The FLStudio 6.1 beta looks to have great features!!!

[tony tony chopper]

And he's totally full of shit... as usual. For starters my new dual core Toshiba notebook was about $600-700 cheaper than the single processor Centrino notebook, also by Toshiba, that I bought last year.

Yes, comparing today's CPU prices with last year's prices, very smart.

We all know 2 apples are cheaper than 1 apple..

I have yet to notice any difference in stability either.

I can explain why a dual CPU can make some app bugs occur more often than with a single CPU. Can you tell more than just your own experience?
Or do you live in a world in which apps are bug-free?

why call it love filter? thats not at all helping to give this program the credit and reconiition it deserves

Open a dictionary and you'll see what a philter is.

[Jason Brian Merrill]

Si is this enough proof to you? As you can see he is not interested in any way and its just fine with me. One day he will maybe consider it. Until that moment and from that moment i will still use both. Cubase and fl. I will repeat that i only wish i could use more from my setup within FL. But that is all. FL is fine even superb to me.

kmonkey, i dont need your so called "proof" I have seen it myself.

I have tested it on my friends dual core amd.

get over it.

Ok. If Gol statements regarding dual core(and what he thinks about it beside this is not what you claim) isn't enough to you that is too fine with me. I am out of this thread. Cheers!

good riddance.

To go into more detail about how dual core cpu works -- if you use one plugin 20 times, that one plugin will go on the same processor... however, if you use 10 of one plugin and 10 of another, one set of ten will go to one core and the other set of 10 to another. This is also how it works with Samplitude.

no, Gols statement is enough, but he is likely talking about threads within the FL program itself. Sure, FL has one thread on one core -- the GUI has another, and diskstreaming may soon have yet another...

but adding vst/vsti plugins is another story completely.

bye!

[Jason Brian Merrill]

is someone b**ching about the name of the new fl eq?

doh!

[Jason Brian Merrill]

Definitions of love-philter on the Web:

philter: a drink credited with magical power; can make the one who takes it love the one who gave it

[Jason Brian Merrill]

And he's totally full of shit... as usual. For starters my new dual core Toshiba notebook was about $600-700 cheaper than the single processor Centrino notebook, also by Toshiba, that I bought last year.

Yes, comparing today's CPU prices with last year's prices, very smart.

We all know 2 apples are cheaper than 1 apple..

\\but an apple with 2 cores?!?!??????

[bmanic]

Another thing that bothers me is the archiving of projects within FLS. It doesn't archive everything (think audio). This is another part of the program that needs to be reworked AFAIC.

As Jason already stated, choose "save as ZIP" option. This is actually one of the few features that IS in FL Studio but is missing in many other hosts.

Cheers!
bManic

[tony tony chopper]

If Gol statements regarding dual core

note that I have nothing against bulk power, but against parallel processing, which is only good for things.. that are totally independant, which rarely happens.

But if AMD can make its 'reverse-hyperthreading' come true (I can imagine it'd work as extra instruction pipelines or something), then I'm all for it.

But for now, your 2 CPU's will be used for things that are independant in FL: GUI, mixer, and several little side threads that pop in & out. But because FL plugins can interact with each other, or with VSTi's, or be spread over different mixer tracks, not much could be safely parallelized.

[justified]

Hehe, so FL basically rocks apart from that it's crap.

must... not... bite... at worms hanging on the hooks.

move along now, nothing to see here

Heh, it was supposed to be sarcastic comment on previous hitman's "demanding" post. Sorry for misunderstanding.

[hoffy]

I want the options to export to MONO and get that ugly fuckin' loop business out of my .wav files.

I can probably do this already. Anyone care to tell me how?

[tony tony chopper]

get that ugly fuckin' loop business

yes, just check the 'get that ugly fuckin' loop business out of wav file' checkbox. Whatever that means.

[Buka]

get that ugly fuckin' loop business

yes, just check the 'get that ugly fuckin' loop business out of wav file' checkbox. Whatever that means.

oh the dark force is with us.

its not a question to freeze or not to freeze but if i turn of the cpu hungry vsti (green led in step seq) why the hell it still uses my cpu/ram....theres got to be a better way than deleting the vsti to free up CPU...theres got to be!

keep up the good work otherwise mate!

[Hink]

Hehe, so FL basically rocks apart from that it's crap.

must... not... bite... at worms hanging on the hooks.

move along now, nothing to see here

Heh, it was supposed to be sarcastic comment on previous hitman's "demanding" post. Sorry for misunderstanding.

my eye roll was equally sarcastic...I don't take those kind of posts serious...

[matthewjumps]

its not a question to freeze or not to freeze but if i turn of the cpu hungry vsti (green led in step seq) why the hell it still uses my cpu/ram....theres got to be a better way than deleting the vsti to free up CPU...theres got to be!

have u tried disabling it????? little green led....

[Jason Brian Merrill]

it wont free up RAM of course...

[Hink]

thats not the only reason a host needs freeze.

okay, lets say you render the track. great. It took a few steps to do.

but now, you want to remove the vsti from the project cause it is taking up RAM or in some instances cpu power.

so, you go to delete the instrument -- but hey, now you delete all the midis that went along with it... so you have to go along and save those.

but what if you want to edit later? you have to save the preset of the vst or vsti you were using and then bring it back later.

all of this and more could be accomplished with a proper freeze. Its not a thing about blaming FL cause i have a bad old computer. Its a common feature that, when implemented properly, like in samplitude, yeilds great results.

-- and its faster than realtime

I save two flps, one with rendered and that one without the pluggins, and one not rendered with the pluggins...when you render the tracks just hit ctrl n, then delete the pluggins...if changes are needed open the first one and rerender through the mixer and overwrite the track....when you open the rendered version the changes will be already done...tbh I usually make about 6 flps for a song...

thats an interesting workaround, but it disgusts me

thanks anyway

I'm stunned you say that....dude no matter what I save mutiple projects in all my hosts and if I'm going to apply effects to a tracck I save the dry version....I really thought everyone did this....that's one of the benefits of digital over the old tape days.....if you want to try something and it doesn't work you're not screwed...and that disgusts you...

dude, please notice the smilies.

its not meant as harsh as it sounds...
Its just that to me, that workflow is counterintuitive. I dont need to try it, even having to bother with it makes me sick

I like working in chunks within the same project, and i think that is what freeze accomplises.

got a BFD drum part you basically like? well, on my pc it takes 15 percent cpu. why not freeze it, and then open up trilogy for the next part? Or whatever...i would imagine to write the basics of a song you would probably have more than just drums open, but you get the point.

done with trilogy? freeze it

this is how i work. Not everyone will agree, as i dont agree that your idea would ever remotely fit into my workflow.

does BFD not have options like DFHs?...I can shut of the matrix while writing drums and then when I render I go full matrix (or as full as I use it).

You know I consider you one of my better friends here at KVR so keep that in mind when I say that you need to time warp back 20 years for a few days then come back and talk too me. Do you have any idea how simple these workarounds are compared to back in the day? If my idea won't remotely fit into you're work flow than perhaps you're a little "techno-spoiled", you need a little honest humility...sticking with the freeze concept...it's like going to someones house and having a drink with no ice, when you ask why there is no ice the reply is "my freezer doesn't have an automatic ice maker...

FWIW workarounds and "yankee ingenuity" is what I thought I would miss about the old tape days, and why I stayed analog until '98. I really enjoy problem solving, I think it's a great skill to have. Part of songwriting for me is the challenge of doing things and creative thinking to get things to workout the way I want...you'd be amazed what you discover when you're trying to find a way to do things. Don't get me wrong, I'm glad I dont have to bounce tracks anymore, I'm glad limited tracks aren't an issue. FWIW I never bounced tracks with a 4-track, I recorded 4-tracks, mixed them and mastered them to a two track and then rerecorded that on another tape to tracks 3 and 4 in my 4-track just so I could always have my drums in stereo, this process might be repeated 4 or 5 times...without some challenges what's the point?