Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Garageband is useless...
- Thread starter Torajima
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I'm not familiar with that sequencer, but if it will transmit the MIDI data as it's playing the sequence, then yes, GB will be able to capture it (but just the MIDI, not the sound coming from it).
GB uses a lot of cpu power for software synths and real instruments: my Dual MDD won't play more than 4 tracks of these (it'll play a lot more tracks that are just sound files, though).
GB uses a lot of cpu power for software synths and real instruments: my Dual MDD won't play more than 4 tracks of these (it'll play a lot more tracks that are just sound files, though).
One hting I always wondered about this midi export issue. WHy isn't midi data compatible with Copy and Paste between applications. I often want to transfer midi drum sequences from reason to logic and the obvious simple method would be cut n paste but htis don't work with midi. Apple there's some room for innovation (sort of) here!
am i to understand that the USB midi controller
connected to GB only needs midi out from the midi controller?
so there is no midi out from GB back into the USB MIDI KEYBOARD
in other words GB is all internal?
So it will not send out midi back to the midi controller?
hope im clear
usually
we connect midi in to out and out to in with midi thru checked so that
the controller if it has its own sequencer /internal patches
receives midi data from the computer sequencer to play its own patches
GB cant do this ?
This is sad!
connected to GB only needs midi out from the midi controller?
so there is no midi out from GB back into the USB MIDI KEYBOARD
in other words GB is all internal?
So it will not send out midi back to the midi controller?
hope im clear
usually
we connect midi in to out and out to in with midi thru checked so that
the controller if it has its own sequencer /internal patches
receives midi data from the computer sequencer to play its own patches
GB cant do this ?
This is sad!
I didn't expect much from GB when they first announced it and gave the description. But after playing with it for a while, I was more disappointed than I thought I'd be. There's a lot of room for improvement on this app. It would be more useful if you could:
1. Bounce MIDI/software synths to make an AIF track, freeing up CPU power. Right now, you could just solo one track, bounce it then reimport; but it would be nice if it were simplified.
2. Automate panning.
3. Didn't combine all of the song data into the GB save file. Sometimes you might want to use one thing from another song without having to rebuild it.
4. Would allow you to create your own aif loops and store them for easy access in the library.
All of these, except for panning have workarounds, so it's not a huge deal; but since there IS a workaround, Apple should oblige and put those features in the next version.
1. Bounce MIDI/software synths to make an AIF track, freeing up CPU power. Right now, you could just solo one track, bounce it then reimport; but it would be nice if it were simplified.
2. Automate panning.
3. Didn't combine all of the song data into the GB save file. Sometimes you might want to use one thing from another song without having to rebuild it.
4. Would allow you to create your own aif loops and store them for easy access in the library.
All of these, except for panning have workarounds, so it's not a huge deal; but since there IS a workaround, Apple should oblige and put those features in the next version.
Logic does each one of the things on your list. My point is that if they start adding more features to GB it starts to step on the toes of Logic. They want people to have a reason to buy Logic. They want you to need Logic, that's the whole idea. Why add features to $49 GB that are found in $299 Logic?
Hee, hee. I'd hope Logic does all those things! I'm not asking for much, really. (OK, maybe separating the saved files into there individual parts is asking too much...) The things I'm asking for are just things to speed up the work flow. As long as GB stays with only 1 input at a time, it won't be worth much at all.
If I wanted full MIDI support, full automation, multiple effect sends, vst support, 8-24 channels of simultaneous input, and all the other stuff, then yes, Logic is the way to go. I've been using Bias Deck for a bunch of years now. In no way do I expect GB to replace that or any app like it. I've thought of jumping to Logic (I need more power, Scotty!), but I've heard that Logic's learning curve is a bit steep.
Re: Garageband is useless...
Whoa... lay off the pipe for a few seconds.
By default, GarageBand is dumping AIFF files into my iTunes folder when I export.
And in iTunes, as long as my "import" settings are set to MP3, I can pick "Convert to MP3" from the Advanced menu.
So right there I've got AIFF and MP3, both of which seem quite useful outside GarageBand and iTunes.
Now, there ARE other things that limit GarageBand's usefulness for serious work - but export format isn't one of them.
Whoa... lay off the pipe for a few seconds.
By default, GarageBand is dumping AIFF files into my iTunes folder when I export.
And in iTunes, as long as my "import" settings are set to MP3, I can pick "Convert to MP3" from the Advanced menu.
So right there I've got AIFF and MP3, both of which seem quite useful outside GarageBand and iTunes.
Now, there ARE other things that limit GarageBand's usefulness for serious work - but export format isn't one of them.
Re: Re: Garageband is useless...
Useful to you, perhaps, but as a keyboard player I need to be able to save (export) and load (import) midi sequences.
What's the difference? Well, once it's in AIFF or MP3, you can't really change it. Sure, you could import it into a Pro App and loop it, slice it up, and even transpose it, but that's pretty much it.
With a midi sequence, you can still edit it any way imaginable.
Useful to you, perhaps, but as a keyboard player I need to be able to save (export) and load (import) midi sequences.
What's the difference? Well, once it's in AIFF or MP3, you can't really change it. Sure, you could import it into a Pro App and loop it, slice it up, and even transpose it, but that's pretty much it.
With a midi sequence, you can still edit it any way imaginable.
Complain where? Here?
Write to unrealistic_expectations@apple.com and your dreams may come true. Or not.
...a place to start
That's what Garage Band is today, and it is not a bad place to start.
All these ideas and suggestions are good, and, since Bill Gates is not running Apple, we may see them in future releases.
If MIDI exports will get more digital musicians on Macs, we'll see them.
Now, if iDVD would work with 3rd party DVD burners...
That's what Garage Band is today, and it is not a bad place to start.
All these ideas and suggestions are good, and, since Bill Gates is not running Apple, we may see them in future releases.
If MIDI exports will get more digital musicians on Macs, we'll see them.
Now, if iDVD would work with 3rd party DVD burners...
GarageBand is an entry-level product. It is not meant to fulfill every need, especially since Apple already has higher-end (more expensive) products that do, and it does not want to cannibalize its own sales. Just as you shouldn't expect iPhoto to ever get any significant graphics tools, you shouldn't expect Apple to put a lot of pro features into GarageBand. If you want to output MIDI files, you're not the audience for GarageBand -- the people it's primarily targeted at have never heard of MIDI, much less already have expensive MIDI equipment.
If you want something more powerful than GarageBand, buy Logic, or any of the other mid- to pro-level products available. Of course, you can complain to Apple that its entry-level (essentially free) product doesn't have certain pro features, but I think it highly unlikely that they will adopt an untenable business model, regardless of the number of complaints they receive.
If you want something more powerful than GarageBand, buy Logic, or any of the other mid- to pro-level products available. Of course, you can complain to Apple that its entry-level (essentially free) product doesn't have certain pro features, but I think it highly unlikely that they will adopt an untenable business model, regardless of the number of complaints they receive.
Oh for pete's sake. Have you people even been listening? The ability to save & load midi sequences IS NOT A PRO FEATURE. Every other Midi Sequencer (and Garageband *is* a midi & audio sequencer) allows you to do this, even those aimed at novices. Even cheap ones. Even free ones.
And I already own a pro app, that doesn't mean I shouldn't be able to use Garageband too. I suspect it would take someone at Apple ten minutes tops to implement this feature. The midi data is already there... they just need to bury an import/export command in one of the menus, and save as a standard midi file.
torajima
im with you
you are right in what you say.
Feedback is always productive for software companies.
If you stay silent nothing will get done.
i wouldnt mind paying for an update that includes the midi features
and Apple wouldnt mind taking my money to provide that feature.
keep complaining
its healthy
im with you
you are right in what you say.
Feedback is always productive for software companies.
If you stay silent nothing will get done.
i wouldnt mind paying for an update that includes the midi features
and Apple wouldnt mind taking my money to provide that feature.
keep complaining
its healthy
If Adobe wanted to sell Photoshop for the same price as Photoshop LE, they'd sell stacks but profits would plummet. Same code, same box, why not the same price?
It's called stratification. Sometimes they do it with "light" versions (Photoshop LE), sometimes with time- or upgrade-limited student versions (Dreamweaver), sometimes with lower-specced apps that are dissimilar to the high-end app but operate in the same space (think: iMovie and FCP). All are ways of getting you to buy the more expensive app if you need certain features. The inexpensive apps also increase mindshare...
"Hey Lenny, that GarageBand on my Mac is cool and really easy to use."
"Oh yeah, Carl? I hear all of Apple's stuff is like that."
"I hear ya Lenny."
The $49 iLife suite is for "the rest of us" that aren't going to shell out for FCP, Logic and DVD SP because
Those who are talented/bright/hitting limitations etc won't have their creativity stifled by the 'lack' of features in GB. Remember, this software is all new stuff, but music making has been around for quite a while before it. Apple would love you to keep using their stuff, but for the top 5% or so of music makers, it probably won't be GarageBand.
If you want to pay for an upgrade for a more betterer midi thing, here ya go.
Mail checks out to S. Jobs, 1 Infinte Loop, Cupertino, CA.
It's called stratification. Sometimes they do it with "light" versions (Photoshop LE), sometimes with time- or upgrade-limited student versions (Dreamweaver), sometimes with lower-specced apps that are dissimilar to the high-end app but operate in the same space (think: iMovie and FCP). All are ways of getting you to buy the more expensive app if you need certain features. The inexpensive apps also increase mindshare...
"Hey Lenny, that GarageBand on my Mac is cool and really easy to use."
"Oh yeah, Carl? I hear all of Apple's stuff is like that."
"I hear ya Lenny."
The $49 iLife suite is for "the rest of us" that aren't going to shell out for FCP, Logic and DVD SP because
- we aren't very talented/bright, but we are keen
- we don't have a lot of money
- it's a past-time, we'll never make real money from it
- the missus won't let us (because of the reason given above
) - we aren't even hitting the limitations of the low-end software, and probably never will
Those who are talented/bright/hitting limitations etc won't have their creativity stifled by the 'lack' of features in GB. Remember, this software is all new stuff, but music making has been around for quite a while before it. Apple would love you to keep using their stuff, but for the top 5% or so of music makers, it probably won't be GarageBand.
If you want to pay for an upgrade for a more betterer midi thing, here ya go.
Mail checks out to S. Jobs, 1 Infinte Loop, Cupertino, CA.
I think the problem arises precisely because GarageBand isn't a general-purpose MIDI sequencer -- it is a music-production application for novices. Yes, it has some MIDI capability, as it has some loop capability and some software amp capability, but the object of the app is not to be a MIDI sequencer, or loop manipulator, or general software amp. Instead, the object is to allow novices to produce sophisticated-sounding music pieces within the application.
Again, compare it to iPhoto. It has slideshow capabilities which are far less than apps such as PowerPoint or Keynote, it has editing capabilities which are far less than apps such as GraphicConverter or Photoshop, and it has organizational capabilities which are far less than photo database apps. But iPhoto isn't competing with any one of those apps, because its job isn't only to slideshow, or edit, or organize -- it's simply to do the kind of simple things that a consumer would want to do with their pictures.
You can complain all you want about the exclusion of MIDI export, but if you're exporting MIDI files, you are moving well beyond what GarageBand is intended to do. There's no doubt that folks with expertise will try to squeeze what they can out of GarageBand, and that's great, but it's silly to berate Apple for not including functionality (however common) that isn't needed for the primary focus of the product.