Cubas vs FL Studio

[Absolutox]

Is the quality of sound really that different ? And if so, can the FL quality get better with any software or something?
I love FL, but the lack of high quality sound is pushing me towards Cubase

Anyone?

[One]

Hi

If your not getting great sound out of Fruity you won't out of Cubase either. Both apps will give you great sound!

[Absolutox]

then what am I doing wrong ...I use for example Vanguard, and with SX it appeares much thicker

[bduffy]

That shouldn't be the case.
There could be something different in the default levels between programs, maybe? When Kontakt came out, many users thought HALion sounded better, but that was because Kontakt defaults to -6db on both its volume controls, and HALion brings in samples at full blast.

[Dimuthu_DeeJay]

I love FL, but the lack of high quality sound is pushing me towards Cubase
Anyone?

What, Did u listen to the coolstuffs in FL studio??

[donbrad3]

Hi

If your not getting great sound out of Fruity you won't out of Cubase either. Both apps will give you great sound!

I really have to agree with this. It really takes time with any application to get good clean, solid, phat, whatever sound. It has also been proven that the default volume settings in FL are slightly lower than other hosts, which makes up for the seemingly difference in quality. But let's get this straight: Quality and Volume are two totally different things.....

[smart]

It's always the volume thing that makes people wonder if FL makes things sound thin - it's really just that the volume of channels defaults to a bit lower than some other apps to help people who are learning avoid clipping.

[LBN]

Cubase goes to 11.

[rbet]

FL goes to only 7.69

[tERMoBLUe]

egg's? *rofl*...

[Ras Upsettah I]

Is the quality of sound really that different ? And if so, can the FL quality get better with any software or something?
I love FL, but the lack of high quality sound is pushing me towards Cubase

Anyone?

I am a noob myself and pondering the same question. for me though it isn't a matter of sound quality per se, it's the fundamental difference in structure. With FL you have a pattern sequencer for quick and dirty song construction - if you're into rhythmic repetitive music - like 90% of modern music - this seems like a good thing. Fast results.

With Cubase you are in a far more professional, "realistic" (i.e. studio-like) environment. You have HUGE flexibility in how you can construct your music. BUT...no pattern sequencer. I don't know much about Cubase, but it seems to me that this should result in a more time-consuming workflow. How do people approach this (I am asking sincerely here)? Do you tend to create your patterns, then render them out and import them back in as audio tracks (I speak of VSTi output here) and copy/paste? Copy/paste MIDI notation in the piano roll? Or is Cubase really just for those who can play most of their tracks live, either through plugged-in real instruments (bass/guitar/keyboards/mics) or a MIDI keyboard?

Sorry for the long involved question - Should I just shuddup and get a good Cubase manual so I can find out?


Ras.

[sangha]

I am a noob myself and pondering the same question. for me though it isn't a matter of sound quality per se, it's the fundamental difference in structure. With FL you have a pattern sequencer for quick and dirty song construction - if you're into rhythmic repetitive music - like 90% of modern music - this seems like a good thing. Fast results.

I have to agree with you here. For a newb, and as a newb, I think the workflow of a host is more important than the sound quality, which is unlikely to be much different.

With Cubase you are in a far more professional, "realistic" (i.e. studio-like) environment. You have HUGE flexibility in how you can construct your music.

And for many newbs, flexibility and variety are not always a good thing. It can be confusing sometimes.

BUT...no pattern sequencer. I don't know much about Cubase, but it seems to me that this should result in a more time-consuming workflow. How do people approach this (I am asking sincerely here)? Do you tend to create your patterns, then render them out and import them back in as audio tracks (I speak of VSTi output here) and copy/paste? Copy/paste MIDI notation in the piano roll? Or is Cubase really just for those who can play most of their tracks live, either through plugged-in real instruments (bass/guitar/keyboards/mics) or a MIDI keyboard?

I tend to copy the MIDI of the part I want to loop, and then paste it into as many measures as I want it to repeat. Cubase SX3 has a "repeat" feature which does that with a mouse-click.

Also, if you want a section of the entire song (ie all the tracks) to loop (as opposed to just one track repeating) Cubase has a feature called Play Order which can be used.

Howewver, if you're into loop/pattern-based music, you'd probably be better off with something that has a pattern editor, as that interface is a more accurate representation of how you think about your music.

[birrbits]

Had several incarnations of cubase through the years.

Is it professional and studio-like to fork out money for every upgrade in a software environment that gets a minor facelift every year or 2?

As for workflow, this has been covered alot on this forum (just use the search function). After you read every time this exact conversation has occured (Cubase vs FL) you will realize that the concensus is that you can accomplish the same song in either program, usually without excessive hassle.

So it boils down to personal preferences (oh and did I mention money?)

Cubase upgrades sucked alot of my money away

[experimental.crow]

Is the quality of sound really that different ? And if so, can the FL quality get better with any software or something?
I love FL, but the lack of high quality sound is pushing me towards Cubase

Anyone?

I am a noob myself and pondering the same question. for me though it isn't a matter of sound quality per se, it's the fundamental difference in structure. With FL you have a pattern sequencer for quick and dirty song construction - if you're into rhythmic repetitive music - like 90% of modern music - this seems like a good thing. Fast results.

With Cubase you are in a far more professional, "realistic" (i.e. studio-like) environment. You have HUGE flexibility in how you can construct your music. BUT...no pattern sequencer. I don't know much about Cubase, but it seems to me that this should result in a more time-consuming workflow. How do people approach this (I am asking sincerely here)? Do you tend to create your patterns, then render them out and import them back in as audio tracks (I speak of VSTi output here) and copy/paste? Copy/paste MIDI notation in the piano roll? Or is Cubase really just for those who can play most of their tracks live, either through plugged-in real instruments (bass/guitar/keyboards/mics) or a MIDI keyboard?

Sorry for the long involved question - Should I just shuddup and get a good Cubase manual so I can find out?


Ras.

i never use the pattern sequencer in FLS ...
concentrating on the pattern sequencer is limiting , and will sell short the full capabilities of the program ...
quite pleased by the piano roll environment , and the midi-tools available therein ...

[origami]

I don't use the step sequencer either but the piano roll. Since you can make it as long as you like, I don't see so much difference between Cubase and FL then.