Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ableton Extensions SDK

ableton.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 104 posts

Re: Ableton Extensions SDK

#81

Post by iainctduncan »

windowliker wrote: post #79
iainctduncan wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doing interrupt level scripting in it works just fine - lots of people have done it in C, C++, Scheme, and other extensions. I take it on stages and have produced music with it extensively. Scheme for Max is written using all the same C primitives from the Max SDK that the other Max sequencing options use and has been load and timing testing exhaustively . I'm currently a PhD candidate in it, have previously used Cso…

Can your external place objects and route cables around on the patch? That's the main thrust of my original comment, which is that JS scripting can help avoid having to patch lots of objects together in the GUI. Live scripting music is beyond the scope of my advice.

You specifically brought up "scheduling tasks". There is a JS task scheduler, but it comes with a caveat - the scheduled timing is accurate but the time of executing is not accurate because it runs in the UI thread. Hence my comment.

If you want to schedule tasks in Max accurately with code, you can either use Max, C extensions, or my extension.

yes, you can do patcher scripting from S4M as well as you can easily send messages to named objects, which is all you need in order to be able to do that. That is how max patching works - whether you do it in the GUI, JS, or messages to the patcher, the whole thing is just objects sending messages to other objects, and the patch is just a connected graph of references of instantiated objects. If you send message to a thispatcher object, you achieve the same thing under the hood as manipulating the GUI or going through JS. You can read about it if interested in the Max SDK documentation and in the Cipriani & Giri books on thispatching.

Re: Ableton Extensions SDK

#82

Post by [deleted] »

iainctduncan wrote: post #81
windowliker wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can your external place objects and route cables around on the patch? That's the main thrust of my original comment, which is that JS scripting can help avoid having to patch lots of objects together in the GUI. Live scripting music is beyond the scope of my advice.

You specifically brought up "scheduling tasks". There is a JS task scheduler, but it comes with a caveat - the scheduled timing is accurate but the time of executing is not accurate because it runs in the UI thread. Hence my comment. If you want to schedule tasks in Max accurately with code, you can either use Max, C extensions, or my extension. yes, you can do patcher scripting from S4M as well as you can easily sen…

[deleted]

Re: Ableton Extensions SDK

#83

Post by [deleted] »

iainctduncan wrote: post #81
windowliker wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can your external place objects and route cables around on the patch? That's the main thrust of my original comment, which is that JS scripting can help avoid having to patch lots of objects together in the GUI. Live scripting music is beyond the scope of my advice.

You specifically brought up "scheduling tasks". There is a JS task scheduler, but it comes with a caveat - the scheduled timing is accurate but the time of executing is not accurate because it runs in the UI thread. Hence my comment. If you want to schedule tasks in Max accurately with code, you can either use Max, C extensions, or my extension. yes, you can do patcher scripting from S4M as well as you can easily sen…

[deleted]

Re: Ableton Extensions SDK

#84

Post by peteforde »

jiriknesl wrote: post #65
peteforde wrote: post #11

I've often felt as though the way to make a DAW that competes with Ableton today would be to build the entire UI around composable scripted modules. Far too much of Ableton's secret sauce is hidden away behind Max for Live and top-tier pricing only features. This is a great step in the right direction.

I don't think it is true. There are massive communities around tools far more simple than Ableton was even a decade ago, like SP404, Akai MPCs, Elektron Digitakt. Many musicians treat any item as an instrument, not as a plaform. There are probably dozens of videos on youtube, where musicians explain, why they use more limited tools instead of Ableton. To make a successful music tool (that includes DAW), you have to o…

I believe that you misunderstood my message, which actually means that I didn't communicate well. Let me do better.

I am not proposing that someone needs to disrupt or make Ableton obsolete.

I am suggesting that the existence of Reaper strongly implies that there's an under-served demographic of people who (correctly) understand that the DAW can be more than a way to translate audio data from buffers to hard drive and VST host.

In the same way that there is currently a lot of innovation in mixers that don't just sum channels, it's not at all unreasonable to imagine that the DAW itself could be an instrument or at least provide composable functions that make other instruments more interesting.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EclavOHIo4o

One of the best things about the golden age of music tools that we're experiencing is that guitars and guitarists have been decentered from the conversation. We don't call them guitar pedals anymore; they are effects pedals now. We're moving past the GROG TURN OVERDRIVE ON OR OFF phase into a much cooler place where pedals are usually MIDI controlled and often have CV inputs as well. Arguably the most lauded pedal of 2025 was the Polyend Mess, which literally allows sequencing of effects. It's awesome!

https://polyend.com/mess/

The cool thing about a truly composable modular DAW is that it doesn't have to get more complex. Being able to strip things down is also totally valid. Perhaps then folks wouldn't be making such a big deal about Tape:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iKZhwIA9hiw

Re: Ableton Extensions SDK

#85

Post by peteforde »

Slow_Hand wrote: post #76
peteforde wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is... not a good analogy at all. What it is, though, is a misguided attempt to move the goal posts on what I actually said, which is that a huge amount of the value of Ableton is gatekept behind paid addons. If a DAW was structured like Blender or KiCAD and designed from the ground up to be extensible (or minimal!) then you wouldn't have any impetus to try to shame people who haven't paid a gate toll to execute…

Agreed. It's not a great analogy. I'm annoyed because you keep referring to the cost of a license as "gate-keeping" or somehow "hiding away" your ability to use the software. Pay the cost for a license or don't. It's a reasonable price for the tools. > I don't own Max for Live, so the large ecosystem of useful tools that I'd enjoy trying out is unavailable to me. t's not about special powers, just being forced to pay…

That's actually exactly what I do! And I highly recommend it as a viable alternative to Max/MSP. It's the native way to create patches for the Organelle and many other instruments.

PlugData in particular has been a real joy to play around with.

I'm glad that your tools are working out well for you. I do reject the idea that I should STFU about being annoyed that I can't run Max for Live scripts, though. Native Instruments Kontakt isn't my favourite piece of software (or company) but at least they understood from early on that making the player free drastically increases the value of a paid license for the people who make content on that platform.

It's 2026. I'd hoped that we were well past needing to debate whether OSS is good or not. Apparently we're not!

Re: Ableton Extensions SDK

#86

Post by _def »

_def wrote: post #73
nedt wrote: post #70

The have it buried in the FAQ, but that's pretty much the interface for AI. And a really good one. You can use it with just your old human intelligence, but then you can also get help if coding isn't your thing. Biggest issue with having something so easy to work with is the huge amount of extensions we will be getting, which makes it harder to find the jewels. Also wondering if we will get extensions for Abelton Mov…

Got some links to the Move hacks?

Answering my own question: schwung.dev

Also: yes, this SDK is a great interface for AI. It was trivial for Claude to quickly write a MCP extension. There is a lot of room to open up the API more and to save on tokens, but I already had fun sketching out new songs or open older projects with clips in session view and just tell Claude "create an arrangement out of them".

Re: Ableton Extensions SDK

#87

Post by coldtea »

moralestapia wrote: post #62
PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They've been purchased.

Wow, you created Ardour! Thanks! I was a heavy and loyal Cubase user then switched to Ardour when it came out because of OSS. Also Reason, you guys remember Reason? It had such a warm, characteristic sound out of the box. You could easily hear it in many songs of the time; same with Fruity Loops but for all the wrong reasons, lol. I don't do a lot of music at the moment, but it's nice to read you here ^^.

>Also Reason, you guys remember Reason? It had such a warm, characteristic sound out of the box. You could easily hear it in many songs of the time; same with Fruity Loops but for all the wrong reasons, lol.

Remember? It never went away. In fact, it was recently bought by LANDR, and just brought out version 14.

Re: Ableton Extensions SDK

#88

Post by coldtea »

cdavid wrote: post #64
tnolet wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Totally unrelated, but it's still interesting that a lot of the key music software was / is created in either Berlin (Ableton, Native Instruments) or in / near Hamburg (Steinberg of Cubase — now owned by Yamaha — and Emagic of Logic — now owned by Apple). There must have been something in the air.

Partially a mix of strong, hacker culture in Germany in the 90ies + Berlin being a major place for electronic music in that decade. For example, ableton was famousley co-created by the members of the monolake, a pioneer of minimalist techno in the 90ies. Some history there: https://www.roberthenke.com/interviews/ableton.html

Ableton yes - and Bitwig which is ex Ableton people.

But Cubase, Logic, etc weren't focused on electronic music in particular. They catered to general studio production.

Re: Ableton Extensions SDK

#89

Post by coldtea »

peteforde wrote: post #21
coldtea wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Far too much of Ableton's secret sauce is hidden away behind Max for Live The other way around. Ableton exposes some internal modules to Max for Live as Max for Live modules. What Ableton gets from Max for Live is not internals, but basically a few Ableton-only Max-built plugins, that could as well use VST underneath.

I answered this in a different branch of the thread, but you're kind of missing my point. I don't own Max for Live, so the large ecosystem of useful tools that I'd enjoy trying out is unavailable to me. It's not about special powers, just being forced to pay the gatekeeper to the otherwise free/OSS ecosystem.

>I don't own Max for Live, so the large ecosystem of useful tools that I'd enjoy trying out is unavailable to me.

Well, it's not that difficult to purchase as an update to Suite or by itself, on a typical western salary.

The ecosystem has tons of free/open source devices. Is it that bad that Ableton doesn't make Max (which they had to buy the whole company for) free too?

I prefer they have actual product revenue like that, and don't go the VC route, gifting stuff to get market share, and then coasting and rent-seeking like NI and others.

Re: Ableton Extensions SDK

#90

Post by coldtea »

nedt wrote: post #70

The have it buried in the FAQ, but that's pretty much the interface for AI. And a really good one. You can use it with just your old human intelligence, but then you can also get help if coding isn't your thing. Biggest issue with having something so easy to work with is the huge amount of extensions we will be getting, which makes it harder to find the jewels. Also wondering if we will get extensions for Abelton Mov…

>The have it buried in the FAQ, but that's pretty much the interface for AI.

Well, they have it buried because it's not "the interface for AI", it's a programming interface, that could have existed 5 and 10 years ago, pre-AI. And in other DAWs, it did.

It just happens that a programmatic interface is also very usable as an AI target. But that's orthogonal.

Post reply on HN