yourcontenthere

Ableton’s Push 2 has a big, beautiful, color display. But what goes on that display is limited to what Ableton has built in – or, rather, it was, until now.

London-based producer/hacker sigabort has already built a Max object that lets you access the display directly as a high-res, color texture. Max boffins, this means you can even use Jitter objects directly. And for those who have no idea what the previous sentence just meant, think of it this way: Max patches will now be able to create their own full-color visual outputs, for practical or entertainment purposes. (Max for Live support is coming, which is the big one.) It’s fast, too – roughly 18 fps rendering and native externals for Mac and Windows.

push2_rainbox

As if that weren’t enough, a standalone library is coming, too. You can try out a free, time-limited (60-minute) version, or go ahead and donate a minimum of 5GBP via PayPal (more for commercial use).

Yep, we’ll be watching this one – and what you do with it. Just don’t use Comic Sans, okay, unless you work for CERN.

http://sigabort.co/p2d

Thanks to @archnerdian / Safet for the tip!

  • I’m always baffled by Ableton’s refusal to open their devices/APIs/anything to developers. This made start considering the update from Push 1 now, but I’ll wait until the whole thing is reverse-engineered and available outside of Max4Live too.

    • Not sure I follow. This hardware has only been out a matter of days and it’s already accessible. So it’s not that Ableton hasn’t opened up the hardware – they just aren’t supporting this mechanism (i.e., with documentation, etc.)

      And not supporting it, that’s understandable. Anyway, as this makes clear, support isn’t strictly necessary. The fact is, Push 2:
      – doesn’t require drivers (that is, supports USB class compliance)
      – has a display you can address directly
      – uses standard MIDI for all other bi-directional communication

      That’s actually not true of some other hardware, and is about as open as I think anyone could possibly want.

      • Sorry, but I disagree. Ableton doesn’t document anything at all – ever. The MIDI mapping on Push 1 was reverse-engineered, as were the MIDI velocity values for pad colours, control values for all other buttons and SysEx messages used to control the display. And please don’t get me started on their secret Python API.

        Simply making a controller that’s USB class-compliant isn’t enough anymore. If you want people to use your hardware to the fullest, document it, offer APIs, do your job! Just look at the nice job Bitwig did with their controller API in JS, or how open and flexible Renoise is.

        • I’m not saying it’s not better to document things… but reverse-engineering *MIDI* is not the hardest thing in the world, and doesn’t mean this is closed. Compare to Maschine.

          Bitwig is an apples-to-oranges comparison as they don’t make hardware. πŸ˜‰ But yes, if we’re talking the API, the API is unquestionably nicer in Bitwig than in Ableton, in terms of design and implementation. Ditto Renoise.

          • > I’m not saying it’s not better to document things… but reverse-engineering *MIDI* is not the hardest thing in the world

            That may be the case, but go to Novation’s website and you’ll find a MIDI implementation chart for all their products – ditto Arturia, Novation, Korg, Yamaha, Keith McMillen, you name it. Do I *really* need to open a MIDI monitor and keep taking notes for every pad and knob? Why? It’s like Ableton is purposefully trying to get in the way and make it harder for people to use their products.

            > Compare to Maschine.

            Maschine is my biggest gear regret. I even wrote about it: http://nostepmusic.tumblr.com/post/130525459949/giving-up-on-maschine

            > Bitwig is an apples-to-oranges comparison as they don’t make hardware. πŸ˜‰

            On the other hand, their API is so good there’s a controller script for Push 1 that manages to be even better than what Ableton offers.

          • No, that’s right, and having a MIDI implementation chart for instance should still be compatible with saying that “hacks” are unsupported…

            Now, note, not everyone is shipping MIDI implementation charts the same day (including those on that list). But yes, I agree, documentation is better.

          • If you really want to see someone busting a gut about lack of MIDI documentation, look for me on USEnet 20 years ago, but I can understand Ableton’s (apparent) stance here: someone would have to do the documentation, someone would have to check it, someone would end up fielding support calls (about other people’s interfacing software), and the API couldn’t be changed. At least they aren’t openly hostile and claiming copyright infringement, like some music gear manufacturers have done.

          • Darren E Cowley

            Its the API that can’t be changed that i think is the biggest stumbling block to Ableton, imagine the furore if they changed what they published and broke everything people had written based upon it…

          • Dubby Labby

            As usual they done with remote scripts… lol xD

          • mr_fork

            I was intrigued by your gear regret post. I’ve been trying to find a good way to work between ableton and maschine for a while now and I’ve come up with a way that works but I am still tinkering with it. Problem being that you have basically 2 DAWs that you’re working in. After reading your post though I’d have to say that at least one of the problems that you had was due to lack of knowledge of the device you were using. At least if I’m understanding you correctly. “Suddenly you realize that any pattern currently selected on Maschine
            will start playing immediately whenever you press play on the DAW,
            regardless of where you are in the arrangement.” That’s actually not entirely true. It sounds like you just didn’t get far enough into learning it. Like I mentioned, maschine is basically a DAW and you can arrange an entire song with it. If you use it as a VST inside a DAW like ableton the timelines will match up BUT you have to have the track laid out in both and you have to have all of your scenes selected in maschine so that they will all play as a song. With those pieces done if you start your track at 3 minutes in ableton it will line up accordingly in maschine.

            As to the reason ableton doesn’t list off the midi specs I’m not certain. My guess is how they are approaching the push. They aren’t presenting this as a midi controller. They are presenting it as an instrument. And one that is connected to ableton live. Based on that it would make sense as to why they wouldn’t release that information in my mind.

          • Ralf Suckow

            I’m working on the MIDI/Display specification for two weeks already, in parallel with some other urgent tasks. Sorry for not having it ready for the release. We will publish it as soon as possible. Now that we got our own Sysex ID from the MIDI Manufacturers Association we have to publish a specification anyway. πŸ™‚

          • heinrichz

            @Fabio: Almost everything you complain about regarding Maschine is true and i really think NI has to make an effort now to go all the way and at least add a decent song mode already so we don’t have to work in two separate arrangers ! I have finally mastered doing that both in Live and Logic but it is a rather awkward thing to do no doubt. One thing though, where Maschine still excells even ober Push 2 is the browsing for sounds, which is still faster in Maschine and also better than with Komplete Kontrol btw, (because you can still use the mouse to point at things, which sometimes is still faster than using knobs). Navigating the menues in Push 2 is certainly slower than in Maschine…but otherwise using Push 2 with Live is great.
            So my conclusion: Maschine is still great as a sound module of sorts, not quite on the level of Kore but certainly offering some of its sound library managment convenience.

  • I’m always baffled by Ableton’s refusal to open their devices/APIs/anything to developers. This made me begin considering the upgrade from Push 1 now, but I’ll wait until the whole thing is reverse-engineered and available outside of Max4Live too.

    • Not sure I follow. This hardware has only been out a matter of days and it’s already accessible. So it’s not that Ableton hasn’t opened up the hardware – they just aren’t supporting this mechanism (i.e., with documentation, etc.)

      And not supporting it, that’s understandable. Anyway, as this makes clear, support isn’t strictly necessary. The fact is, Push 2:
      – doesn’t require drivers (that is, supports USB class compliance)
      – has a display you can address directly
      – uses standard MIDI for all other bi-directional communication

      That’s actually not true of some other hardware, and is about as open as I think anyone could possibly want.

      • Sorry, but I disagree. Ableton doesn’t document anything at all – ever. The MIDI mapping on Push 1 was reverse-engineered, as were the MIDI velocity values for pad colours, control values for all other buttons and SysEx messages used to control the display. And please don’t get me started on their secret Python API.

        Simply making a controller that’s USB class-compliant isn’t enough anymore. If you want people to use your hardware to the fullest, document it, offer APIs, do your job! Just look at the nice job Bitwig did on the software side with their controller API in JS, or how open and flexible Renoise is.

        • I’m not saying it’s not better to document things… but reverse-engineering *MIDI* is not the hardest thing in the world, and doesn’t mean this is closed. Compare to Maschine.

          Bitwig is an apples-to-oranges comparison as they don’t make hardware. πŸ˜‰ But yes, if we’re talking the API, the API is unquestionably nicer in Bitwig than in Ableton, in terms of design and implementation. Ditto Renoise.

          • > I’m not saying it’s not better to document things… but reverse-engineering *MIDI* is not the hardest thing in the world

            That may be the case, but go to Novation’s website and you’ll find a MIDI implementation chart for all their products – ditto Arturia, Novation, Korg, Yamaha, Keith McMillen, you name it. Do I *really* need to open a MIDI monitor and keep taking notes for every pad and knob? Why? It’s like Ableton is purposefully trying to get in the way and make it harder for people to use their products.

            > Compare to Maschine.

            Maschine is my biggest gear regret. I even wrote about it: http://nostepmusic.tumblr.com/post/130525459949/giving-up-on-maschine

            > Bitwig is an apples-to-oranges comparison as they don’t make hardware. πŸ˜‰

            On the other hand, their API is so good there’s a controller script for Push 1 that manages to be even better than what Ableton offers.

          • No, that’s right, and having a MIDI implementation chart for instance should still be compatible with saying that “hacks” are unsupported…

            Now, note, not everyone is shipping MIDI implementation charts the same day (including those on that list). But yes, I agree, documentation is better.

          • If you really want to see someone busting a gut about lack of MIDI documentation, look for me on USEnet 20 years ago, but I can understand Ableton’s (apparent) stance here: someone would have to do the documentation, someone would have to check it, someone would end up fielding support calls (about other people’s interfacing software), and the API couldn’t be changed. At least they aren’t openly hostile and claiming copyright infringement, like some music gear manufacturers have done.

          • Darren E Cowley

            Its the API that can’t be changed that i think is the biggest stumbling block to Ableton, imagine the furore if they changed what they published and broke everything people had written based upon it…

          • Dubby Labby

            As usual they done with remote scripts… lol xD

          • mr_fork

            Edited my response. After reading more it did seem like you figured out the ways to get Maschine to work correctly with ableton’s timeline.

            As to the reason ableton doesn’t list off the midi specs I’m not certain. My guess is how they are approaching the push. They aren’t presenting this as a midi controller. They are presenting it as an instrument. And one that is connected to ableton live. Based on that it would make sense as to why they wouldn’t release that information in my mind.

          • Ralf Suckow

            I’m working on the MIDI/Display specification for two weeks already, in parallel with some other urgent tasks. Sorry for not having it ready for the release. We will publish it as soon as possible. Now that we got our own Sysex ID from the MIDI Manufacturers Association we have to publish a specification anyway. πŸ™‚

          • Bjorn Vayner

            Doing the Lord’s work πŸ™‚

          • heinrichz

            @Fabio: Almost everything you complain about regarding Maschine is true and i really think NI has to make an effort now to go all the way and at least add a decent song mode already so we don’t have to work in two separate arrangers ! I have finally mastered doing that both in Live and Logic but it is a rather awkward thing to do no doubt. One thing though, where Maschine still excells even ober Push 2 is the browsing for sounds, which is still faster in Maschine and also better than with Komplete Kontrol btw, (because you can still use the mouse to point at things, which sometimes is still faster than using knobs). Navigating the menues in Push 2 is certainly slower than in Maschine…but otherwise using Push 2 with Live is great.
            So my conclusion: Maschine is still great as a sound module of sorts, not quite on the level of Kore but certainly offering some of its sound library managment convenience.

  • I’m always baffled by Ableton’s refusal to open their devices/APIs/anything to developers. This made me begin considering the upgrade from Push 1 now, but I’ll wait until the whole thing is reverse-engineered and available outside of Max4Live too.

    • Not sure I follow. This hardware has only been out a matter of days and it’s already accessible. So it’s not that Ableton hasn’t opened up the hardware – they just aren’t supporting this mechanism (i.e., with documentation, etc.)

      And not supporting it, that’s understandable. Anyway, as this makes clear, support isn’t strictly necessary. The fact is, Push 2:
      – doesn’t require drivers (that is, supports USB class compliance)
      – has a display you can address directly
      – uses standard MIDI for all other bi-directional communication

      That’s actually not true of some other hardware, and is about as open as I think anyone could possibly want.

      • Sorry, but I disagree. Ableton doesn’t document anything at all – ever. The MIDI mapping on Push 1 was reverse-engineered, as were the MIDI velocity values for pad colours, control values for all other buttons and SysEx messages used to control the display. And please don’t get me started on their secret Python API.

        Simply making a controller that’s USB class-compliant isn’t enough anymore. If you want people to use your hardware to the fullest, document it, offer APIs, do your job! Just look at the nice job Bitwig did on the software side with their controller API in JS, or how open and flexible Renoise is.

        • I’m not saying it’s not better to document things… but reverse-engineering *MIDI* is not the hardest thing in the world, and doesn’t mean this is closed. Compare to Maschine.

          Bitwig is an apples-to-oranges comparison as they don’t make hardware. πŸ˜‰ But yes, if we’re talking the API, the API is unquestionably nicer in Bitwig than in Ableton, in terms of design and implementation. Ditto Renoise.

          • > I’m not saying it’s not better to document things… but reverse-engineering *MIDI* is not the hardest thing in the world

            That may be the case, but go to Novation’s website and you’ll find a MIDI implementation chart for all their products – ditto Arturia, Novation, Korg, Yamaha, Keith McMillen, you name it. Do I *really* need to open a MIDI monitor and keep taking notes for every pad and knob? Why? It’s like Ableton is purposefully trying to get in the way and make it harder for people to use their products.

            > Compare to Maschine.

            Maschine is my biggest gear regret. I even wrote about it: http://nostepmusic.tumblr.com/post/130525459949/giving-up-on-maschine

            > Bitwig is an apples-to-oranges comparison as they don’t make hardware. πŸ˜‰

            On the other hand, their API is so good there’s a controller script for Push 1 that manages to be even better than what Ableton offers.

          • No, that’s right, and having a MIDI implementation chart for instance should still be compatible with saying that “hacks” are unsupported…

            Now, note, not everyone is shipping MIDI implementation charts the same day (including those on that list). But yes, I agree, documentation is better.

          • If you really want to see someone busting a gut about lack of MIDI documentation, look for me on USEnet 20 years ago, but I can understand Ableton’s (apparent) stance here: someone would have to do the documentation, someone would have to check it, someone would end up fielding support calls (about other people’s interfacing software), and the API couldn’t be changed. At least they aren’t openly hostile and claiming copyright infringement, like some music gear manufacturers have done.

          • Darren E Cowley

            Its the API that can’t be changed that i think is the biggest stumbling block to Ableton, imagine the furore if they changed what they published and broke everything people had written based upon it…

          • Dubby Labby

            As usual they done with remote scripts… lol xD

          • mr_fork

            Edited my response. After reading more it did seem like you figured out the ways to get Maschine to work correctly with ableton’s timeline.

            As to the reason ableton doesn’t list off the midi specs I’m not certain. My guess is how they are approaching the push. They aren’t presenting this as a midi controller. They are presenting it as an instrument. And one that is connected to ableton live. Based on that it would make sense as to why they wouldn’t release that information in my mind.

          • Ralf Suckow

            I’m working on the MIDI/Display specification for two weeks already, in parallel with some other urgent tasks. Sorry for not having it ready for the release. We will publish it as soon as possible. Now that we got our own Sysex ID from the MIDI Manufacturers Association we have to publish a specification anyway. πŸ™‚

          • Bjorn Vayner

            Doing the Lord’s work πŸ™‚

          • heinrichz

            @Fabio: Almost everything you complain about regarding Maschine is true and i really think NI has to make an effort now to go all the way and at least add a decent song mode already so we don’t have to work in two separate arrangers ! I have finally mastered doing that both in Live and Logic but it is a rather awkward thing to do no doubt. One thing though, where Maschine still excells even ober Push 2 is the browsing for sounds, which is still faster in Maschine and also better than with Komplete Kontrol btw, (because you can still use the mouse to point at things, which sometimes is still faster than using knobs). Navigating the menues in Push 2 is certainly slower than in Maschine…but otherwise using Push 2 with Live is great.
            So my conclusion: Maschine is still great as a sound module of sorts, not quite on the level of Kore but certainly offering some of its sound library managment convenience.

  • anyone wants to donate a Push2 to the Modality Toolkit? I’m sure we’ll find someone opening the display for SuperCollider, too.

    http://modalityteam.github.io/

  • anyone wants to donate a Push2 to the Modality Toolkit? I’m sure we’ll find someone opening the display for SuperCollider, too.

    http://modalityteam.github.io/

  • anyone wants to donate a Push2 to the Modality Toolkit? I’m sure we’ll find someone opening the display for SuperCollider, too.

    http://modalityteam.github.io/

  • chaircrusher

    This seems like a project that is a neat hack with zero utility for making music. But more power to them, I guess.

    • Lee Huddleston

      Hi. Not really – I started looking into this as I wanted feedback for my Gridlock software – something I had on Push1 but was lacking on Push2. I have a session view clip grid up and running now which is useful and have some other ideas for useful utilities. I’ve already spoken to a few developers who are interested in providing custom UIs for their M4L devices so it has plenty of musical applications.

      • EvanBogunia

        I’m one of those developers! I lost the display for my M4L performance rig on Push 2. I’m gonna get familiar with UI stuff in jitter, and wait patiently for M4L support. You’re doing great stuff Lee!

        • Lee Huddleston

          Hi. The donation versions of the device will contains a text based display that mimics the Push in the next few days to allow people to translation. I’m also building a more sophisticated toolkit for non-Jitter people to cover some basics.

          • EvanBogunia

            Sounds great, anything you provide at this point is ace. I donated today, and will continue to do so. I think creating custom GUI/display stuff on the Push will be really satisfying.

            The toolkit will be cool but I’m excited to brush up on my jitter chops anyway. Seems like a good enough reason.

          • Lee Huddleston

            Thanks for the donation. Much appreciated πŸ™‚

    • Tons of utility! Anything that wants a custom display. So not sure what you mean.

    • wetterberg

      Already using the brilliant external for music, I’m afraid. Can I still have some power, too?

  • chaircrusher

    This seems like a project that is a neat hack with zero utility for making music. But more power to them, I guess.

    • Lee Huddleston

      Hi. Not really – I started looking into this as I wanted feedback for my Gridlock software – something I had on Push1 but was lacking on Push2. I have a session view clip grid up and running now which is useful and have some other ideas for useful utilities. I’ve already spoken to a few developers who are interested in providing custom UIs for their M4L devices so it has plenty of musical applications.

      • EvanBogunia

        I’m one of those people (although I haven’t spoken to you, yet)! I lost the display for my M4L performance rig on Push 2. I’m gonna get familiar with UI stuff in jitter, and wait patiently for M4L support. You’re doing great stuff Lee!

        • Lee Huddleston

          Hi. The donation versions of the device will contains a text based display that mimics the Push in the next few days to allow people to translation. I’m also building a more sophisticated toolkit for non-Jitter people to cover some basics.

          • EvanBogunia

            Sounds great, anything you provide at this point is ace. I donated today, and will continue to do so. I think creating custom GUI/display stuff on the Push will be really satisfying.

            The toolkit will be cool but I’m excited to brush up on my jitter chops anyway. Seems like a good enough reason.

          • Lee Huddleston

            Thanks for the donation. Much appreciated πŸ™‚

    • Tons of utility! Anything that wants a custom display. So not sure what you mean.

    • wetterberg

      Already using the brilliant external for music, I’m afraid. Can I still have some power, too?

  • chaircrusher

    This seems like a project that is a neat hack with zero utility for making music. But more power to them, I guess.

    • Lee Huddleston

      Hi. Not really – I started looking into this as I wanted feedback for my Gridlock software – something I had on Push1 but was lacking on Push2. I have a session view clip grid up and running now which is useful and have some other ideas for useful utilities. I’ve already spoken to a few developers who are interested in providing custom UIs for their M4L devices so it has plenty of musical applications.

      • EvanBogunia

        I’m one of those people (although I haven’t spoken to you, yet)! I lost the display for my M4L performance rig on Push 2. I’m gonna get familiar with UI stuff in jitter, and wait patiently for M4L support. You’re doing great stuff Lee!

        • Lee Huddleston

          Hi. The donation versions of the device will contains a text based display that mimics the Push in the next few days to allow people to translation. I’m also building a more sophisticated toolkit for non-Jitter people to cover some basics.

          • EvanBogunia

            Sounds great, anything you provide at this point is ace. I donated today, and will continue to do so. I think creating custom GUI/display stuff on the Push will be really satisfying.

            The toolkit will be cool but I’m excited to brush up on my jitter chops anyway. Seems like a good enough reason.

          • Lee Huddleston

            Thanks for the donation. Much appreciated πŸ™‚

    • Tons of utility! Anything that wants a custom display. So not sure what you mean.

    • wetterberg

      Already using the brilliant external for music, I’m afraid. Can I still have some power, too?

  • Lee Huddleston

    Hi Peter – thanks for the writeup. Just to be clear its Max only at the moment due to some technical issues, I’m only just proving the M4L stuff across platforms – hopefully that won’t be too long tho!

    • Bjorn

      Hey Lee,
      Wouldn’t UDP work to send from MFL to a standalone running the external? Even Ableton is using an external app to drive the display. Maybe there’s some faster internal way to send Jitter Matrices I’m unaware off. If UDP proves too slow for video, it would still be fast enough for some control signals.

      • Lee Huddleston

        Hi Bjorn.. Live opens the display exclusively, which is necessary due to the way the protocol has been implemented. I’m pretty sure I have a solution now anyway, just needs more testing.

        • wetterberg

          I do believe you have my email if you need a volunteer πŸ™‚

  • Lee Huddleston

    Hi Peter – thanks for the writeup. Just to be clear its Max only at the moment due to some technical issues, I’m only just proving the M4L stuff across platforms – hopefully that won’t be too long tho!

    • Bjorn

      Hey Lee,
      Wouldn’t UDP work to send from MFL to a standalone running the external? Even Ableton is using an external app to drive the display. Maybe there’s some faster internal way to send Jitter Matrices I’m unaware off. If UDP proves too slow for video, it would still be fast enough for some control signals.

      • Lee Huddleston

        Hi Bjorn.. Live opens the display exclusively, which is necessary due to the way the protocol has been implemented. I’m pretty sure I have a solution now anyway, just needs more testing.

        • wetterberg

          I do believe you have my email if you need a volunteer πŸ™‚

  • Lee Huddleston

    Hi Peter – thanks for the writeup. Just to be clear its Max only at the moment due to some technical issues, I’m only just proving the M4L stuff across platforms – hopefully that won’t be too long tho!

    • Bjorn

      Hey Lee,
      Wouldn’t UDP work to send from MFL to a standalone running the external? Even Ableton is using an external app to drive the display. Maybe there’s some faster internal way to send Jitter Matrices I’m unaware off. If UDP proves too slow for video, it would still be fast enough for some control signals.

      • Lee Huddleston

        Hi Bjorn.. Live opens the display exclusively, which is necessary due to the way the protocol has been implemented. I’m pretty sure I have a solution now anyway, just needs more testing.

        • wetterberg

          I do believe you have my email if you need a volunteer πŸ™‚

  • frank

    Hope someone makes an op-1 themed interface and set of max for live plugins with this. That would be pretty neat.

  • frank

    Hope someone makes an op-1 themed interface and set of max for live plugins with this. That would be pretty neat.

  • frank

    Hope someone makes an op-1 themed interface and set of max for live plugins with this. That would be pretty neat.

  • wetterberg

    Slowly but surely. Jit.lcd works a treat with this. Writing an abstraction that writes an x-amount of sliders to the display took 10-12 minutes, and by some weird twist it has more colour options than max’s own Multislider.

    The only thing I’ve seen as a possible drawback/bug is that the colours seem a fair amount colder when on the display.

    So yeah, this is the beginnings of a max standalone granulator for push2. I will probably be using Brendan McCloskeys Granary, since it’s easily modded for multichannel outs…!

    • Lee Huddleston

      The colour mapping is incorrect in the colour release as I had the bit depth wrong – this has now been corrected for the next update, so hopefully things will improve.

      • Jonathan Liu

        I have a project that renders QML to Push 2 display: https://github.com/net147/Push2Qml
        There is also Push 1 translation using MIDI loopback ports but it is missing translation of some characters on the display. If someone with a Push 1 running on Windows would like to help, can email me from my GitHub profile.

        • Lee Huddleston

          Not sure exactly what you need me to do, but if you give me more detail I have a Push1 and can take a look on Thu…

  • wetterberg

    Slowly but surely. Jit.lcd works a treat with this. Writing an abstraction that writes an x-amount of sliders to the display took 10-12 minutes, and by some weird twist it has more colour options than max’s own Multislider.

    The only thing I’ve seen as a possible drawback/bug is that the colours seem a fair amount colder when on the display.

    So yeah, this is the beginnings of a max standalone granulator for push2. I will probably be using Brendan McCloskeys Granary, since it’s easily modded for multichannel outs…!

    • Lee Huddleston

      The colour mapping is incorrect in the current release as I had the bit depth wrong – this has now been corrected for the next update, so hopefully things will improve.

      • Jonathan Liu

        I have a project that renders QML to Push 2 display: https://github.com/net147/Push2Qml
        There is also Push 1 translation using MIDI loopback ports but it is missing translation of some characters on the display. If someone with a Push 1 running on Windows would like to help, can email me from my GitHub profile.

        • Lee Huddleston

          Not sure exactly what you need me to do, but if you give me more detail I have a Push1 and can take a look on Thu…

  • wetterberg

    Slowly but surely. Jit.lcd works a treat with this. Writing an abstraction that writes an x-amount of sliders to the display took 10-12 minutes, and by some weird twist it has more colour options than max’s own Multislider.

    The only thing I’ve seen as a possible drawback/bug is that the colours seem a fair amount colder when on the display.

    So yeah, this is the beginnings of a max standalone granulator for push2. I will probably be using Brendan McCloskeys Granary, since it’s easily modded for multichannel outs…!

    • Lee Huddleston

      The colour mapping is incorrect in the current release as I had the bit depth wrong – this has now been corrected for the next update, so hopefully things will improve.

      • Jonathan Liu

        I have a project that renders QML to Push 2 display: https://github.com/net147/Push2Qml
        There is also Push 1 translation using MIDI loopback ports but it is missing translation of some characters on the display. If someone with a Push 1 running on Windows would like to help, can email me from my GitHub profile.

        • Lee Huddleston

          Not sure exactly what you need me to do, but if you give me more detail I have a Push1 and can take a look on Thu…

  • Genjutsushi

    For VJs, if you could use the display on PUSH 2 as a preview / cue display, or even per channel output, then we could be in a whole new realm of sophisticated and portable performance systems. Could be amaaaaazing

  • Genjutsushi

    For VJs, if you could use the display on PUSH 2 as a preview / cue display, or even per channel output, then we could be in a whole new realm of sophisticated and portable performance systems. Could be amaaaaazing

  • Genjutsushi

    For VJs, if you could use the display on PUSH 2 as a preview / cue display, or even per channel output, then we could be in a whole new realm of sophisticated and portable performance systems. Could be amaaaaazing

  • Fayek Helmi

    reading the comments on this thread, i’m so happy/impressed/proud of the hacking community for getting to this so fast! this is definitely going to make it hard for me not to buy the push 2!

  • Fayek Helmi

    reading the comments on this thread, i’m so happy/impressed/proud of the hacking community for getting to this so fast! this is definitely going to make it hard for me not to buy the push 2!