Originally posted by MIKE333ACE
...... i think that might actually be it.. It might just be that because I have heard so many negative comments about FL from people that have only seen it in its early days when it was bad, I subconsciously feel like there's something wrong with it, but maybe the new version is fine. Maybe its finally gotten pro, because I like it and so far it hasn't seemed to hold me back.
It seems like your attempted criticism has led me to a realisation, so thankyou....? :haha:
anyway, thanks for the input so far by everyone and you can keep adding it. i think that for the moment I have a piece of mind, especially seeing that my skills arent up there yet.
There are many speculations about that program and they are justified to a certain degree.
Of course, to notice any difference and understand its caracteristics you should have something to compare it to.
As a Cubase user, what immediately impressed me when I tried it was its thin and fragile translation in comparison. Basically, the elements seemed already equalized to me ears. In fact, I didn't eq at all. Made only a quick roll off to high freq. content such as hi-hats and obtained a pretty decent picture for a first touch.
You could pass it without any compression as well.
I think Basshunter was one who applied this into Fl.
Highs appear dirty, but not harsh and fatiguing. + and -
Mids were very pleasant and actually had some warmth. Big +
Lows very disappointing. Weak. -
So, as you can see everywhere there are some plus and minuses.
If it sounds weak in some areas maybe it means you should layer more. Adam Nickey did it, so why you couldn't do it?
Telling you this cause you should understand...you have to adapt to your program. And this applies to any daw. Every program has its strong and weak sides. Your task is to understand how to compensate.
If I could sum this, would be: "Understand your daw". Feel it, analyse it, love it, it, hug it, hate it, stretch it, abuse it, amuse it, lick it, take it, fake it, break it, make it.
Rodri Santos
notable fl users i remember:
-Arnej,Arty,Avicii,MEM,Brian Kearney... many more. I think the battle is between FL and Logic. Reason may be the real pro daw and i know very few people that use Cubase, Ableton has it's fans... Cubase... what really does the job is the technique and maybe the VST's but surely a good producer can achieve a hit using Sytrus and 3xosc integrated in FL.
Reason refill is dope as people say... logic has amazing default vsts... each one has it's advantages. I am using FL8, upgraded to 10 and hated it so reinstalled it, i think Burial is using FL3 so that pretty much speaks about the importance of the latest of latest in terms of Daws...
Without doubt if you seek this go for FL because you've lifetime upgrades, apple will make you pay 200$ every year to keep you pretending to be cool.
Julz
quote:
Originally posted by Rodri Santos
surely a good producer can achieve a hit using Sytrus and 3xosc integrated in FL.
A good producer can make a hit in any DAW.
Pointless thread, like asking which colour condom will improve my skillz
JEO
Make some music already.
Storyteller
quote:
Originally posted by Julz
A good producer can make a hit in any DAW.
Pointless thread, like asking which colour condom will improve my skillz
I was told I look good in purple ones with green dots on them. No rings or extra stimulation in there needed either!
stewart.m
you may want to remember fl was made by gamer programers and not audio pros like logic ect so tbf fl stands up very well in my book i almost brought it my self last week but went with sony acid instead because it worked better for my needs ect.
Woony
quote:
Originally posted by Rodri Santos
I think Burial is using FL3 so that pretty much speaks about the importance of the latest of latest in terms of Daws...
No, according to him he's using soundforge (no sequencer)
DJ RANN
quote:
Originally posted by Woony
No, according to him he's using soundforge (no sequencer)
And just like TranceElevation's posts, he's trying to troll us.
even using the montage fucntion in Soundforge (which is the only think close to multitrack audio) it would be the most ing cumbersome way I could think of working apart from manually trying to stitch 2" tape together.
The only differences between daw's are how they function to let you make music, not whether they can or can't. I don't like FL as my mind doesn't work in drum patterns, it likes a linear flow, and Logic is closest thing to real studio signal flow which is how I was taught so it seems completely intuitive to me.
Having said that, some people are ninjas on FL and really blow you away with what they can so with it.
Looney4Clooney
DAW's only start mattering when you are working on very large projects. EDM projects are small , and honestly, think Reason is more than capable now a days.
Woony
quote:
Originally posted by DJ RANN
And just like TranceElevation's posts, he's trying to troll us.
even using the montage fucntion in Soundforge (which is the only think close to multitrack audio) it would be the most ing cumbersome way I could think of working apart from manually trying to stitch 2" tape together.
B: I’m not a ‘musician,’ no training, nothing. So I was always scared of people who had studios. Heroes of mine like Photek suddenly became Rupert Parkes in his studio, telling everyone how he did it. The magic got a bit lost.
B: So I thought to myself it I’m going to stick to this ty little computer program, Soundforge. I don’t know any other programs. Once I change something, I can never un-change it. I can only see the waves. So I know when I’m happy with my drums because they look like a nice fishbone. When they look just skeletal as in front of me, and so I know they’ll sound good.
M: So you don’t use a sequencer?
B: No.
M: So does that mean your drums are not necessarily in time?
B: My drums are definitely not necessarily in time. When I try and do drums that are too regimented, they lose something. But the moment I put drums where I think they sound good, rather than in time, they seem to have that roll, the swing of the jungle and garage tunes I love.
B: Some of the elements in the drums that make that swing are the ones that don’t fit in to a time signature and that are out. The little bits that are wrong. If I used a sequencer my tunes would sound rubbish.
B: Because I don’t have a sequencer I can’t really mess around. I can’t noodle, at all. I got to shove it together and vibe off it. I make the tune, ing quick. Not a single tune on my album took more than a few days to make. They come together real quick and then I spend some time on the details so they’re alright to listen to.
M: So once a tune has been started how do you go back and change it?
B: I can’t. I can only affect it. I have to fade bits out or fade it if I don’t like it or replace it and hope it’s in time. It’s budget. It’s not perfect.
I've heard people claim how some parts in his tunes are impossible to make without a sequencer. Maybe he's lying. I find it believable enough.
