Dubstepforum.com

Posted: **Sat Jul 31, 2010 12:02 am**

nowaysj wrote: I don't believe this is true.

Below is a graph of search terms for daw products. I believe the rate at which terms are searched for reflects to a large extent a products usage. If you have stats that directly show daw usage rates, I'd like to see them.

The biggie daws buy a lot of ad space in the publications, and part of those deals is to feature the products in other portions of the publication, notably tutorials.

I think Imageline wasn't playing that game. Though I think they're starting to.

Another reason is that the staff of those publications are "industry people," meaning that they see music as a business and a commodity and so behave as people do in business, chasing each other's tails, always conforming to consolidate reputation, and all the other yukkie shit business is about. And so, the staff doesn't know the first thing about flstudio because it hasn't been "professional," so can't legitimately write about it. They're not going to reveal their ignorance and jeopardize their "position" in the "industry."

Equally though, Gol, the lead dev of flstudio is a total prickosaurus. I honestly think he has some kind of clinical condition. This might have come about from the amount of contact he actually has with his customers. Can you chat with the developers of the other daws?

In all honesty though, whenever I've had a problem with fl, I get a response within a day, and usually right away because of my f'ed up schedule and time zones.

In my experience, Steinberg's customer service was WAY worse than Imageline's.

^ Yeah I can agree with that as well, including the Steinberg support. I've only tried a couple of times, but I got automated responses and stuff and got the run around another time. I just looked for 3rd party support on forums and such instead after that.

No I've never checked for stats on that, but yes you are right about companies paying magazines, and also giving perks like software/hardware and such in return for reviews, ads etc. That's pretty common business. I'm not sure how relevant search terms are in regards to usage, but that's pretty interesting. I shouldn't have said "purely because", as there is obviously more than 1 reason behind it.

I can also understand the annoyance of 2,000 people emailing/commenting/asking the same thing over and over, but that goes with the territory really. It's probably never a good idea for the head of a company to deal with customer affairs and support, but he seems to want to be in control of all aspects. It's his baby so he's free to do what he wants, but like I said it's not a good way to build a good rep amongst customers. I've seen loads of threads on forums, and blog posts complaining about it and speaking out against the software. That's not a good thing because FL itself is great. That's also why I mentioned it as being one of the main reasons FL itself gets undeserved hate.

About the search terms... Maybe one scenario would be someone would search for FL info, and find people bad mouthing it and that might cause them to avoid it or look at some other software.

Posted: **Sat Jul 31, 2010 12:05 am**

i haven't read through this thread...but i never understood the o.p's question either. fruity is definitely better than reason imo.

i hate reason.

Posted: **Sat Jul 31, 2010 12:06 am**

Yeah, if I met Gol on the street, I think I might drop him catastrophically, then pick him up and give him a huge hug for somehow figuring out how to make a very usable piece of audio software.

Posted: **Sat Jul 31, 2010 2:29 am**

If I met him on the street, I think I'd be creeped out.

Magazines might not cover FL as much... because there aren't many people writing about it (apparently). I think it's being mentioned much more these days than a few years ago.

Posted: **Sat Jul 31, 2010 2:43 am**

Well, FL has added features that you'd find in the major daws, like audio in an arrange type page (playlist), so it looks and behaves more like an ordinary daw, so it makes sense that as it conforms more to the standard paradigm, it receives more "press" attention.

Also, I think Il's starting to play that pay to play game with the mags.

Posted: **Sat Jul 31, 2010 4:20 am**

I still use fl 5.
cant get away from it for some reason.

Posted: **Sat Jul 31, 2010 11:36 am**

Wikum wrote: i hate reason.

+1

Posted: **Sat Jul 31, 2010 1:13 pm**

Far as I can tell FL studio suffers from the fact that anyone who wants to have their first go at making a tune downloads it cuz they are under the impression it will be easier to use than all the others (probs from the old name). They then proceed to poast all their cruddy efforts on you tube and FL's reputation as a novelty for producing shite is set in stone.

The fact that, in the correct hands, FL is as good a DAW as any (give or take) seems to escape many people which is a shame, I hope they finally manage to shake off this image, but I think it'll be tough. Dunno why people seem to think good tunes only come from expensive kit, silly really, they come from decent producers. If I thought like that I'd never have made the swap from my £500 cubase to my $60 Reaper.

Posted: **Sat Jul 31, 2010 1:17 pm**

wormcode wrote:
nowaysj wrote:

In my experience, Steinberg's customer service was WAY worse than Imageline's.

^ Yeah I can agree with that as well, including the Steinberg support.

Steinberg customer service and Retarded policies on dongles etc are why I was determined to move away from them. Companies that punish their paying customer base for the action of non paying pirates deserve everything they get.

Posted: **Sat Jul 31, 2010 3:16 pm**

Astral wrote:Probably it's original name.

ITS*

Posted: **Sun Aug 01, 2010 5:32 am**

I've been using FL Studio for the past 5 years, I originally picked up Logic 4 I believe years ago and eventually stumbled onto FL. I do love it but lately I've been on an Ableton binge. The work flow for some things is so much faster imo. I don't like not having a step sequencer for drums but thats what rewiring is for. I know a few people who back in the day hated on FL when I was the only one around using it and now they swear by it, they just didn't know how to work it or what it was fully capable of.

Posted: **Sun Aug 01, 2010 1:21 pm**

sines wrote:I still use fl 5.
cant get away from it for some reason.

Ditto mate

It seems everytime they update it they leave out little features of VSTIs, which bloody annoyed me, so I'm sticking with 5 and that's that

Posted: **Sun Aug 01, 2010 2:44 pm**

bass_killa wrote:
Astral wrote:Probably it's original name.
ITS*

'It's' as it is a possessive use of a pronoun. Retard.

Edit: eg. Dave's umbrella
Emily's car
Barry's DVD of Hannah Montana with some of his very stick tissues.
It's name.

Posted: **Sun Aug 01, 2010 6:41 pm**

Assassin wrote:
bass_killa wrote:
Astral wrote:Probably it's original name.
ITS*
'It's' as it is a possessive use of a pronoun. Retard.

Edit: eg. Dave's umbrella
Emily's car
Barry's DVD of Hannah Montana with some of his very stick tissues.
It's name.

you are so wrong you're retarded. ITS. the * is just to show you it was a typo.

ITS. not it's.

would this make sense?
Probably it is original name.

FUCKING NO!
now fuck off

Posted: **Sun Aug 01, 2010 7:39 pm**

quick question. why do propellorhead refuse to allow 3rd party plugins to work in conjunction with reason outside of rewiring? surely that's losing them money?

Posted: **Sun Aug 01, 2010 7:55 pm**

Wikum wrote:quick question. why do propellorhead refuse to allow 3rd party plugins to work in conjunction with reason outside of rewiring? surely that's losing them money?

stability

Posted: **Sun Aug 01, 2010 8:00 pm**

Project EX wrote:
Wikum wrote:quick question. why do propellorhead refuse to allow 3rd party plugins to work in conjunction with reason outside of rewiring? surely that's losing them money?
stability

Yep and its unique selling point is being an all in one studio so that wont change.

Funny how some FL studio users moan about their DAW being looked down upon when they are always quick enough to call other programs shit.

Posted: **Sun Aug 01, 2010 8:41 pm**

the thing is, i have a copy of logic and an old copy of reason, yet i can't think of a single thing that makes me want to rewire reason into logic. i hate reasons interface, it's sound, ect. i tried to like it...i just can't. the only thing i like about it is the unique routing features (that i didn't really learn to use that much).

i'd almost definitely use fl if i still had a pc though. i actually really loved using it. i thought it was especially fun for making drum beats. mind you, i haven't used it in almost 7 years lol.

Posted: **Mon Aug 02, 2010 12:43 am**

FL Studio USED to be a toy, it was never a production tool that anyone serious about music would take... er, seriously.

However, that has changed in recent years and FL Studio is more and more becoming a production powerhouse. The people that put these kinds of things down, are more than likely the same kinds of people who say "oh you're using a digital mixer, that's not real DJing". Fact of the matter is - if what you're doing is being enjoyed by others and you're doing it well - what does it matter what you're using?

As for coverage - it's possible that due to the elitism, certain magazines won't cover it - as they're probably that way inclined, also.

Posted: **Mon Aug 02, 2010 12:44 am**

JT7 wrote:Yep and its unique selling point is being an all in one studio so that wont change.

Aren't they allowing VST support in the next major release?

Dubstepforum.com

Why is FL studio looked down upon?

Re: Why is FL studio looked down upon?

Re: Why is FL studio looked down upon?

Re: Why is FL studio looked down upon?

Re: Why is FL studio looked down upon?

Re: Why is FL studio looked down upon?

Re: Why is FL studio looked down upon?

Re: Why is FL studio looked down upon?

Re: Why is FL studio looked down upon?

Re: Why is FL studio looked down upon?

Re: Why is FL studio looked down upon?

Re: Why is FL studio looked down upon?

Re: Why is FL studio looked down upon?

Re: Why is FL studio looked down upon?

Re: Why is FL studio looked down upon?

Re: Why is FL studio looked down upon?

Re: Why is FL studio looked down upon?

Re: Why is FL studio looked down upon?

Re: Why is FL studio looked down upon?

Re: Why is FL studio looked down upon?

Re: Why is FL studio looked down upon?