anyone use fruity for anything serious?

[kensuguro]

My friend started a fruity user meetup here in NYC, and I sat though their first meeting to have a couple of beers.. I guess my impression of fruity was back when it resembled a tracker more than a modern daw..

I checked it out, but still have mixed feelings as to whether anything serious can come of it, partially because of its rigid pattern based structure. Reminds me of trackers for sure, it also reminded me of Orion, which was one of the underdog sequencers who pretty much has gone to meet its maker. (has seized to be, is no more.. to quote john cleese) I mean, patterns are inherent in any tune, but to make it the ONLY way to compose a song? Not sure if that'll work as a serious tool.

I haven't really mixed anything on it, so I can't speak about its summing algo or anything technical like that. I don't notice it sounding particularly bad. I don't see myself mixing in their tiny mixer tho. Live's mixer is tiny, but fruity's is microscopic. It's hard to switch to anything else once I've used scope's mixer..

Anyway.. seems with enough persistence, Reason's become a bit more legit than what it was (techno kids toy), now I hear some studio musicians use it. To me that's quite blasphemous, but I was just wondering if fruity has changed in status. The software certainly grew to be much more capable... still not sure if it's capable enough to be a big player. at the same time, I have a feeling that a full fledged production is not really fruity's demographic to begin with.

[dante]

Depends whether you're talkin Fruity Loops or FL Studio (FL9). The latter is supposedly a serious contender (104 track stereo mixer ) and each track can host 8 inserts (VST, DX or FL ) if thats serious enough for you.

http://flstudio.image-line.com/documents/whatsnew.html

I wouldn't consider Reason a DAW by itself but with Record (the ability to actually record audio tracks) it is.

[kensuguro]

Well, i guess its multitrack capability is there.. I still think workflow wise it drags its tracker traditions and that makes it difficult to use for lets say, a symphonic arrangement. Same with reason.. These apps are built on such a particular workflow.. Its good at what it does, but tough to take it beyond that.

Like in the game im producing now. If it called for a house track, ok, maybe fl studio or reason might cut it. They may also work if it was a hiphop soundtrack. But then throw in a string ensemble arrangement, a tango with an accordeon, and a full on symphonic arrangement, and i'll probably end up ripping my own brain out if i were to try to adjust my workflow to suite fl studio's design. I think thats a vital difference between "serious production tool" apps and those that arent. With the major apps, it seems theres a certain level of "sit down and just write" workflow they all adhere to, without the app dictating how you have to go about writing a tune.

Bleh, but anyway i think its just a difference betweem a groovebox mentality vs a traditional sequencer mentality.

[garyb]

not to say that great work can't be done with such things, but why are you looking at toys?

[ChrisWerner]

I hope the beer was okay, I am not sure, though.

[garyb]

moi?!!

i'm just saying, if you're doing a groovebox production, then those are the tools to do it with, although a more professional sequencer can surely do the job(but maybe not as stupidly easy). but if you are thinking about serious compositional tools for serious compositions, then why even thing about fruity? as ken pointed out, that's not what it is.

a great artist can certainly do fine work on an etch-a-sketch, but...

[garyb]

yes, it is all about what you are trying to do.

there are great artists playing on a children's xylophone, and i'm certainly not against it. ken has already given every reason that he doesn't want fruity, hence my response...

personally, it has nothing to do with anyone else, but i could never take anything seriously, with a name so utterly gay as fruity. people who like that sort of thing(gay names on the stuff they buy) will be very impressed. i'm fine with it and them. i hope they are fine with me as well, if they are nice people. please don't pc me anyone. some gay people are disgusted by certain kinds of gayness and some straight people love that stuff and eat it up. i'm scared of tomatoes too, even though there's no good reason.

if they're jerks, then i really don't care what they like or don't like or what they think of me.

i'm mostly funny. unfunny people don't get that because they, well because they're unfunny. that's not to say that i'm never serious, because i'm almost always serious. that's part of what makes me funny.

yes, great work has been done with a 4 track, but if the 4 track is the art, and if the music wouldn't have been even nicer with a better recording, then the MUSIC wasn't necessarily that good to begin with(even though the ART may have been fantastic). good music works with almost(almost) any format, instrument or technique.

my wife like to paint with house paint. her artwork is just as nice with watercolors, so...if she uses a less permanent paint and then sells the artwork, that's fine if it's something throwaway, but if it's supposed to provide whatever the artwork was supoosed to provide for decades, then the proper paper and paint better have been used...which is not to say that something to last the ages couldn't be made with fruity. heck, you could use garage studio for crying out loud!

[ChrisWerner]

Well, the beer thing was addressed to Ken in the hope that at least the beer was ok.
Seriously, fruity might be a good low budget entrance to record your "creativity".

Anyway, I like to see people be creative with what ever, in the sum it is all better than hanging out on the streets and do bad things instead.

But the discussion using fruity (89 EUR) for a serious symphonic production is a waste one (imho), or do you expect successful open ocean fishing with a coracle?

[FrancisHarmany]

I'm not gonna claim I have done anything serious with it.... but.....

Its not called Fruity. Its called FL Studio!

The Producer edition is about EUR 150,-. There is a more expensive edition a well which comes with a few extra Synths (EUR 220,-)

you are _not_ limited to 8 insert effects. The mixer channels are freely routable. So if you need more you can route Track1 -> Track2 - >Master.

[kensuguro]

My thinking behind this comes from the concept of "affordance" in design.. it's mostly from industrial design, but now very relevant to UI design and workflow design in general.

People who produce music with grooveboxes, trackers, cmix/csound, supercollider, etc.. tend to think a particular way, and produce music that sound a particular way. These interfaces are shaped a particular way, and forces the user to interact with it in a particular way. Some of these are physical limitations, like a groovebox only having 16 steps, leading to a more truncated mental image of a musical phrase (comparatively speaking). Step shifting left and right also comes specifically from the interface, making it more natural for the groovebox composer than for a traditional pencil and staffpaper writer. (lots of erasing!) The interface allows the user to do certain things, allows user to do certain things easier/more naturally, makes certain things harder, and makes certain things impossible to do. And then there's the mental layer on top of that, making it easier / harder for the user to THINK of a particular action in his creative thought. All the ones I mentioned above are extremely specific in their interaction, and workflow, many times dictating how a piece of music is pieced together and structured.

The mainstream ones like cubase, nuendo, dp, Live, Logic, Sonar (still around?) seem to follow a more general approach, which makes workflow comparatively similar within the group. (compared to say, Digitracker) The structure is very free form, allowing music to be written in whatever unit... maybe taking cues from traditional staff paper where the canvas is totally blank. The pianoroll / matrix has replaced the staves, still doing pretty much the same thing. The tradeoff is that this does not make you think like when you use a groovebox, though you can achieve the same result.. Which shows that following the staff paper paradigm (extending it) limits the mainstream sequencers in its own type of affordance, still making certain things easier/harder. It just so happens that this paradigm matches a large percentage of what needs to be written in a post production setting. (which tends to be larger in scale and budget compared to a typical fl studio project)

The difference is that through a more imposing structure, high affordance products may help structure a budding musician's thought process, perhaps allowing him to get results faster. The low affordance products may seem daunting because of its free form approach. This isn't just about knowledge / training / experience. It's about chunking, or grouping together a series of actions into larger units to speed up process. The larger units are quicker, but it's a package deal.

Though at the very basic, if it all is in the head, then it shouldn't matter what platform you "output" on. That's true in theory.. probably what a pure empirical scientist in the 50's would have said. The fact is though, with creative tools you can (sometimes rely on) be inspired by the tool. And since the creative process is a constant negotiation with multiple aspects (tools being one of them) the process is not as simple as 1. think 2. output. That's a sorry scientist's understanding of creativity that roots from simple machine metaphors. Basically, the tool is inseparable from the creative process.

It does boil down to a simple "the right tool for the job". My criteria was whether it can do post production writing or not. (should have been more clear)

[FrancisHarmany]

btw they are updating the mixer (FLStudio 9.5+) you can turn on a bigger mixer view.

[FrancisHarmany]

sorry, but no. We all know God put those other sequencers (the non FL Studio onces) to test us.

[spacef]

FL "pitch perfect" looks more advanced than cubase 5 variaudio... (because you can depitch on small portions only, without cutting as variaudio would oblige to do.... it sounds just as crappy as cubase 5 variaudio though

[garyb]

Well, the beer thing was addressed to Ken in the hope that at least the beer was ok.
Seriously, fruity might be a good low budget entrance to record your "creativity".

Anyway, I like to see people be creative with what ever, in the sum it is all better than hanging out on the streets and do bad things instead.

But the discussion using fruity (89 EUR) for a serious symphonic production is a waste one (imho), or do you expect successful open ocean fishing with a coracle?

that's what i say...

[dawman]

FWIW I have made a small fortune using a hardware sequencer and VDAT.
The newer DAW's overpack their manifest with useless freebies, and alarm clocks that email your coffee machine, etc.
I am having a blast with my 50 dollar Reaper though, but they too are becoming an update trap like all other DAW's eventually become. And no need for Dongle RAID arrays either..

[FrancisHarmany]

but they too are becoming an update trap like all other DAW's eventually become. And no need for Dongle RAID arrays either..

FL Studio has lifetime free updates. I only paid extra when they changed from fruityloops -> fl studio. Thats two payments in about 11 years.....

[dante]

Ken have you tried Reaper ? I keep getting an earfull about how good it is (from other than Jimmy as well.... Im not about to try it myself but I would if I was starting from scratch.

But the discussion using fruity (89 EUR) for a serious symphonic production is a waste one (imho), or do you expect successful open ocean fishing with a coracle?

I would have thought if you were doing a symphony, then the sample library would be more important than the sequencer driving it. Ok, ok I know Cubase 6 has some fancy 'expression' triggers in it now, but apart from that, would EWQL Platinum care whether it is being driven by Nubendo or FL ? It might even prefer Sibelius

[garyb]

yes, and if it were ALL midi and all traditional composition, Sebelius might even be the proper tool.

look, there's nothing wrong with any of these tools or the people using them. don't mistake humor for judgement. Ken keeps describing reasons why he doesn't want Fruity Loops, otherwise Fruity might be something to consider. from a traditional recording/composition point of veiw, programs like Fruity are not "serious". they are toys. that's neither a slam against the users or the program.

[FrancisHarmany]

ohh yes. Thats indeed the most likely time stream. And it also explains the name....

makes all the sense in the world doesn't it! the logic is sound.

[dante]

Look Ken, all this talk of i7's and 6 gig of RAM. Reaper will run on the smell of an oily rag, in fact, it will run on an Atari :

Reaper On Atari

Reaper_On_Atari.JPG (237.8 KiB) Viewed 2840 times