F L S T U D I O 9 [**** yes] - TranceAddict Forums

TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Production Studio
-- F L S T U D I O 9 [**** yes]
Pages (2): [1] 2 »

Posted by sixofour.604 on Sep-09-2009 10:53:

F L S T U D I O 9 [**** yes]

http://flstudio.image-line.com/documents/whatsnew.html

Guess what is released today.

Posted by BshidoHEAT on Sep-09-2009 11:12:

w00t!

Posted by Nightshift on Sep-09-2009 11:13:

WOOT.

i dont really use FL Studio much anymore though, however it seems like they made some huge upgrades, especially with the playlist

Posted by Final Call on Sep-09-2009 11:17:

looks really really promising!

Posted by echosystm on Sep-09-2009 16:24:

quote:
Originally posted by Final Call
looks like they finally got their shit together

fixed

Posted by itsamemario on Sep-09-2009 16:33:

downloading now, can't wait to check it out
lifetime free upgrades ftmfw!

Posted by s_grant on Sep-09-2009 16:39:

Just downloading the demo now, hoping the automation is more integrated with the playlist now as it could get a bit complicated if you had lots of automation clips in the previous versions. Also looking forward to the improved multithreaded processing.

Posted by cryophonik on Sep-09-2009 16:43:

I bought FLS6 a few years ago on a whim, but never really used it. Now I get Vocodex for free, so I'm finally going to get my money's worth!

Posted by Sinnica Hax on Sep-09-2009 17:35:

I logged in on imagelines website today just randomly to download the latest FL version upon re-installing Vista and got 9.0 almost fell of my chair, this version is DELICIOUS, loads much faster, and the enchanced plug-ins is OFF THE HOOK, this should get my inspiration back if anything

Posted by sako487 on Sep-09-2009 19:14:

man i just hope its faster and crashes less with the new multithreaded processing

Posted by s_grant on Sep-09-2009 20:33:

Been trying out the demo for the past hour and you can definitely see a difference in the cpu usage, seems to be down about 5-10% for a remix I have been working on recently on a dual core system.

Posted by sixofour.604 on Sep-10-2009 17:59:

Fuck Yes, In FL 9 I can set my latnecy from 2048 to... *drumroll* 8192! That's 186ms

Posted by Subtle on Sep-10-2009 18:01:

quote:
Originally posted by sixofour.604
Fuck Yes, In FL 9 I can set my latnecy from 2048 to... *drumroll* 8192! That's 186ms
Thats what i call beardgrowing

Posted by Zak McKracken on Sep-10-2009 18:07:

quote:
Originally posted by sixofour.604
Fuck Yes, In FL 9 I can set my latnecy from 2048 to... *drumroll* 8192! That's 186ms

imagine the soundquality you will gain with this.

Posted by Subtle on Sep-10-2009 18:26:

quote:
Originally posted by palm
imagine the soundquality you will gain with this.
2048 x 4 = 8192

192 x 4 = 792 khz

Posted by sixofour.604 on Sep-10-2009 18:31:

quote:
Originally posted by Subtle
2048 x 4 = 8192

192 x 4 = 792 khz

duh

Posted by Akridrot on Sep-10-2009 18:42:

When will people finally stop saying "OMG, you made *that* with FL Studio?!"

It's already reached that point for me. Each new release always impresses me. Image-line is making some quality software here.

Posted by sako487 on Sep-10-2009 18:48:

Its all down to the user I think. All producers are as good with the software they are using as they want it to be. Fl studio is pretty much the same as say cubase or reason, just a different interface.

Posted by Nightshift on Sep-10-2009 20:52:

quote:
Originally posted by sixofour.604
Fuck Yes, In FL 9 I can set my latnecy from 2048 to... *drumroll* 8192! That's 186ms

LOL

Posted by echosystm on Sep-10-2009 23:18:

quote:
Originally posted by palm
imagine the soundquality you will gain with this.

was it chronodevir that actually thought a higher buffer increased sound quality? or was it someone else? i forget.

Posted by sixofour.604 on Sep-11-2009 00:09:

No one ever throught high buffer rates increased sound quality. cronodevir said high buffer rates removes clicks and pops and underruns and all that. Diginut, Subtle, DJ RANN and a few others said it didn't.

Posted by Tarpex on Sep-11-2009 00:16:

I'm in contact with a few guys that are releasing on Black Hole, Armada, Alter Ego and such top class labels and working everything in FL studio version X, so it's not a question whether if it's a good DAW, it's just a matter of preference.

I personally hate FL with all my heart, same with another camp thinking similarly about cubase / sonar / logic.

Go make some good tunes boys

Posted by echosystm on Sep-11-2009 00:33:

quote:
Originally posted by sixofour.604
cronodevir said high buffer rates removes clicks and pops and underruns and all that. Diginut, Subtle, DJ RANN and a few others said it didn't.

i find that hard to believe... each of those people know exactly what a buffer is. methinks you're distorting the facts

i remember the thread now.

Posted by Lucidity on Sep-11-2009 01:27:

He just talked in 3rd person, lol

Posted by kadomony on Sep-11-2009 05:26:

liking the bells in Ogun!

http://dl.getdropbox.com/u/1734626/mcbells.mp3
http://dl.getdropbox.com/u/1734626/livestuff.mp3

live playin stuff

Pages (2): [1] 2 »