|
fruity loops/ableton (pg. 4)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| kevin shawn |
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. |
|
|
| Lunar Phase 7 |
| 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 mind 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, |
You are deffo a spastic mate.
"The general structure of an argument in a natural language is that of premises (typically in the form of propositions, statements or sentences) in support of a claim: the conclusion."
You made a statement to support a claim; ergo - an arguement.
You actually said that playing an instrument helps with learning Cubase.
| quote: | Originally posted by Looney4Clooney
I suppose if you have never played an instrument or been in a studio, it might seem weird. |
There must be countless musician who have never used a sequencer, yet for some bizarre reason you feel that playing an instrument is enough to know cubase instinctively.
Last time I used Cubase (a few years back in fairness) there was about 10 steps required to preview a sample and then import it into the sequencer. The preview was inside some dossy little windows box and it was just crappy as hell.
FL might look fisher price but I cannot believe there is a single person on earth who would not be able to make a tune on it within 5 minutes of being shown what to do. Browse sound here > drag sound here, make loop here, make songs from loop here. Don't get much easier than that. |
|
|
| Looney4Clooney |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lunar Phase 7
You are deffo a spastic mate.
"
You actually said that playing an instrument helps with learning Cubase.
|
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. |
|
|
| Vector A |
| Learning any DAW is pretty easy as long as you have some patience. But then again, I have never tried to learn Cubase. |
|
|
| Lunar Phase 7 |
| 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. |
Oh Jesus Clooney... |
|
|
| magnosis |
| 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 :) |
|
|
| atxbigballer1 |
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. |
|
|
| atxbigballer1 |
| 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! |
|
|
| Stef |
| 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 , 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. |
Explain this then.
 |
|
|
| Storyteller |
| quote: | Originally posted by DJ RANN
and don't get me started on Renoise (inb4 Storyteller comes out with "Real men sequence vertically" :p ) |
But it's true :stongue:
| quote: | Originally posted by Andy28
Aye whats that all about?? :wtf:
Who ever thought that would be a good idea needs to go away and have serious words with them self! |
:toothless
Anyway... I'm quite positive Fruity Loops is the easiest at entry level. Few features (as in, you can start with the step-sequencer and move further along when you're ready), not too overwhelming in terms of interface (if you don't mind the colours), visually appealing for most and you can go deeper step by step.
There's a reason I got the avatar I have ;).
Most others (and Renoise especially) tend to be a bit overwhelming when starting out. |
|
|
| pointPi |
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. |
|
|
| Pagan-za |
Multicore is supported in FL 9 and 10. No idea why its not working for you. |
|
|
|
|
