Trying my best

[Jay Vaughan]

> It took me a while to get on with live, but I persisted because it
> *seemed* like what I had been looking for.  I am glad I spent the time
> with it I did.
>

live really rocks when you pair it with faderfox boxes.  without such  
external hardware, for me, i found that live is a bit too mousey/ 
clicky at first, and its hard to not find yourself stuck in the rut  
for wanting to do things all mousey/clicky, but when you've got an  
external interface for recording new clips, playing/triggering them,  
mixing/etc., it makes the whole process of recording new stuff into  
clips and then recording your live-in-the-mix as an arrangement much  
more intuitive.

but you know what i like better than live right now?  seq24.

yes, its not nearly as oomphy, but the work flow just plain kicks  
ass.  you start a jamm session with an empty grid and before you know  
it, you've got all kinds of great variations and parts to trigger and  
tweak with, live and in the mix, and the interface really promotes a  
workflow where you end up knowing what you're doing, and what you've  
already done.

i think its really a lot more fun in many ways to build up a set of  
clips with seq24 than it is with live, if only because the seq24 clip  
grid gives you a grander overview/perspective of what you've created  
in the session.  i find myself continually clicking around in the  
live clip grid to find out what grids are what, musically-wise, and  
this is an offline process that doesn't do much for my musicability,  
but with seq24 i can just see the base materials intuitively, even  
while playing on some other part.  if you want a bit of a kick in the  
pants, set up seq24 and give it a whirl .. honest.  there is a  
dynamic concurrency with the workflow of seq24 that isn't quite there  
with live, yet ..

;
--
Jay Vaughan