Posted By SPE on 26 Sep 2009 10:13 AM
whatever top 40 song you are into, or any song at all can be made with FL as the main program.
really you could do anything with it. its only limited by its user.

Posted By 3nigma on 26 Sep 2009 01:54 PM

Posted By SPE on 26 Sep 2009 10:13 AM
whatever top 40 song you are into, or any song at all can be made with FL as the main program.
really you could do anything with it. its only limited by its user.

From a logical standpoint, I understand that FL CAN do anything the top end DAWs can do, but no one is really doing it. All the top musicians I look up all use either Logic Pro, Pro Tools, Ableton Live, Reason, or Cubase. Not one mention of FL. I've also never seen FL as a part of anyone's 'Live' setup, or in any major audio engineering studio.

It doesn't really motivate me to use the program. It's kind of like if a certain car cost $1,000 but was as good as the $50,000 ones. Except, no one drove it. It's like... huh? Why aren't more people driving it? Is it inferior? Etc. Maybe it's the name?

If I was a big time music producer and I had clients that recorded entire albums in my studio, I'd rather be using a program called 'Pro Tools' than 'Fruity Loops.' Get me?

Posted By AK beatz on 26 Sep 2009 02:25 PM

Don't use fruity loops then...if you think it's crap only cuz of name "fruity loops" you didn't get the point, what a DAW is all about.

If the top musician you look up to would jump off a bridge, would you do the same thing?
Do you need some kind of a "approved" certification from top producers to use a particular DAW?


Any DAW is limited by its user, like SPE said. If you suck either way, no pro tools will help you.

Posted By Sabotage on 26 Sep 2009 02:43 PM
Yes!

The reason (while many people actually do use, pro or not) why people don't eagerly confess to using FLStudio is largely based on it's old name and stigma.

Fruity Loops was a poor choice and IL would do wisely in dropping the name and any association to it all together... Not that it would make the program any better or worse, just makes sense from a marketing point of view.

Somewhere along the line, FL got the stigma of being a kids toy, why and how is a compilation of many things. It doesn't help either that the price is right, cause surely that tiny thing cannot do what the tools I dropped 20 grand on can. FL doesn't have ALL the features all other daws have, then again neither does any of them. However alot of the things that are not there are not crucial in any way and are not even used by most users. A good analogy is ADOBE Photoshop, alot of people use it and for what? Drawing... Well thats all fine and dandy, but most users will propably use about 25% of photshops functions and cabability. There are things in there that have to do with post processing and editing photos that I will propably never use.

Also alot of times when people argue against FL, they bring up the point of it's stock sounds not being very good. Well that says more about the nay sayer then it does FL. And to anyone that actually knowledgeable it should be a mute point from the get go.

At the end it all boils down to what you what fits your workflow and what you feel comfortable working with. You make the music, only a bad carpenter blames the tools.

Posted By 2nd Man on 28 Sep 2009 01:33 AM

Posted By Sabotage on 26 Sep 2009 02:43 PM
Yes!

The reason (while many people actually do use, pro or not) why people don't eagerly confess to using FLStudio is largely based on it's old name and stigma.

Fruity Loops was a poor choice and IL would do wisely in dropping the name and any association to it all together... Not that it would make the program any better or worse, just makes sense from a marketing point of view.

Somewhere along the line, FL got the stigma of being a kids toy, why and how is a compilation of many things. It doesn't help either that the price is right, cause surely that tiny thing cannot do what the tools I dropped 20 grand on can. FL doesn't have ALL the features all other daws have, then again neither does any of them. However alot of the things that are not there are not crucial in any way and are not even used by most users. A good analogy is ADOBE Photoshop, alot of people use it and for what? Drawing... Well thats all fine and dandy, but most users will propably use about 25% of photshops functions and cabability. There are things in there that have to do with post processing and editing photos that I will propably never use.

Also alot of times when people argue against FL, they bring up the point of it's stock sounds not being very good. Well that says more about the nay sayer then it does FL. And to anyone that actually knowledgeable it should be a mute point from the get go.

At the end it all boils down to what you what fits your workflow and what you feel comfortable working with. You make the music, only a bad carpenter blames the tools.

Word, I never got why people say "FL Stock sounds are wack", like so.....





-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Talking about the stock sounds of a DAW and the capabilities are two different things.

Fl stock sounds are whack...let's face it. But this doesn't mean you can't create good music with fruity.