has to make), it needs to have a UI that at least pretends to recognise screens from this century, an interface I can scale, a sample list column that I can expand to actually show the full sample name, a mixer that isn’t 60 pixels in height and which, again, I can expand if I choose, proper mouseover scrolling like every other interface on my computer and automation that is vaguely usable. And, ideally, I’d still like it to be controllable from Maschine. Otherwise I’ll just use a DAW that has these basic features instead.3 -
I agree on the challenge of integrating Maschine into DAWs. I’ve done it with Logic and Ableton and they were both different.
I think the easiest thing for NI (or even us) to do would be to share the templates we’ve made. That way it’s easier for people to use their Maschines within their chosen DAW.
And, ideally this gets accompanied by some well prepared documentation that explains what has gone on so people know how to use them effectively.
0 -
I could definitely share the Ableton project I have where each Maschine group is mapped to a drum rack. I wish someone would make a Max4Live device that would take the pain out of the Maschine routing in Ableton
1 -
What those complaining about the new functionality (mouse based features) seem to be missing is that no existing integration with the Maschine controllers has been removed.
All the hardware control you had and loved when you bought it, is still there.
There's just some new stuff in the software that's (currently) mouse only. It doesn't prevent you from doing all the things you could do before. It's now making itself even more useful, giving people what they asked for.
4
Categories
- All Categories
- 19 Welcome
- 1.5K Hangout
- 62 NI News
- 785 Tech Talks
- 4.1K Native Access
- 16.6K Komplete
- 2K Komplete General
- 4.3K Komplete Kontrol
- 5.7K Kontakt
- 1.6K Reaktor
- 379 Battery 4
- 846 Guitar Rig & FX
- 429 Massive X & Synths
- 1.3K Other Software & Hardware
- 5.8K Maschine
- 7.3K Traktor
- 7.3K Traktor Software & Hardware
- Check out everything you can do
- Create an account
- See member benefits
- Answer questions
- Ask the community
- See product news
- Connect with creators