http://createdigitalmusic.com/images/2009/09/mackie820i_thumb.jpg”>

It’s long been the case that if you wanted to run Pro Tools, you needed hardware from Digidesign. That’s why it was a surprise when Mackie announced new audio interface-mixer hardware that they said they had made work with Pro Tools M-Powered, which previously worked only with M-Audio gear. Digidesign parent Avid had made statements that they would champion “openness,” but it wasn’t clear at the time if that would extent to allowing third-party gear to work with Avid’s software crown jewels.

We get our answer today from LOUD. There is a catch – you’ll have to pay extra for the connection – but it does seem that the two will work together.

LOUD Technologies Inc. (parent company of Mackie®) today announced it has signed an agreement with Avid® that licenses the use of Mackie’s new Onyx™-i Series Firewire Recording Mixers with Avid Pro Tools® M-Powered™ 8 software.

To enable use with Pro Tools M-Powered 8, users will need to purchase the Mackie Universal Driver upgrade ($49.99 USD) at www.mackie.com. Once the driver is downloaded and installed, the Onyx 820i, 1220i, 1620i and 1640i mixers can be used with Avid Pro Tools M-Powered 8 software.

Of course, I imagine all of this prompts a collective eye roll from some of Avid’s competitors, since DAWs from MOTU, Cakewalk, Apple, Ableton, Steinberg, and others are all designed to work with a wide range of hardware – no fee-based driver upgrade needed. But for lovers of Pro Tools, this does mean a new choice, and it’s definitely a departure from tradition. If Pro Tools is your favorite DAW, this seems like very good news, as it’s an extremely versatile-looking interface-mixer that fills a gap M-Audio themselves hadn’t filled. Anyone with the new Onyx-i hardware want to let us know if you’re likely to bite?

http://www.mackie.com/onyxiseries

Looking at the monome hardware, it could be difficult to understand how a simple array of buttons has become the most important musical design of the decade. It’s been the software that has brought this to life, not least the work of stretta (aka Matthew Davidson).

In the early days of electronic music, the creation of modular systems for synthesizing sound was a major breakthrough. Today, we can produce modular systems for composition, for assembling the music itself. And in a world in which “more” is the key word, many of these systems, by design, do less, focusing on the essential.

stretta reached a major landmark late last week, with the release of the maxforlive monome suite. It’s a set of seven Max for Live devices, with variations, which can be dropped into Ableton Live for use in musical projects. But it’s also more than that – it’s a modular model for how stretta thinks, and each module is designed to be used with the others, all without ever having to take your hands or eyes off the monome controller. Included in the pack:

• obo matrix step sequencer
• pitches for playing notes on the monome
• polygomé 64 for polyphonic, step-sequenced, transposing pitches
• press cafe for repeating patterns of pitches
• spectral display for blinking lights to visualize sound
• step filter step-sequenced filter bank
• automatorgator MIDI- and audio- and OSC- controllable pattern gate

Details and download link (no explicit license coming yet, but Matthew has promised an open license):

maxforlive monome suite released

I got the chance to talk to Matthew about the project, how he created it, how to approach using it, and what it was like working with Max for Live.

All photos by Matthew Davidson; released under a Creative Commons attribution license. Click the images for full-sized versions.

Drum machines may have no soul, but thanks to an update, Native’s soft drum machine has a lot more meat.

As the year comes to a close, inevitably thoughts turn to writing “best of the year” stories and round-ups. For computer musicians, this year has been dominated by Ableton on one hand and mobile apps on the other. But one of the big software releases of 2009 was also unquestionably Native Instruments’ Maschine. The hardware/software combination returns to some of the traditional drum machine workflows, but in a way that integrates nicely with your software setup. I got to see a prototype while in Berlin in the fall of 2008, and thought it had terrific potential. It’s not that it’s radically different from other things we’ve seen so much as the hardware-software integration, combined with a beautiful implementation and lots of NI sound goodness, made it fun. But, as often happens with 1.0 releases, the first shipping version had some missing pieces – like full-functioning MIDI integration – which could be deal breakers.

1.1 changes that, finally bringing the necessary ingredients to make Maschine an essential part of your music-making process. New features in this version (see video demos from NI after the jump):

• Proper MIDI output: You can use Maschine to output MIDI to play software, and to play hardware. That makes Maschine a powerful sequencer you can drop into any host – including NI’s own KORE, making the KORE + Maschine combination finally workable. And you can use it to sequence that Minimoog Voyager / Sega Mega Drive synth you have lying around.
• Proper MIDI input: Finally, you can trigger Maschine from your host, so you can, say, drop Maschine into Live or Numerology and sequence it.
• MIDI scene switching: In addition to triggering notes/sounds, you can trigger scenes from a host, ideal for recording arrangements.
• Drag-and-drop pattern export: Export patterns as audio into a host by dragging and dropping.
• Metronome and record count-in: Yes, as I’m not a robot, this will help me actually play my patterns live.
• Use REX loops: Propellerheads’ REX remains a standard for pre-sliced audio, making it easy to import your loops.
• Better hardware integration: Navigate and adjust groups, sound volume, panning on the controller, and save files.

Max for Live is now available, fusing the multimedia, visual programming environment of Max/MSP/Jitter with the plug-in hosting and sequencing and clip-launching and recording of Ableton Live. With two complex products interacting, there are plenty of questions to answer. I asked Michael Chenetz, the creator of the online tutorial site and community max4live.info, to tell us what major points we shouldn’t miss.

Here for launch week are Michael’s answers, information on what you get in the box (including videos from Ableton), plus the best video tutorials from Michael’s site to get you oriented in the new tool – and to begin to determine wheterh Max for Live is for you.

Laptop musicians are feeling out of sync — literally. But we can work together to help the situation.

Computer music making can be an isolating experience. But when users try to use their eminently-mobile tools to play together in the same room, they often find that the technology resists. MIDI, as a serial protocol, isn’t designed for networked environments. Software interfaces are designed to be visible to only one user. Sharing between users rarely figures into designs. Input points are made to be single-user only.

And most importantly, just getting a couple of computers to sync can be a Herculean task — one that seems to have gotten worse with advanced computer software rather than better. In short, for all the technology we have today, we’ve actually regressed from the state of interoperability 20 years ago.

I’ve been hearing more and more frustration over sync, as people begin to collaborate with multiple computers as they would with a small ensemble of instruments. Ableton Live is the most frequent example, but it’s only one case – and I suspect part of the fault is that people are more likely to try to sync multiple copies of Live. When I spoke to Depeche Mode’s Martin Gore in the spring for Keyboard, Martin complained that they had trouble syncing his Apple Logic sessions with other band members using Pro Tools and Ableton. This weekend in Los Angeles at the DubSpot sessions, Glitch Mob’s Justin Boreta talked about the issues that group has had with multiple copies of Live.

Synchronization is, by definition, a tough thing to do. But musical engineering is replete with challenges; it’s no longer acceptable to simply say “live with it” and walk away. It seems we need both better shared knowledge about what sync is how to make it work, and better engineering solutions on the software and protocols side to support the way users want to work. And yes, we need a new sync standard that goes beyond what’s presently available in MIDI alone.

Focusing this discussion, I just got an essay in my inbox that I think focuses the issue. I will try to speak to Ableton’s engineers about the matter, but this isn’t really about Ableton alone, so I’m posting it here first. We could use more data about how you’re working with various software and hardware, what techniques you’ve developed, and what frustrations you’ve had. We have a wide community here of users and developers (and a whole lot of you are both).

Mark Kunoff writes: