TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Production Studio
-- So I picked up FL Studio 5 today....
Pages (3): « 1 [2] 3 »

FFS people, I don't dislike Fruityloops, I don't have any problem with it! For the price it sells for it's an excellent production suite that can be used to make some very good music.

It just ticks me off how the hardcore Fruityloops producers seem unwilling or unable to admit that the program has shortcomings. It costs a fraction of the price that other packages cost, it's obviously going to be less sophisticated!.

What's the big deal? Cubase isn't perfect either. Neither is Logic Audio. Using a less sophisticated program doesn't say anything about your ability as a producer, and I never implied that it did. But FLS cannot do everything that Cubase can do, especially when it comes to audio editing, plain and simple!

Seriously dude, you combated almost none of my points, resorting to simply stating that other people have other ways of doing things. Good job for stating the obvious but no points for stating facts today. People have different ways of doing things. That is the ENTIRE point of my arguing for the side of FLS. Just because you like Cubase, does not mean that other people dont prefer to use FLS. The point I'm making here is that FLS is a very capable sequencer regardless of your inexpirience with it.

quote:

Originally posted by DigiNut Oh for fuck's sake. This is why I hate FL users - they all assume that because THEY haven't experienced a particular limitation, then the limitation doesn't physically exist. Because your productions are the most complex productions in existence, right?

This is a fucking gross over-generalization. Wheres Icone when I need him. He has created some pretty damn good productions using FLS and I'm not very bad myself. The shit I post on TA is not my best because I save shit to get signed. Give me 2 weeks and I'll show you how FLS can realyl sound out of the box. Forget that shitty first ALLFRUIT demo I did and wait for ALLFRUIT vol2.

quote:

Originally posted by DigiNut You've got to be kidding me on this one. When I'm editing audio I'll take a half-second clip and perform about 10 different effect processes on it, then 10 completely different ones on another half-second clip. I have the feeling that you imagine the most complex scenario to be a sweeping filter or phaser on a big chunk of audio - it's not. Many producers use tons of different effects on little slices of audio that can't be modelled by a couple of FX and automation tracks... ...rendering offline means you lose all the information about how you modified the audio, and if you ever need to tweak or recreate it, you're screwed. Okay, yes, you can save all your effect presets and automation curves - you then have to remember which order you put them in, and if you do this hundreds of times in a single track, then your project file is quickly going to become a complete jumbled mess - that is, if you don't run out of track/fx-slot space before then.

You seem to miss the idea of real-time FX and in fact further prove why real-time FX are better. No, you can't go and change something you applied as an offline effect, whereas with a realtime effect, you can save the project and go back later. Being able to zoom in on the playlist does in fact allow you to do very small edits and I lots of times do. I'll agree, there are some really powerful offline FX and honestly, lots of times, I do infact use Adobe Audition to edit audio, but this does not make FLS an incapable wave editor.

quote:

Originally posted by DigiNut Vocals are precisely what I'm talking about. I can timestretch nearly 15-20 BPM while almost perfectly preserving rhythmic AND pitch accuracy - can you do that in FLS? The timestretchers/samplers in that program preserve neither pitch nor rhythm (unless you're working in a scope of just a few bpm).

Like I said before, FLS includes full time stretching capabilities. This includes linear shifting (without constraint to time or pitch), pitch shifting (with contraint to time) and time shifting (with constraint to pitch). It has a great deal of accuracy too. Its wonderful on drums and does a great job on vocals. If you are into using drum loop samples (not my thing but whatever) then you can even have FLS automaticly detect the BPM of the sample and then resize automaticly it if you ever change the tempo.

quote:

Originally posted by DigiNut Turning snapping off completely defeats the purpose. You want audio tracks to line up with other audio tracks and MIDI data; personally, I'd prefer to be able to do that without manually editing the clipping information for each audio slice. And how is snapping to the quarter-note giving you 1/192 accuracy?

The 1/4th does not refer specifically to a quarter note. It instead refers to 1/4th of a block on the screen. The same goes for 1/2, 1/3 and 1/6. Zooming into the max with a snap of 1/4th allows 1/128 note edits and 1/6 zoomed all the way in allows 1/192 note edits.

quote:

Originally posted by DigiNut Ha. Ha. Maybe I just know what type of effect I'm looking for from the get-go, and don't need to fart around trying to get the right order/combination? Or, maybe I'm smart about it, and if I have just one effect then I'll stick it in slot 3 or 4 so I can easily add effects before or after?

Good for you, but I find it best to expiriment with a bunch of different things. This leads to the possibility of adding in an entire different section to the music you hadnt previously though of because you found 2 effects to modulate between and or shifted around. 'Knowing' what your looking for tends to add too much of a mathematical approach to the music. Whatever works best for you though.

quote:

Originally posted by DigiNut Okay, you've completely missed the point here. Yes, IT IS NEEDED to route a channel to more than one output, that is EXACTLY WHAT THE SIDECHAIN IS. And I'm sorry, but the 4 send tracks that FLS offers are completely inadequate - even in my simplest tracks I invariably use at least double that. Maybe you don't use sends much, but that doesn't mean nobody does! It's not uncommon to have several different delays, reverbs, and other "wet-only" effects and to want to selectively add those effects to individual dry tracks. Without a proper sidechain and only 4 sends, this isn't even possible, let alone convenient. Even if you've got 4 state-of-the-art PCs all networked together, good luck squeezing out enough CPU power to run all those effects as inserts.

Instead, you missed the point. You can sidechain because you can route the bass chanel and the kick channel into another FX channel. Then you can add your compressor and voila, rudamentory sidechaing. I find this method better to using a sidechain compressor because it tends to keep a better gain response while keeping the kick and bassline pretty bright. As for using sends, I tend not to use them. They are a good idea in principle, but I have a lot of processor cycles to use and I like to use them. I do have a lot of effects running and they all run smoothly.

quote:

Originally posted by DigiNut Christ... why do FL junkies all have this attitude? I bitch about Cubase all the time and how shitty a program it is, but with the FLoopers, it's like their magical program can do no wrong. It does everything and it does it perfectly.

Actually, I complain plenty about FLS. Theres tons of things I would like improved about FLS but instead of bitching constantly, I deal with it. If it isnt going to change, why waste your time bitching about it when thats time you could have spent producing. I'm definitely not saying its a magical program. What I dont like is people that use Cubase or any other sequencer talking shit on my sequencer of choice. Just because you havent been able to produce shit with it does not make it a shitty sequencer. It also does not make you an expert at using it either. I think you need to look more to your patience than to how 'shitty' you think FLS really is. Learning it takes time and patience but in the end, it really pays off no matter what you think about it.


Cheers,
Zac.

Whatever dude, I have no intention of responding to all that. Fine, Fruityloops is the most fan-fucking-tastic program in the universe. It can do anything that the professional sequencers do even though it costs 1/10th of the price! Everybody go out and buy fruityloops!

Oh, P.S.

quote:

Originally posted by IDarkISwordI Instead, you missed the point. You can sidechain because you can route the bass chanel and the kick channel into another FX channel. Then you can add your compressor and voila, rudamentory sidechaing.

THAT IS NOT A FUCKING SIDECHAIN
THAT IS NOT A FUCKING SIDECHAIN
THAT IS NOT A FUCKING SIDECHAIN
THAT IS NOT A FUCKING SIDECHAIN
THAT IS NOT A FUCKING SIDECHAIN
THAT IS NOT A FUCKING SIDECHAIN
THAT IS NOT A FUCKING SIDECHAIN
THAT IS NOT A FUCKING SIDECHAIN
THAT IS NOT A FUCKING SIDECHAIN
THAT IS NOT A FUCKING SIDECHAIN

Please, LOOK UP WHAT A SIDECHAIN IS! IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH COMPRESSION!!! AAAAARGH JIOSD*(@#*()DSHO(T&*@q3g99gYEbhsdooDSFFDSDXFZ

The most common use of sidechaining is when you are using sidechaining compression. Which tends to also refer to ducking. If you want to link me to your definition of sidechaining, I'd be happy to read it.

quote:

Originally posted by IDarkISwordI The most common use of of sidechaining is to use sidechaining compression. You also clearly stated in your previous post about ducking, which has a lot to do with compression. A sidechain compressor does not affect the gain of the sidechain, instead it affects the threshold of the sidechain, so when speaking of ducking, it has a lot to do with a compressor.

I stated that I was NOT talking about the bassducking effect!

A side chain is a parallel signal path from the "side" of an audio channel, as opposed to the "front" which is the channel's primary output. The term "side chain" makes NO assumptions whatsoever about what type of effect is being used.

You can't do this in FL. You just can't. FL tracks don't have a sidechain. All you have are 4 static "sends". There is no flexibility whatsoever in that routing and it's completely insufficient for a huge number of projects (I use up 5 FX tracks in Cubase just with reverb... that's not counting delay lines or side-chain group routings).

FYI, the *most* common use of the side chain is not compression, but reverb and delay. It is unfortunate and annoying that so many producers understand this concept *only* as a "send" and think that sidechaining always refers to a redirected compressor.

quote:

Originally posted by DigiNut A side chain is a parallel signal path from the "side" of an audio channel, as opposed to the "front" which is the channel's primary output.

I'd really like to see where you have gotten this definition because it seems that the way you have worded it, it makes it sound as if it does stereo imaging, which it does not do. A side-chain in definition from what I have seen refers to a primary signal and a sidechain, where the primary is able to trigger a change in the sidechain, generally a chainge in volume in the case of a kick + bassline. In your definition, jsut about any send can be conidered a sidechain because sends are generally done in parallel with the generators primary FX channel.

I didn't "get" it from anywhere, it happens to be something I know as an electrical engineer.

I refuse to get sucked any further into this debate. I made one lighthearted comment which was OBVIOUSLY not meant to be taken seriously since I posted a picture of a can of worms right below. You chose to take it personally, accuse me of ALWAYS bashing FL, and proceed to try to convince me that FL can do everything that Cubase does, and even more outrageously tell me that I must simply lack the skill you have if I don't want to learn the overly circuitous routes in Fruityloops to accomplishing what would be a relatively simple task in other sequencers.

Where did I EVER bash FLS, before you chimed in? Where did I ever bash you as a producer? Why the need to militantly defend your choice of sequencer to people who don't even care?

And I don't care. I give up. I don't fucking care. Fine, Fruityloops is a better sequencer. Fine, you're a more skilled producer than I am and that's how you're able to do things in Fruityloops that I just couldn't "figure out" how to do. I tip my hat to you Zac, you really showed me who's boss around here.

Is that what you want to hear? Is that what it will take to end this ridiculous debate? I DON'T CARE. You use whatever damn sequencer you please but don't fucking accuse me of being an idiot because I find the feature set of a particular sequencer to be limited or inadequate for my needs as a producer. What kind of shit attitude is that? Don't you realize how much of a hypocrite you're being?

quote:

Originally posted by DigiNut I didn't "get" it from anywhere, it happens to be something I know as an electrical engineer. I refuse to get sucked any further into this debate. I made one lighthearted comment which was OBVIOUSLY not meant to be taken seriously since I posted a picture of a can of worms right below. You chose to take it personally, accuse me of ALWAYS bashing FL, and proceed to try to convince me that FL can do everything that Cubase does, and even more outrageously tell me that I must simply lack the skill you have if I don't want to learn the overly circuitous routes in Fruityloops to accomplishing what would be a relatively simple task in other sequencers. Where did I EVER bash FLS, before you chimed in? Where did I ever bash you as a producer? Why the need to militantly defend your choice of sequencer to people who don't even care? And I don't care. I give up. I don't fucking care. Fine, Fruityloops is a better sequencer. Fine, you're a more skilled producer than I am and that's how you're able to do things in Fruityloops that I just couldn't "figure out" how to do. I tip my hat to you Zac, you really showed me who's boss around here. Is that what you want to hear? Is that what it will take to end this ridiculous debate? I DON'T CARE. You use whatever damn sequencer you please but don't fucking accuse me of being an idiot because I find the feature set of a particular sequencer to be limited or inadequate for my needs as a producer. What kind of shit attitude is that? Don't you realize how much of a hypocrite you're being?

I honestly dont give a shit either dude. The only reason I started the debate is because you blatantly put down FLS. Ive seen you before, try to tell users of other sequencers to switch over to Cubase because it was 'better' and that thier sequencer was of much less sophistication. My entire arguement was that it isnt better, its equal.. Notice that I never once tried to point to a flaw in Cubase. I know its a pretty decent sequencer. I prefer to use FLS because I like the workflow better than a multitracker. And no, I dont want to hear you say I'm better or that FLS is better. I just dislike it when you put down other sequencers. Dont give me that 'you have an attitude problem' crap either dude. You were well into the debate and definitely on the offensive here. If you can understand this, then you can understand that I'm not a hypocrite.

wow, this has become an interesting thread.....

Yeah it's kinda pointless. Can a moderator just close this? It's turned into a flame war. Just PM each other with vicious comments about what's what or why you're wrong and the other person isn't. Don't keep posting in a thread where someone just posted "So I picked up FL Studio 5 today..." Come on I know you both are better than that.

ROFL I had to point this out. Look at what this thread has turned out to be and what the guy had posted originally...and I quote "What type of MIDI input device do the FL users here recommend so I can incorporate my synths into this project?"

As an FL Studio producer, I fully admit that FL Studio has its limitations. As does Cubase or Logic or Reason or anything else.

I use FL Studio because I happen to find the interface to be very intuitive. I understand FL well from a conceptual standpoint. I also find its interface to be very easy on the eyes. There are certain things it is limited on, but it's what I work best with. I'd probably be very lost in Cubase (I haven't tried). I know full well that Cubase is an incredible suite because I've heard what has come out of it.

It all comes down to preference. Different strokes, and all that.

/end thread

Hey guys! Next thread we should talk about abortion! : /

Well I thought it was a very intresting. I own both sequencers ( real copies ) and I think I've have learned the pros and cons of both in quite a bit of detail.
I use fl studio myself but after this thread I think I'am going to record and edit my audio in cubase then import to fl studio.

So thanks guys

quote:

Originally posted by Derivative dont go there fu.cker! thats why i have soundforge. but shhhhhhh.

Ditto!

quote:

Originally posted by IDarkISwordI ALLFRUIT vol2 will be out soon for those fruity fans

Darksword, what is allfruit vol 2, sounds interesting.

PC

[naive childish mode]
This is to all Cubase, Live, Logic and Reason users:

FL STUDIO IS THA BEST

nah nah nah nah nah, i am better than you, nah nah nah nah nah
[/naive childish mode]

***EdIT

i feel the need to defend darksword here.

about quantisation. fruity can actually quantise to smaller increments than 1/128th step. you have to double the timebase in the options menu to do this and you can go waaaaay smaller. this also changes the proportion of the step sequencer grid.

the only downside to this is that existing scores retain their proportionate length. therefore, changing the timebase on an existing project actually changes the duration and starting position of all the notes in the entire score.

i agree with diginut about audio editting in fl studio. its functional to a point. but its not precise. you cannot edit wav files to a degree of accuracy that you can in, for example soundforge. soundforge allows you to zoom in and edit in lengths of individual samples. thats a tiny tiny tiny increment. from my experience of fl studio's audio editor there is only a rough timeline. and selecting a very small part of the wave form (less than 1000 samples duration) is very annoying using fl studio's retarded 'selector bar.' christ. why cant you just zoom in/out using the mousewheel and highlight the bit you want with the mouse cursor...

about sidechaning. and this is aimed at diginut and bedlem. please. fl studio is fl studio and cubase sx is cubase sx. the two are not comparible in terms of how you go about using them. they are only comparable in terms of the end result you can get out of them.

citing the fact that you cannot sidechain in fl studio is pointless because you are trying to use fl studio as if it were cubase. which it is not. it is fl studio. if you are used to using sidechain inputs then cubase is probably something you will be more familiar with. fl studio users dont think in terms of sidechain inputs - if we want a second audio stream to determine the effect level of another audio stream we automate it manually. fl studio makes this easy to do since every rotary/slider/parameter in every fruity plugin can be modulated. additionally, all effects in fl studio can be mixed in and out gradually (and these rotaries can also be automated). you can also link any effect variable to a midi channel and simultaneously automate 1 variable at the same time through the same midi channel (or inversely proportional to/theres quite a few waves/steps you can use) as that of another effect variable. it doesnt take much longer to set up something in fl studio that results in a sidechain like effect.

Wow, why do people feel the need to defend their sequencer so passionately?

Make music, not hate.

Wow lol, I never intended for this to turn into a 'what sequencer' is better competition but it's been a good read with lots of interesting information nonetheless, thanks for everyone's input and advice.

I'm just excited about finally breaking the software barrier myself, I did alot of research, probably too much but all in all I get the impression FL Studio is a great place to start, whether or not I'll move on to different software eventually, only time will tell.

Like I said though, I get the impression FL Studio is at the least a great starting point, now I'm ready to start putting some ideas together and getting everyone's advice on how I can improve and develop my composing skills.

I only made a couple of comments about FL not having the essential functions that I need that cubase does have. I was then accused of slander and summond before the FL county judge.

I have another question as far as FL Studio (might as well keep it in the same thread)... I noticed the manual that comes with the software is not very detailed, I also noticed they have the FL Studio Bible available at their website, does anyone have this? And if so, would they recommend it to others just getting started? Or is it a waste of money?

I brought the fl studio bible but to be honest it's taught me more about the basics of production than fl studio it's self.

For example if you know what the basic settings and functions are and do on a reverb or delay pluging then that pretty much applies for all plugings on all sequencers.

It's been pretty useful but I don't think theres anythnig at all here which you could,nt have either figured out on your own or with the help file bundled with the software and there's a pdf of it on the net anyway.

( If your pretty new to production and fl is your first sequencer then I do recommended it other wise forget it)

Hope this helps

quote:

Originally posted by Jason_R I brought the fl studio bible but to be honest it's taught me more about the basics of production than fl studio it's self. For example if you know what the basic settings and functions are and do on a reverb or delay pluging then that pretty much applies for all plugings on all sequencers. It's been pretty useful but I don't think theres anythnig at all here which you could,nt have either figured out on your own or with the help file bundled with the software and there's a pdf of it on the net anyway. ( If your pretty new to production and fl is your first sequencer then I do recommended it other wise forget it) Hope this helps

Indeed! Thank you!

Thing is, I'm not new to producing music, but I am new to producing music with software.
I pretty much understand how different effects work, I understand compression settings, reverb and delay settings, limiters, phasers and flangers, how lo's, hi's and mid's fit into the stereo spectrum etc etc but what I'm interested in is more of a quick reference book so I can find my way around the software more easily and discover what the software is capable of without having to go to the website or basically jump through alot of hoops.

quote:

I only made a couple of comments about FL not having the essential functions that I need that cubase does have. I was then accused of slander and summond before the FL county judge.

now you are just being melodramatic...

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.