FL Studio 21.1 released! - A disappointment in the making

[Trancit]

nevermind... was adressed before...

[sjm]

No native hotkey for Make Unique (I personally think "Make Unique" should be reworked or entirely removed though)

It's Ctrl+Shift+C or something along those lines. Check the main menu, where it is called "Clone". Yeah, kinda confusing that the same feature has two names. My preferred way of cloning is to open the little menu and hit M for make unique though.

Audio Clips/Drums in the Playlist don't have the same features and editing capabilities as Audio Clips/Drums used in the Channel Rack (Envelopes, LFOs, Mod X/Y, Arpeggiator, MIDI Delay/Note Echo)

That's because they aren't audio clips in the channel rack. Audio clips are for takes that you want to use raw in the playlist, hence them having a limited feature set. Samples loaded directly in the channel rack are loaded in the Sampler plugin. Hence the difference in functionality, and they are expressly intended for different use cases.

No Ability to have two or more Instrument Tracks on the same Mixer Insert (LOTS of reasons this is problematic)

That's because the routing is handled in the mixer, not the playlist, and you're trying to mix multiple incompatible paradigms here.

When using Instrument Tracks, moving them up or down in the playlist does NOT reflect in the Channel Rack or Mixer as if they're completely independent. There is no sense of being "tied" together or any linkage (this requires the user to exert a lot of effort to stay organized)

The fact that instrument tracks make no sense is really just a by-product of trying to mix incompatible paradigms and catering to people who want FL Studio to be something it isn't. My advice would be to completely ignore them, or use them to keep your colouring and naming in sync if you are that OCD. Instrument tracks can't be what people want them to be without completely rewriting the foundations of FL Studio. As many have said, if you want that linear DAW thing going, use a linear DAW.

Inability to use Slide Notes on third-party plugins (yes I know there exists a tool called Bendy but to my knowledge it isn't a walk in the park to set up and use)

This isn't anything to do with FL Studio. It's because that functionality isn't supported by the VSTs (because it's not part of the spec). FL Studio has no control over how the VSTs react to incoming note data, that's the job of the VST.

You do have some valid criticisms, and FL Studio is not perfect (no DAW is). But a whole lot of this is really down to misunderstanding some very basic concepts.

[Trancit]

nevermind...

[Trancit]

nevermind...

[sjm]

it distorts the real figures and hides how little people are really enjoying this "freedom" concept and it distorts how much this very own system stands in it's own way.

You might get that impression, but that's only because you are always much more likely to see people complain about things (in this case, primarily due to a lack of understanding rather than any inherent flaws in the approach). There's actually no lack of people who are very happy working this way and take full advantage of the freedom the playlist gives you. It's just that they've been spending the past 10-20 years using the software to make music, rather than rehashing the same tired talking points. Note how 99% of these threads on the IL forums are posted by people who are a few weeks into the experience, and, rather than learning how their software works, would rather dictate to everyone else how they think it should work based on their extremely limited experience. It's not exactly valuable input as a result, and certainly not a good reason to turn FL Studio into Yet Another Linear DAW.

FL Studio has its big problems (e.g. it's not MIDI compliant and working with hardware is made a lot harder than it needs to be). But the freeform playlist is not one of them - it's very good at what it does, it might just not be for everyone. A large part of that is that it places the onus on the user to organise the playlist in a way that makes sense to them, rather than prescribing any one approach. Greater freedom brings with it greater responsibilities.

The FL Studio demo is also one of the most generous out there (Reaper is obviously even more generous). There's simply no excuse for not having realised that it's not a linear DAW before paying up.

[Trancit]

it distorts the real figures and hides how little people are really enjoying this "freedom" concept and it distorts how much this very own system stands in it's own way.

You might get that impression, but that's only because you are always much more likely to see people complain about things (in this case, primarily due to a lack of understanding rather than any inherent flaws in the approach). There's actually no lack of people who are very happy working this way and take full advantage of the freedom the playlist gives you. It's just that they've been spending the past 10-20 years using the software to make music, rather than rehashing the same tired talking points. ...

You are wrong...
I have had at least a 100 students for teaching of FLS and not a single one... not one of a hundred has used FLS how the programm is meant to be and was extremely struggling with the workflow...
I am not relying on claims or forum posts...this is based on pure experience...

If this workflow would be so great for bigger numbers of people there should have been at least a single person using it the way it should be...
If this workflow would be so great that bigger numbers like to use it, why went all the others broke??

I stand with my opinion... there are a few who really think this way and enjoy using it... there are some more who make such limited and simple constructed music that they actually do not hit the limits... but the vast vast majority curse the day they bought the programm and would immediately buy something else if they could go back respectively would love to see the programm mutate in something more linear and more pleasant to work with... not to speak having the goodies and improvements other DAWs had in the past decade.

I don´t want to diss the programm nor the company...they are doing profit orientated business and did what they needed to do to be sucessful... and they seem to have done a brilliant job...

But this is simply the reality I personally came across with and which reflects to a 100% my personal experience with FLS over the past 15 years while I have to admit there is something magical with it that I have hard times to escape... but for sure it´s not freedom related or has anything to do with the actual "highlights" of the programm which in my opinion are nothing but downsides...
I actually was fighting all the time to fit a square pig through a round hole and exactly the same I have seen with every single student I ever had...

Imho if IL would create a linear DAW with the same kind of "magic" (handling, feel, look...etc) it would be at least 10 times more sucessful than FLS is right now.

[sjm]

[You are wrong...
I have had at least a 100 students for teaching of FLS and not a single one... not one of a hundred has used FLS how the programm is meant to be and was extremely struggling with the workflow...
I am not relying on claims or forum posts...this is based on pure experience...

I'd facetiously argue that's on you though. I mean, surely it was your job to teach them? People I've taught to use FL Studio never had any problems

That said, I don't think there's really a workflow you "should" use, that's kinda the point here. It's very freeform and there are lots of different ways to skin the same cat. You can put everything in a single pattern, which is particularly popular among people doing orchestral type stuff, where you don't have lots of repeating patterns like in EDM of whatever. You can go pseudo-linear, with one instrument per pattern and each playlist lane being a single mixer channel. You can mix and match, with multiple audio takes on the same playlist lane, but all going to different mixer channels, e.g. you have one lane for "rhythm guitar" or "main vox", but route the different takes to different mixer channels in order to process them differently - often for chorus and verse. This is actually a lot more efficient space-wise than having separate playlist lanes for verse/chorus.

It's essentially up to the user to decide what makes sense to them. Put your double bass, cello, violin and viola in a single pattern together, and call it "string quartet", but then have your drums split over multiple lanes and each one in separate patterns.

So the idea that there is actually one single way to use the software is, I think, misguided. That's part of what the freedom is all about - you get to decide your own way of working. That is not going to work for everyone - some people need structure - and is going to be a real blessing for other people. I'm just one of those whose really likes being able to do whatever I think makes the most sense for the project that I'm working on. I'll absolutely choose different approaches in different projects!

[Lbdunequest]

the fact that you cannot copy/paste MIDI directly in the Playlist is really bad

You cant do that because its not a lane based but pattern based which explains why its not implamented. I never even though its usefulnes because you copy paste in to chanel rack.

[Trancit]

...
I'd facetiously argue that's on you though. I mean, surely it was your job to teach them? People I've taught to use FL Studio never had any problems

...

This is a senseless discussion but no, I first looked how they have worked before as the most weren´t absolutely newcomers but have used FLS already for years ... so cannot be wrong teaching from my side but what people came up with themselves...
So, sorry to disappoint you...

Just have a look at this poll here... 95% have settled on no pattern based DAWs... 95%...
This gives a good hint of the splitting in user groups of FLS users too...

[apoclypse]

...
I'd facetiously argue that's on you though. I mean, surely it was your job to teach them? People I've taught to use FL Studio never had any problems

...

This is a senseless discussion but no, I first looked how they have worked before as the most weren´t absolutely newcomers but have used FLS already for years ... so cannot be wrong teaching from my side but what people came up with themselves...
So, sorry to disappoint you...

Just have a look at this poll here... 95% have settled on no patternbased DAWs... 95%...
This gives a good hint of the splitting in user groups of FLS users too...

The polls here don't mean much so not sure you can extrapolate any real data points from it. People may just prefer Ableton, I mean Bitwig has a higher percentage than Logic of people saying that it would be their "last DAW". We know Bitwig doesn't have anywhere near the number of users as Logic so the numbers are skewed.

FLStudio wasn't my first DAW (that would be Krystal Audio, the predecessor to Studio One) but when I first used it way bay in version 2.5 I got it right away. If you don't have a lot of DAW experience it's actually quite intuitive to use, especially if you come from hardware where some of the limitations are pretty much the same. The way patterns work is pretty much the same on most hardware sequencers. Maschine works in a very similar way for example with the same limitations for copying patterns vs making them unique.

However as I moved to other DAWs, like Logic and Reason. I slowly stopped "getting it". Now it looks confusing and unapproachable to me. I still think that if you have no experience with making music or used "traditional" DAWs before FLStudio is quite easy and straightforward to use. Considering how many kids I've seen use it with no problems I stand by that.

[apoclypse]

--Snip--

FLStudio is not a track based or clip based DAW. It's a pattern based sequencer. Patterns are referenced as opposed to instantiated. When you ask for Pattern 1, you are always going to get Pattern 1. You can clone Pattern 1 and get Pattern 2 to make changes. It's just how they work. Clip based or event based sequencer are linear when you make changes to clip 1 and copy it, the next clip that gets created has nothing to do with clip 1 (even if they are named the same).

There are caveats to both workflows. For example in clip based sequencers it's harder to make sweeping changes to all clips for the same instrument. If you wanted to add a kick to all the clips in your drums, well you can't really do that without a lot of copying and pasting. Some DAWs have Aliased clips to get around this where it references one clip and you can make changes that reflect in all clips, but it's still cumbersome sometimes. Most people just go through the copy and paste or duplicate process instead. This can have adverse effects sometimes (like breaking automation points you previously set) depending on your DAW.

[Trancit]

The polls here don't mean much so not sure you can extrapolate any real data points from it. People may just prefer Ableton, I mean Bitwig has a higher percentage than Logic of people saying that it would be their "last DAW". We know Bitwig doesn't have anywhere near the number of users as Logic so the numbers are skewed.
...

Of course you cannot take out any real numbers but some basic impressions and these are for me:

1. If pattern based would be anyway near to be interesting to the bigger masses there would be far more competitors in this part... there aren´t... out of the let´s say bigger 20 there is just one pattern based which has survived: FL Studio ... and as I already said a few times this has other reasons than the fact it´s being pattern based... for me it´s more despite the fact that it´s being pattern based...
1 out of 20... there are our 5% again...

2. If 95% of the people who have voted choose the more linear DAW approach where I count in Bitwig and Ableton too as their main parts are linear as well and their tracks work like in a linear DAW, this gives after all a good hint that the majority of people aren´t very keen of "more freedom" and using patterns...why shall this be different among FLS users???
The majority will not have chosen it on the fact that it´s pattern based and give them more freedom...
From my experience, users chose it because of lifetime free upgrades, great stock plugins, great PR Editor, Automation clips, the GUI and it´s snapiness, marketing and much support all around the web...
Nobody mentioned ever to me anything of "freedom" , "patterns" and "how it works" when I asked for the reasons...

You mentioned the limits of Hardware and that would be very similar to FLS...
I personally cannot imagine either many people prefering for their Studio work just Hardware sequencer or something like Machine instead of a modern DAW... this percentage is perhaps far smaller than the part of people really prefering FLS´original workflow.

Anyway... it is what it is and they did the rest of the programm so well that for me it´s really hard to not go back no matter how hard I try to use something else and I was coming from first Logic (PC) and a bit of Cubase after Logic was stolen from PC users... so it´s got it´s own charme...

[elassi]

Hey Trancit,

long time FL user here (since Fruity Loops 1.76 and also Fruity Tracks, discontinued centuries ago). I'm using Ableton Live since years, sometimes Reaper, therefore dropped FLS, and understand your POV.

See, both of you guys have valid points. But in terms of this 5% votes let me underline, that FLS is extremely popular in the Rap&HipHop-Scene, which is almost completely absent here at KVR.

Thus, the hardware sequencer approach is not a miracle. It's in fact the (AKAI) MPC mode.

[sQeetz]

1. If pattern based would be anyway near to be interesting to the bigger masses there would be far more competitors in this part... there aren´t... out of the let´s say bigger 20 there is just one pattern based which has survived: FL Studio ... and as I already said a few times this has other reasons than the fact it´s being pattern based... for me it´s more despite the fact that it´s being pattern based...
1 out of 20... there are our 5% again...

I believe Renoise to be in the top 20 (heck, how many are there anyway? ) and it's 100% sequential pattern based. So 10%...

[vurt]

do people really care if they use the most popular host?
seems a weird thing to even pay attention to, unless you are looking to collaborate maybe.

one day, we will reach a point, where some folk, will only listen to music, produced in their host of choice!
all their friends will use the same host and have the same haircut too.

this is the world you want!!