TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Production Studio
-- fruity loops/ableton
Pages (2): « 1 [2]
I started with Fruity Loops as my first production software. Although it was very simple, I was not satisfied with the sound quality. I then upgraded to Reason, and I must say that I was impressed. Reason has great sound quality and the interface was very user friendly. I then went over to Ableton, and I will NEVER go to another DAW EVER! Ableton is easy to use, AND the sky is the limit regarding what you can do. Best of all, I can compose, arrange, mix and master a whole production on Ableton. VST's plug in very easily and the way everthing just comes together has been amazing for me. I reccomend Ableton to ANYONE AND EVERYONE!
FL is without doubt the easiest thing to use.
Try cubase for a mind fuck.
Shit knows how people actually write a tune in that fucking thing. I'd have better luck making a song in MS Paint or Calculator.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Lunar Phase 7 Try cubase for a mind fuck. Shit knows how people actually write a tune in that fucking thing. I'd have better luck making a song in MS Paint or Calculator. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Lunar Phase 7 FL is without doubt the easiest thing to use. Try cubase for a mind fuck. Shit knows how people actually write a tune in that fucking thing. I'd have better luck making a song in MS Paint or Calculator. |
)
I always found cubase the simplest as it really is intuitive if you had ever done recording in a studio. So when I first used it in 1999 , it really didn't take any sort of learning. I would say Cubase is the simplest daw to learn, maybe protools as well.
I suppose if you have never played an instrument or been in a studio, it might seem weird.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Looney4Clooney I always found cubase the simplest as it really is intuitive if you had ever done recording in a studio. So when I first used it in 1999 , it really didn't take any sort of learning. I would say Cubase is the simplest daw to learn, maybe protools as well. I suppose if you have never played an instrument or been in a studio, it might seem weird. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by DJ RANN and don't get me started on Renoise |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Looney4Clooney |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Lunar Phase 7 Please explain how playing an instrument would aid in the use of cubase? |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Looney4Clooney ever wonder why they are called virtual instruments ? The process is very similar which is why anyone that has done any recording will find cubase has a zero learning curve. It just makes sense from a traditional standpoint. That isn't a judgement on the quality of the program, just how it relates to how things were done prior. also , musicians on average tend to a little smarter than your average EDM button pusher hack so i suppose there is that aspect. |
never said such
I said musicians tend to find it easier as musicians tend to record and people that record will see the parallels in both mediums. Regards to the virtual instrument argument, that was not posited by me. Perhaps you should read things a few times before replying as you seem to be missing much of what is said and replacing it with personal biases that you seem to want to sneak in to an argument i'm not part of. As Robyn would say, you are dancing with yourself. Lastly, some research on what an argument is, compared to a statement, or a rhetorical question would save your self much embarrassment.
How you fins cubase a mindfuck says much with little words. You will also find that musicians tend to favour linear based DAW's as it how recording was done before DAWs. Either way , i think you are putting too much emphasis on this point. The fact of the matter is that Cubase is extremely traditional and to find it difficult to learn says much about your capacity to learn anything. Are you an idiot, probably but that is neither relevant or nice.
I don't really care having a discussion with someone that has a very narrow viewpoint and a barely palpable insight into music to make the task of having to hip you to what is what quit painful.
moving on,
I found cubase easy after I read the manual and one of the cubase power books. I'm on Logic and found it easier than most other ones I've tried including FL, Reason and Ableton. Logic 8 though.
A friends wants to start working on stuff with me and he is set on using ableton. I need to hit youtube for some tutorials as I'm lost when it comes to making tracks in there. Seems straightforward but I'm not used to the layout.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Looney4Clooney never said such I said musicians tend to find it easier as musicians tend to record and people that record will see the parallels in both mediums. Regards to the virtual instrument argument, that was not posited by me. Perhaps you should read things a few times before replying as you seem to be missing much of what is said and replacing it with personal biases that you seem to want to sneak in to an argument i'm not part of. As Robyn would say, you are dancing with yourself. Lastly, some research on what an argument is, compared to a statement, or a rhetorical question would save your self much embarrassment. How you fins cubase a mindfuck says much with little words. You will also find that musicians tend to favour linear based DAW's as it how recording was done before DAWs. Either way , i think you are putting too much emphasis on this point. The fact of the matter is that Cubase is extremely traditional and to find it difficult to learn says much about your capacity to learn anything. Are you an idiot, probably but that is neither relevant or nice. I don't really care having a discussion with someone that has a very narrow viewpoint and a barely palpable insight into music to make the task of having to hip you to what is what quit painful. moving on, |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Looney4Clooney I suppose if you have never played an instrument or been in a studio, it might seem weird. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Lunar Phase 7 You are deffo a spastic mate. " You actually said that playing an instrument helps with learning Cubase. |
Learning any DAW is pretty easy as long as you have some patience. But then again, I have never tried to learn Cubase.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Looney4Clooney no i didn't. And if I did, please do show me where. And herein lies the issue with having a discussion with someone that seems to invent things others haven't said. The only thing you could claim I said very weekly is that there is a correlation which has nothing to do with the instrument but rather the typical process most musicians go thru ie recording. If you can;'t make that distinction, you do not meet the standard of intelligence for which I will tolerate replying to. Nothing personal against the feeble minded but I am not a charity and there are people out there for those types to converse and play with. And my sentence which was a rhetorical question regarding virtual instruments does not meet the criteria of an argument. Just stop. |
yea everyone is right. it depends on what u like. they all do mostly the same thing, except i prefer non-linear DAWs over linear DAWs. i started in fl studioand graduated to Reason n fell in love. and the best thing ever is reWiring Ableton and Reason together so you have vst power too (live) annnnd the best structuring program out there imho (reason). so in the end it dont really matter, just experience and choosd 
I just don't understand fl studio. I do not like it.
Reaper is sweet it's been a good DAW and does every thing i ask it to do!
As for LIVE I like it.
I use it stand alone or rewired to my main DAW like I do with Reason or I just bounce tracks down as stems for my main DAW.
Don't matter what the hell I use it's all the same I can make Music on any thing, it's a Gumbo pot I just make music!
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Kysora It's had multi-threading support for a while, I think, and I'm positive it's had full multi-core support since FL 9. I only have version 8 and audio latency is nearly nonexistent, whether it's my i7 or the 8 gigs of ram, I don't know, but either way the program doesn't seem to be struggling to take advantage of my new PC's specs. As far as looking like shit, that's subjective and irrelevant to anyone who thinks the interface works for them, such as myself. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Pagan-za Yip. 9 came out with multi-core support, and as far as I know, all the bugs are now worked out of it in 10. Personally, I love the way it looks. Never wanted to change to a different scheme. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by DJ RANN and don't get me started on Renoise (inb4 Storyteller comes out with "Real men sequence vertically" ) |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Andy28 Aye whats that all about?? Who ever thought that would be a good idea needs to go away and have serious words with them self! |
.
Enough with this "my-car-is-better-than-your-car"-babbling, already. I use FL Studio 10 because that's what my dad gave me in xmas gift.
The original question was if "sicc" should spend money on changing DAW. Really, there really is no actual difference, in terms of the quality of the production, between the different DAW's, it doesn't matter. I suggest that those money "sicc" is ready to do away with, is better spent on a new synth or sample pack.
In terms of workflow, I think it's more up to the producer rather than the program.
Multicore is supported in FL 9 and 10. No idea why its not working for you.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Pagan-za Multicore is supported in FL 9 and 10. No idea why its not working for you. |
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.