|
FL Studio ReWired thru Cubase SX3... (pg. 2)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| DJ 00 Tommy |
| quote: | Originally posted by qiushiming
lol i see he took down the screenshot of his haxed FL |
So their was another pic?? untill i read this last post i kept thinking how do you know it is pirated? |
|
|
| mysticalninja |
i just want to be able to play wandii's 3xOsc sound with all those fruityloop effects in cubase =*(
and i want to be able to eq and add effects while im playing a vsti instead of having to record to to wav first like cubase. |
|
|
| DigiNut |
| quote: | Originally posted by mysticalninja
i just want to be able to play wandii's 3xOsc sound with all those fruityloop effects in cubase =*(
and i want to be able to eq and add effects while im playing a vsti instead of having to record to to wav first like cubase. |
RTFM dude, you can do all those things in Cubase. (3xOsc patches you can reprogram in any half decent synth). |
|
|
| mysticalninja |
well ive also just got a faster work pace with FL.. is there any other reasons I should go cubase not FL? and what vsti would you recommend for reprograming a fat bass patch like wandii's?
also can you name a good vst too enhace the bass like the FL effect 'bass boost' or whatever. and a good distortion vst? |
|
|
| DigiNut |
| quote: | Originally posted by mysticalninja
well ive also just got a faster work pace with FL.. is there any other reasons I should go cubase not FL? and what vsti would you recommend for reprograming a fat bass patch like wandii's?
also can you name a good vst too enhace the bass like the FL effect 'bass boost' or whatever. and a good distortion vst? |
Well you obviously haven't learned how to use Cubase yet (no offense), so that's why you've got a faster work pace with FL. I don't even understand why you're trying to do the whole rewire thing - if you're comfortable with FL then use it. I switched to Cubase because FL was holding me back, but lots of people still use FL.
ANY synth can do a 3xOsc patch. z3ta+, Albino, V-Station, Pro53, whatever. Probably half of the free synths out there can do it too, but I can't name any since I don't use any. Just read up on some synth programming, man.
To enhance the bass: eq the bass up!
For distortion: use QuadraFuzz in Cubase, it's way better than FL's distortion unit. There are many others, but the distortion units that come with Cubase are more than enough.
|
|
|
| mysticalninja |
| can i ask what more your able to do personally with cubase instead of fruity? |
|
|
| DJ-Kreing^^ |
| quote: | Originally posted by DigiNut
I never really understood the purpose of the whole ReWire thing. With Reason I can understand, because it's a closed system, but why would anyone want to wire FL Studio in Cubase? Just use Cubase. :p |
Layering percussion in FL is much easier than in Cubase... |
|
|
| mysticalninja |
| how does FL hold you back diginut? |
|
|
| DigiNut |
| quote: | Originally posted by DJ-Kreing^^
Layering percussion in FL is much easier than in Cubase... |
Says who? Maybe if you do it sample by sample it's easier in FL, but if you use a proper sampler like Kontakt or Battery for drum sets, it's far easier to write out the MIDI parts in Cubase than it is to use FL's clunky pattern-based sequencer. I used to be addicted to pattern sequencing, but after a while I realized how "messy" it made things (since I like to vary my drums quite a bit).
| quote: | Originally posted by mysticalninja
how does FL hold you back diginut? |
1. Sound quality issues (I'm not going to debate this one, fruity lovers are entitled to their opinion, but I was not happy with the results).
2. The built-in EQ. Cubase's built-in EQ is good quality, unlike FL's, it's 4 bands not 3, and it's much easier to use.
3. Units in Cubase are in dB, so you can actually understand what's happening with the sound, unlike with FL's annoying percentage system.
4. The program layout in general - it's also much more organized when I create my own tracks rather than scrolling through those 64 preset tracks to find the one I want, and not being able to move them over, etc. I could go on and on for pages about the layout, but let's just say FL is just totally annoying for a musician.
5. Sends. FL only has 4 send tracks. I use more than that. I know with the new version they are adding delay banks and stuff, but it's still limited.
6. VST delay compensation. FL does not have it. Real pain in the ass when using things like impulse reverb or some of the more complex VSTis.
7. Efficiency. FL seems to use more CPU than Cubase for the exact same plugins. This is especially true with big ones like z3ta+ - I've never seen an instance take more than 5-10% CPU in Cubase, but in FL it would sometimes hog 20 or 30%!
8. Audio manipulation. For chopping up sounds, FL just doesn't cut it (no pun intended, hah). I know they've been improving that steadily over the past few versions, but it doesn't even come close to some of the features Cubase has, like offline process history.
9. Automation. Imageline FINALLY introduced automation clips in version 5, by which time I had already made the decision to switch to Cubase, but even the automation clips aren't quite there. They're buggy, sometimes they don't work at all, sometimes they stop halfway through, etc.
10. VST System Link. Yes there are things like FX Teleport you can use with FL, but if you're running multiple systems, that's kind of the accepted standard on PC...
Need any more reasons? :) These are just MY reasons, I'm not saying that they'll apply to everyone, and I don't intend to start a whole debate over Cubase vs. FL either. I was asked why I switched, and that's why.
Understand that I'm not the biggest fan of Cubase either. For me it's the lesser of two evils. Cubase has MANY problems with things like MIDI timing, for example. I'd much prefer an environment like Logic, but at this point I can't afford all the costs associated with switching. |
|
|
| Thois |
| Plz someone explain to me what send fx do and why they are needed in normal english? i really don't have a clue |
|
|
| DigiNut |
| quote: | Originally posted by Thois
Plz someone explain to me what send fx do and why they are needed in normal english? i really don't have a clue |
Heh, yeah, the terminology can get a little confusing.
Sends are actually what "sidechain" REALLY means, before the term was bastardized by guys like Eric Prydz. Have a look at this diagram I whipped up in Visio:
That should help explain sends/sidechains, and Cubase's architecture in general. The actual outputs of tracks are routed to a group channel or an output bus. However, you can also route a separate copy of the sound to additional tracks ("FX tracks" in Cubase), which is called the sidechain, or just "sends".
The point, of course, is to minimize CPU usage by routing a whole bunch of tracks to one common processor like reverb or delay. It generally has to be a wet-only track, things like filters obviously won't work.
Hope that explains it! |
|
|
| lars33 |
| Found a VST plugin. works with Cubase, Fl, etc. www.vstunnel.com. can make music together over the internet. Pretty cool. I think they haven't annouced it yet but you can download it for free. |
|
|
|
|
