|
Which Trance producer uses Fruity Loops? (pg. 7)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Acton |
| quote: | Originally posted by Nightshift
no offense here echosystm, but isnt Maor Levi signed? where's your music? |
Although hearing opinions from a well known artist carries weight, that's still no reason to ignore/dismiss other peoples views. |
|
|
| B_man |
| Does anyone here have the FL Studio cheat codes? |
|
|
| Subtle |
| quote: | Originally posted by Nightshift
no offense here echosystm, but isnt Maor Levi signed? where's your music? |
Being signed is irrelevant in this case.
In terms of features Cubase owns DAWs like Reason, FL Studio, Ableton etc. |
|
|
| psymon.d |
I don't think he (echo) is arguing that great music can't be created with whatever software one has available to him. This has been discussed until death and beyond, and is frankly getting tiresome. The inevitable and habitual threads entitled "Sequencer A vs. Sequencer B" are easier to forecast than the weather. One will list features of one, one will list features of the other, and finally someone will state the obvious truth--it doesn't really matter what you use, but how you use it.
What echo is arguing (I think) is that, merely on technical merits, FL Studio is somewhat inferior to Cubase. That's solely technical. As a user of FL Studio for 5 years, from FL 3-8, I'd tend to agree with him, especially when I got my first piece of hardware this year (noticing the PDC compared to Logic's). That's where the detracting from FL Studio stops really. I doubt I'll ever work as quickly as I did in FL, and I doubt I'll find a drum/sample sequencer as intuitive. But purely on a technical standpoint (all creative benefits aside), it's somewhat inferior. |
|
|
| orTofønChiLd |
| ecosystem should shut his mouth cuz he just got owned by a professional |
|
|
| Nightshift |
| quote: | Originally posted by psymon.d
I don't think he (echo) is arguing that great music can't be created with whatever software one has available to him. This has been discussed until death and beyond, and is frankly getting tiresome. The inevitable and habitual threads entitled "Sequencer A vs. Sequencer B" are easier to forecast than the weather. One will list features of one, one will list features of the other, and finally someone will state the obvious truth--it doesn't really matter what you use, but how you use it.
What echo is arguing (I think) is that, merely on technical merits, FL Studio is somewhat inferior to Cubase. That's solely technical. As a user of FL Studio for 5 years, from FL 3-8, I'd tend to agree with him, especially when I got my first piece of hardware this year (noticing the PDC compared to Logic's). That's where the detracting from FL Studio stops really. I doubt I'll ever work as quickly as I did in FL, and I doubt I'll find a drum/sample sequencer as intuitive. But purely on a technical standpoint (all creative benefits aside), it's somewhat inferior. |
I understand this but i believe this Thread is titled "Which Trance producer uses Fruity Loops?"
So i believe entering this thread and bashing FL saying its not as "good" as cubase is completely out of place and immature.
if the thread poster wanted that opinion then he would have named the thread something different.
| quote: | Originally posted by Nemesis44
Far too much emphasis is placed on tools and techniques these days and not enough time is spent discussing good song writing skils.
All DAWs have plus and minus points. You don't even need amazing VSTs.
I think for the totally computer based musician who possibly has limited musicianship but has good ideas and understanding, it will do fine. Some of the other DAWs do admittedly work better with hardware.
Cheers
Nem |
+1
| quote: | Originally posted by cronodevir
Alot of people around here who talk about what DAW is best, what hardware is best, what technique is best, probably cannot even write a melody |
+1
| quote: | Originally posted by orTofønChiLd
ecosystem should shut his mouth cuz he just got owned by a professional |
:haha: +1 |
|
|
| echosystm |
| quote: | Originally posted by Nightshift
no offense here echosystm, but isnt Maor Levi signed? where's your music? |
irrelevant.
| quote: | Originally posted by Nightshift
It doesnt matter what DAW you use its the person behind the DAW that matters. |
go back and read what i said.
"that's not to say you can't make good music with it though... but on technical merit, it sucks a fat one... gags on it even."
everything i said is true. |
|
|
| echosystm |
| quote: | Originally posted by orTofønChiLd
ecosystem should shut his mouth cuz he just got owned by a professional |
no i didn't.
| quote: | | the audio editing and recording is laughable, hardware support is a joke, no auto pdc, no proper sidechaining and no proper multicore cpu support. |
all maor did is come along and say "this is all bull". he provided no evidence. it is actually all true, hence not owned. ;)
you all need to stop being such blind fan boys. i never said you can't make good music on fl and i never said it doesn't have its good points... but i did say that it has fallen behind most other daws for some years now, and that is fact. |
|
|
| palm |
im with echo here, fruity is just another VST...
...
oh wait what?
:stongue: |
|
|
| hundred |
yep, fruity started out as a basic drum machine
whaawhaaaaa
:nervous: :nervous: :nervous: |
|
|
| Stef |
| quote: | Originally posted by echosystm
you all need to stop being such blind fan boys. i never said you can't make good music on fl and i never said it doesn't have its good points... but i did say that it has fallen behind most other daws for some years now, and that is fact. |
Completely true, FL prided itself on being easy to use and at the same time having the same features as the "professional" DAWs out there. What i really feel are holding FL back is it's name and it's developers.
Lets just look at the name, fruity loops, quite hard to be taken seriously when your name is a modern day synonym for homosexuality. And when looking at the "loops" part; it sort of implies that the music created is sort of stale and repetitive and just overall just writhing in it's own tautology. Imageline's shift to the "FL Studio" name did not change anything at all, in fact it prompted more people to read into the name. Couple this with an obscure fruit as the DAW's logo and you really have something that when judged solely by aesthetics seems to be a joke. What FL needs is a full brand makeover, starting from color scheme and logo and moving onto target audience GUI appeasement.
Now onto something much more ridiculous, the arrogant and pompous attitude of the developers. It at times actually felt as if they were going out of their way to not listen to the people who actually use the product(IE: the whole FL chan assortment of garbage instead of actual useful updates and fixes). It makes it very hard to stick with a product when the developers completely ignore the needs of the average producer. Let me make it clear, i do not want all of the included nonsense plugins that they offer, i want raw functionality and full license for me to be able to do anything i would want to in the program within the realm of EDM production. Oh and a customizable interface would really add to the appeal of the product. I feel that everytime i ask for these things one of the developers(gol usually) comes and basically s all over my ideas and suggestions and replaces them with his big brother knows best mentality. I do not enjoy having the same color scheme year after year (FL GUI history) just because guys over at imageline and too lazy to do anything else. The fact that i can add a random jpeg as my FL background doesnt satisfy me in the slighest, in fact it only angers me because the developers thought that this is a fair trade off for having a completely bland and drab user interface. Staring at the same gray .bmp circa 1999 ad nausea is the last thing i want when i sit down and have to work on a song.
I also despise imageline for their attitude towards user customization and general user input. I cannot stand being either ignored completely or told i am wrong because what i suggest would require extra work on the developers part. True FL has a great work flow and other things of that nature. But this no where near makes up for the flaws the software seems to inherently have. |
|
|
| B_man |
| FLStudio is behind the times... I'm an FL user with a p4 processor and I am looking to upgrade to a new computer within the next year or two. FLStudio is going to have to upgrade to multicore support if it wants to keep me as a user. |
|
|
|
|
