Ableton’s 2nd controller out-NONE from MOTU?

toodamnhip · Post by **toodamnhip** » Sun Nov 22, 2015 5:29 pm

I see that Abelton has released it’s SECOND version of a controller for it’s DAW. This is a young company, and DP is one of the original great DAWs.
MOTU, having made hardware for at least a decade, and after being begged by us users for years, has yet to make it’s own hardware controller.
Why is this?
I also see a recent poll where DP is ranked well behind Ableton, coming in at # 10 in popularity. (though the poll might not be 100% accurate, DP is often lagging in such polls and some manufacturers omit DP altogether in their ads).

I love DP, but it appears that Ableton has the right idea. A younger company already on it’s second controller and none from MOTU for dp after all these years!
What say you?

FMiguelez · Post by **FMiguelez** » Sun Nov 22, 2015 5:34 pm

Are you asking us to speculate?
You do realize that's all you'll get, right?

Maybe Ableton is "better" after all?

toodamnhip · Post by **toodamnhip** » Sun Nov 22, 2015 5:54 pm

FMiguelez wrote:Are you asking us to speculate?
You do realize that's all you'll get, right?

Maybe Ableton is "better" after all?

I’m hoping to get an intelligent conversation that MOTU reads to see what users think of this? Many of us have asked for a DP controller. In working with a variety of companies, it has become clear to me that DP has a variety of under the hood quirks, (as do most DAWs, but DP seems to have more than some). So who better to make a control surface?
I think business often equates to MONEY. So, my speculation is that MOTU does’t think it profitable to make a control surface. (no one turns down money).
Yet MOTU obviously has a hardware dept churning out annual products.
Is DPs market share not large enough to make profit from a control surface?
Who knows.

But I do not like seeing such a young company as Ableton on it’s SECOND controller when the old standby DP has yet to make one.
Forum members do not have to “speculate" by the way. They can also chime in that they WANT one and let their voices be heard.
I wonder if 500 members all added a “+1” here, if MOTU would pay attention?
It is getting old relying on “others’ to make control surfaces. James had to dig up a programmer to update drivers just to get ONE fader for his set up. Slate just supported DP in it’s surface, but I am not sold on glass screen controllers, (though it is a nice thing to have available). I am using Artist mix stuff with various disabilities in it but it’s till worth using.
I would buy a DP control surface in a heartbeat.

kgdrum · Post by **kgdrum** » Sun Nov 22, 2015 6:14 pm

Yes TDH it would be nice if Motu made a DP-centric hardware controller but from a manufacturing standpoint imo even if 1000 DP users bought this initially it wouldn't cover the R&D and manufacturing $$ to cover what it would cost to create this.
Ableton probably has a bigger market share as they are very popular with the home studio,DJ and Electronica markets.
Regardless Motu makes hardware products because an IO can work with any DAW not just DP.
To make a hardware controller that would be potentially profitable imo it would have to be made to work with all DAWs and that might be a task that MOTU doesn't want to pursue.
Yeah it would be nice but I'm sure they know more about the cost and inherent problems than you or any user might realize.

toodamnhip · Post by **toodamnhip** » Sun Nov 22, 2015 6:31 pm

kgdrum wrote:Yes TDH it would be nice if Motu made a DP-centric hardware controller but from a manufacturing standpoint imo even if 1000 DP users bought this initially it wouldn't cover the R&D and manufacturing $$ to cover what it would cost to create this.
Ableton probably has a bigger market share as they are very popular with the home studio,DJ and Electronica markets.
Regardless Motu makes hardware products because an IO can work with any DAW not just DP.
To make a hardware controller that would be potentially profitable imo it would have to be made to work with all DAWs and that might be a task that MOTU doesn't want to pursue.
Yeah it would be nice but I'm sure they know more about the cost and inherent problems than you or any user might realize.

That’s a fair argument. OK, so let the controller work with other DAWs too! I’m good.

Michael Canavan · Post by **Michael Canavan** » Sun Nov 22, 2015 10:58 pm

A couple things:
DP was the second company to support Mackie Control, actually DP/MOTU were the first company that usurped Emagic/Logic and their what they thought, was an exclusive arrangement with Mackie.

Mackie Control only works so so with DP IMO, I like a lot of us use V-Racks to host instruments, and aux tracks. I would like to be able to fine tune the basic volume at least, of these with a control surface.

Ableton Live was at first a live performance DAW, it's only recently that they've sold it as a replacement for DP, Logic, Cubase etc. With the performance aspect in mind, control surface manufacturers of course include Live support, and Live is an obvious choice for end users buying the controller Ableton put out in droves. Ableton Push and Push 2 are definitely not separate devices, there isn't even support for running more than one at a time. The amount of users that are trading in their Push 1 for Push 2 is crazy to me. It's $799 and Ableton offer you $240 for your $599 new Push 1... These people are paying roughly $600 twice for this thing. (Disclosure I have a Push 1, but I haven't bit on 2)

All that said I agree with you, MOTU would of course be the best at working with Chunks and V-Rack control without having to work in a single sequence only etc. and I think the numbers might be significantly higher than 1000 as far as purchases if they really hit the mark with the interface. If all it did was Mackie Control level, but you could mix V-Racks with it I would buy in a heartbeat.

toodamnhip · Post by **toodamnhip** » Mon Nov 23, 2015 12:33 am

Michael Canavan wrote:A couple things:
DP was the second company to support Mackie Control, actually DP/MOTU were the first company that usurped Emagic/Logic and their what they thought, was an exclusive arrangement with Mackie.

Mackie Control only works so so with DP IMO, I like a lot of us use V-Racks to host instruments, and aux tracks. I would like to be able to fine tune the basic volume at least, of these with a control surface.

Ableton Live was at first a live performance DAW, it's only recently that they've sold it as a replacement for DP, Logic, Cubase etc. With the performance aspect in mind, control surface manufacturers of course include Live support, and Live is an obvious choice for end users buying the controller Ableton put out in droves. Ableton Push and Push 2 are definitely not separate devices, there isn't even support for running more than one at a time. The amount of users that are trading in their Push 1 for Push 2 is crazy to me. It's $799 and Ableton offer you $240 for your $599 new Push 1... These people are paying roughly $600 twice for this thing. (Disclosure I have a Push 1, but I haven't bit on 2)

All that said I agree with you, MOTU would of course be the best at working with Chunks and V-Rack control without having to work in a single sequence only etc. and I think the numbers might be significantly higher than 1000 as far as purchases if they really hit the mark with the interface. If all it did was Mackie Control level, but you could mix V-Racks with it I would buy in a heartbeat.

wonderful, more of this conversation is what is needed. Thank you very much

YouTube · Post by **James Steele** » Mon Nov 23, 2015 12:51 am

Okay... I thought we covered this. This goes into the "OT/MOTU Theoretical" section because this is more of a criticism of MOTU as a company and its strategy. (Big surprise.) Moved.

toodamnhip · Post by **toodamnhip** » Mon Nov 23, 2015 1:36 am

I get confused because I see “criticism” in the title of the section of the forum I placed this in and this is criticism. I guess you mean DESIGN criticism?

I have no problem with wherever you put these threads. But maybe that other section shouldn’t say “criticism”?
You don’t have to explain yourself though. I am not trying to give you a hard time. People usually “view new posts” anyway and these sections make less of a difference in that case anyway. I would like to put it in the RIGHT section if I can. So if it makes your job easier, explain the difference so I don’t make work for you.

daniel.sneed · Post by **daniel.sneed** » Mon Nov 23, 2015 2:39 am

Well, to each his own, I suppose...

For years, my DP controllers have been... a mouse, a computer keyboard, a few master keyboards (mainly Novation - Automap), a few MIDI pedalboards (mainly Keith McMillen - Softstep).

All my past and actual needs have been very well covered with these.
That is to say in studio and on stage.
I sure won't pay $$$s for a dedicated DP controller.

I do understand things may be widely different for musicians deeply involved in electronica and the like. But, IMHO, DP may not be the best choice for them, either.

AFAICT, in DAW world, there's no one-size-fits-all.
And I must say I'm very pleased, and efficient, with DP.

YouTube · Post by **James Steele** » Mon Nov 23, 2015 3:10 am

toodamnhip wrote:I get confused because I see “criticism” in the title of the section of the forum I placed this in and this is criticism. I guess you mean DESIGN criticism?

I have no problem with wherever you put these threads. But maybe that other section shouldn’t say “criticism”?
You don’t have to explain yourself though. I am not trying to give you a hard time. People usually “view new posts” anyway and these sections make less of a difference in that case anyway. I would like to put it in the RIGHT section if I can. So if it makes your job easier, explain the difference so I don’t make work for you.

Good. You shouldn't have a problem with where I put them. Here's the basics one more time: if you're making general criticism about MOTU... THE COMPANY... in terms of it's product strategy, or lack of a particular product, etc., than that is what I call "MOTU Theoretical"... as in "Why don't they make controller hardware?" This is opposed to very specific "nuts-and-bolts" criticism of a particular piece of software or hardware, for example: "Why doesn't DP allow me to do ______?" Or "I don't care for the sound of the D>A converters in the ________." Your criticism is more about company policy... as in why they don't offer a product you feel they should.

Is that clear enough?

Gravity Jim · Post by **Gravity Jim** » Mon Nov 23, 2015 4:06 pm

I suspect that Raven for DP makes hardware controllers unnecessary, if not obsolete, or will shortly. I had some second thoughts about my Raven, but mostly about whether or not I actually require a control surface beyond keyboard and mouse... if you want one, there's no reason to be restricted by hardware when this software will grow and improve over time and puts virtually no restrictions on how you interact with your DAW.

YouTube · Post by **James Steele** » Mon Nov 23, 2015 8:10 pm

Let's not make this personal. If people care they can read and participate in this topic. If they don't, they can just ignore it.

Gravity Jim · Post by **Gravity Jim** » Mon Nov 23, 2015 10:20 pm

Agreed. Apologies, James.

Babz · Post by **Babz** » Fri Nov 27, 2015 8:12 pm

Ableton Live has always been about live clip launching, groove construction, something used by DJs in live performance. This is why there is a veritable cottage industry of integrated hardware controllers with colorful pads, made numerous third parties (Novation, Akai, etc.) in addition to Ableton's own Push controller. These are mostly about controlling Live's "Session" environment.

DP started life as more of a tape machine + mixer replacement. It has no function like Ableton's Session View, so I don't really see much purpose for a hardware controller like Push for DP. Instead of developing a hardware controller, I'd rather see more Ableton-like software features (better integrated virtual instruments and sampler, loop browser, groove, grid and loop features, absolute grid snapping, high-quality flexible pitch and time...) Today's DAW needs to be as much about sparking and developing grooves, ideas and arrangements, as it is simply recording preconceived or composed material. The program is, after all, called "Performer," not "Recorder."

Once we get more of that, then maybe a hardware clip launcher starts to make sense.

MOTUnation.com