Differences Between Sequencers

[DJ Elemental]

liquideyes said:

DJ_Elemental said:

Point is - i think the fruityloops basics are too basis which is why i associate it as a kiddies toy

I don't understand your point...?

 

You judge a program by its results. And I've heard some pretty [censored]-hot stuff come out of Fruity. If it is easy to use, then even better!

 

i've heard some sweet outcomes too - but because its 'so easy to use' every one is using it flooding the market with crap - im not saying all those who use fruity make rubbish tracks

[ReBirth]

liquideyes said:

You judge a program by its results. And I've heard some pretty [censored]-hot stuff come out of Fruity. If it is easy to use, then even better!

 

yea, I agree with u there

[Claire DC]

DJ_Elemental said:

liquideyes said:

DJ_Elemental said:

Point is - i think the fruityloops basics are too basis which is why i associate it as a kiddies toy

I don't understand your point...?

 

You judge a program by its results. And I've heard some pretty [censored]-hot stuff come out of Fruity. If it is easy to use, then even better!

 

i've heard some sweet outcomes too - but because its 'so easy to use' every one is using it flooding the market with crap - im not saying all those who use fruity make rubbish tracks

 

Id be more likely to blame the labels that signed the tracks.. people can make crap tunes every day but if theyre signed thats down to the label.. not what sequencer they use.. how can u even bring that into this topic when its not the market of tunes im talkin about im talkin about the advantages and disadvantages of each sequencer not how the market is flloded with bad tunes!! Not bein funny but this comment has nothin to do with the original question.. bad tunes can be made on ANY sequencer.. yes Mark ANY even ur amazin(?) customised stuff!! *

 

*drunk maybe not makin her point as well as she could!!

[Claire DC]

ReBirth said:

liquideyes said:

You judge a program by its results. And I've heard some pretty [censored]-hot stuff come out of Fruity. If it is easy to use, then even better!

 

yea, I agree with u there

 

And me!!

[ReBirth]

liquideyes said:

"what can you do in other sequencers that you can't do in Fruity? Nothing!"

 

Yea, I might have been guilty of a statement like that somewhere o no wait, I think I said someone should show me something that it can't do..

 

But in all fairness there is some features in Fruity that works a lot better (in MY opinion..) than the other sequencers....and I base that on the fact that it's faster to do in Fruity than some others, and if u're doing the engineering for someone then time = money, and they'd rather see results getting achieved faster

[Rob D]

The point has been made that labels are responsible for signing crap, and yes they are, but any kiddie can get FL for free off the internet and make [censored] music. For someone to invest in something like Pro Tools and the associated hardware and some other studio bits shows a certain level of commitment and I think makes a better producer. To make a decent tune in PT shows a lot more takent than making some bollox run of the mill formulaic hard trance track in FL that sounds like every other hard trance track released since Cafe Del Mar and Trance became BIG.

[ReBirth]

Rob D said:

To make a decent tune in PT shows a lot more takent than making some bollox run of the mill formulaic hard trance track in FL that sounds like every other hard trance track released since Cafe Del Mar and Trance became BIG.

 

yea, I get your point, but surely if you can get results just as good on Fruity without spending THOUSANDS of pounds on a ProTools system then the better...

 

Yea sure, there's a lot of [censored] tunes being made on Fruit, but there's also a lot of [censored], and standard tunes made on ProTools, Logic, Cubase...at the end of they day it's up to the producer , NOT the sequencer , because a good producer should be able to make a decent track on all of them.

[Ian Cashman]

ReBirth said:

liquideyes said:

"what can you do in other sequencers that you can't do in Fruity? Nothing!"

 

and I base that on the fact that it's faster to do in Fruity than some others, and if u're doing the engineering for someone then time = money, and they'd rather see results getting achieved faster

 

like what?

[CreamyC]

Claire DC said:

CreamyC said:

liquideyes said:

Claire,

Fruity is not even in the same league as Cubase/Logic. It is a joke to compare them.

 

It's like comparing a sports car to a juggernaut: FL may be very slick and fun to use, but it is nowhere near as feature-packed as Cubase.

 

FL is basically a loop-editing tool, that has been slightly extended over the last couple of years into a half-baked sequencing package.

 

Cubase & Logic were designed as complete virtual studios, to enable simultaneous recording/playback of multiple audio tracks, and MIDI arrangement. E.g. for recording & producing bands etc.

 

Summed up nicely. Slam dunk.

 

So whats your views on the sequencers.. ie ur reasons for agreeing?

 

My reasons for agreeing are private. See FAO post that Jay kindly did for me. However, I'd be more interested to hear your views on it seeing as you ARE a DJ and all that. Well, apparently but I've still seen no proof since you registered your ass in July 2002.

[LiquidEyes]

DJ_Elemental said:

i've heard some sweet outcomes too - but because its 'so easy to use' every one is using it flooding the market with crap - im not saying all those who use fruity make rubbish tracks

Your reasoning seems to be as follows:

 

"If a lot of people make crap music with a certain product, then it must be a toy."

 

Wrong. You can make crap music with a £10,000 studio or a £100,000 studio. However most normal people can't afford this! This notion that, because a program is simple to use it must be a "toy", is a load of utter bollocks.

 

I don't regard Fruity as a toy just because it's easy to use. I regard it as a toy because [for my requirements] it simply doesn't have the features I demand from a sequencer.

 

Having said that... I like toys.

[ReBirth]

Mod1 said:

 

like what?

 

Like dropping in your samples from the broser straight into the step sequencer, and then it automatically loads it into the sampler. And when you want to timestrecth a pre-made loop, you quickly adjust it to 16 or 32 bars etc...whereas with others you first have to import the samples, or open up a sampelr on a channel and then import the sample into that etc..then open up a seperate editor to time stretch etc etc..

 

If you have a pre-made melody in midi, you don't need to import the midi file and then assign it to a specific instrument or channel, you can just open the piano roll of a VST by pressing F7 and then import it directly into your piano roll (or matrix sequencer..whichever u prefer) and bam your done.

 

 

[Scream]

ReBirth said:

Scream said:

but can you honestly say that if we asked a lot of people in the industry they will say that fruity is better??? I mean if it was why isn't fruity the big piece of software and logic, cubase and protools not?

 

erm...did u even read my post ? I didn't say Fruity was better than the others

 

Ok, fair enough, I may not know every ickle bit of "all" the appz, but I'd say that I'm pretty well tuned up since SAE's beaten every ounce of knowledge about those sequencers into my tiny little mind in the Audio Engineering diploma.....

 

 

LOL Obviously you hadn't read the original post made by claire. this was us battling out what's the best sequencer. As you've quoted from my post i'm asking you if we asked a [censored] load of professional producers what's better FL or cubase, protools etc what would they answer? Get my point? I'm battling what i think is best. Notice i say "I"?? lol.

 

Like i said on samplecity mate it's down to personal pref, my mate can make wikid tunes in FL, yet i think you get a much richer sound out of logic with a lot less work as compared to FL.

 

I've only just started learning Logic and i've got a long way to go, but already i can see a difference.

[ReBirth]

Scream said:

 

LOL Obviously you hadn't read the original post made by claire. this was us battling out what's the best sequencer. As you've quoted from my post i'm asking you if we asked a [censored] load of professional producers what's better FL or cubase, protools etc what would they answer? Get my point? I'm battling what i think is best. Notice i say "I"?? lol.

 

Like i said on samplecity mate it's down to personal pref, my mate can make wikid tunes in FL, yet i think you get a much richer sound out of logic with a lot less work as compared to FL.

 

I've only just started learning Logic and i've got a long way to go, but already i can see a difference.

 

fair enuff

[Scream]

ReBirth said:

Scream said:

 

LOL Obviously you hadn't read the original post made by claire. this was us battling out what's the best sequencer. As you've quoted from my post i'm asking you if we asked a [censored] load of professional producers what's better FL or cubase, protools etc what would they answer? Get my point? I'm battling what i think is best. Notice i say "I"?? lol.

 

Like i said on samplecity mate it's down to personal pref, my mate can make wikid tunes in FL, yet i think you get a much richer sound out of logic with a lot less work as compared to FL.

 

I've only just started learning Logic and i've got a long way to go, but already i can see a difference.

 

fair enuff

 

can't saif fairer than that, lol

[LiquidEyes]

ReBirth said:

Like dropping in your samples from the broser straight into the step sequencer, and then it automatically loads it into the sampler. And when you want to timestrecth a pre-made loop, you quickly adjust it to 16 or 32 bars etc...whereas with others you first have to import the samples, or open up a sampelr on a channel and then import the sample into that etc..then open up a seperate editor to time stretch etc etc..

Obviously Fruity is a lot more streamlined as a soft-sampler. But citing this as evidence that Fruity is better than Cubase/Logic/whatever is a bit superficial.

 

There are things I can do much more quickly in FL, compared to Cubase, but ultimately FL is very limited. Essentially it's a virtual sampler with some sequencing abilities tacked on.

 

Saying FL is "better" than say Cubase (because of its slick sampler-style abilities) is like saying "Microsoft Word is better than Fruity because it has a great spell-checker".