|
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? 
| quote: | Originally posted by IDarkISwordI
I thought that it was pretty easy to drop in a wav file into the playlist and then drop in FX, automate them and then render the wav to a new one. Guess thats absolutely nothing like Cubase. True enough, offline FX dont work as well as they should when rendering tracks but honestly, how many offline FX do you need that cant be supplemented by a just as worthy real-time effect. |
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.
How many offline FX do I need? You'd be surprised. What you don't seem to understand is that the whole reason Steinberg implemented this functionality in Cubase SX was because the users wanted it! You yourself may not have a need for it, but other users do.
Plus you seem to be missing the obvious issue of CPU constraints, coupled with the fact that 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.
| quote: | | Another foolish statement. The Fruity Sampler allows full time stretching capabilities and they are quite nice. The lack of formant preserve is a dissapointment to me but thats not a common effect except when I'm doing vocals. |
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).
| quote: | | Another misconception. You can even turn snapping off in FLS and have a resolution as acurate as your screen resolution is. Although, getting down to 128th notes is as easy as zooming in on the playlist and setting the snapping rules to 1/4th. You can even go down to 192nd notes in snapping. |
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?
| quote: | | You might be shocked to learn, FLS can save presets for any plugin there is. Interestingly enough, not only can you do that, but you can also save entire FX channels as presets and load them up into another FX channel. |
Cubase organizes them by plugin and puts them in the drop-down menu for that plugin. One click, no searching for files. True, it's not a necessity, but it's a huge convenience when you have a ton of patches. That was really a minor, off-the-cuff remark that I'm not going to argue about. The preset system in FL is fine for most people, just inconvenient for me personally.
| quote: | | And about the you not needing to move FX around a lot, I think youre not expirimenting enough with your music then because you can get a completely different sound by swapping say... a phaser and a delay so that the delay comes after the phaser. |
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?
| quote: | | *shakes head* I'm beginning to think you have never even used FLS5. You can do this in FLS fully. If you want to run a sound through 64 FX channels, then you can do that. As for routing it to more than one output, this is not really going to be needed, but if you do, its easy enough to use a send. |
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.
| quote: | | Next time, before bashing FLS, make sure you know what your talking about because I believe I've hit jsut about every point you brought up, and surprisingly, FLS has everything you said it didnt. Interesting... |
It has absolutely none of what I stated. You believe it does because your understanding of certain terms and processes is incorrect or incomplete.
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.
And you know what? I had the same crummy attitude when I was doing my productions in FLS. Thank god I grew up.
___________________
My party schedule:
2009-02-21 - DJ Attention @ I'm So Popular
2009-06-18 - DJ Annoying @ People Need To Know Where I'll Be
2012-11-32 - DJ Insufferable ɸ Or At Least the Stalkers I Complain About
2048-06-66 - Spastic & Whocares ¶ Although I'm Actually Flattered
9999-45-81 - Tweaker Gimp ☼ I Probably Won't Even Go To This But I Have To Make Sure I Fill Up All The Available Space Here
|
I'll agree that Steinberg ought to get on the ball and implement that, since it seems ridiculously simple to do, but how often do you really need to move effects anyway? I think I've needed to that maybe twice.
