# FL Studio and Film Scoring - Things need to CHANGE!



## ImJim (Feb 23, 2022)

Hey everyone,

Sorry in advance for the long post, but with this I'm hoping to speak on behalf of the thousands of frustrated composers who, for the most part, feel ignored by Image Line. This isn't a rant against IL by the way.

I've been a faithful FL Studio user for years, and have always loved the unique and flexible workflow this DAW offers, which is why I'm not considering changing DAW... yet.

While I'm always eager to discover new features and appreciate the work from the dev team, as an orchestral music composer that faces the shortcomings of FL every day, in 8 years I've never seen the crucial updates I desperately needed.

I'm not the only one in this situation. There's a growing film scoring community among FL users, desperately waiting for a handful of basic, almost rudimentary functions that most other DAW cover. I've collected dozens and dozens of posts, comments, requests from users that never had any follow-up. With FL21 coming soon, I hope to shed some (further) light on the weaknesses of this DAW and maybe encourage developers to address those. The future release of FL21 is a great opportunity for this.

While there's always a workaround for pretty much everything in FL, its lack of basic features are slowing down user workflow and killing the songwriting process before it has even started. Arrangement and orchestration are the main weak points of FL. Even though BRSO articulate has already saved us many hours, it won't do more than what it's supposed to do. 

Here I've made an non-exhaustive list of "urgent" features IL should incorporate in FL21. As you'd expect, it's mainly focused on MIDI management and orchestration/arrangement workflow. I wrote what came to mind, feel free to add your own stuff. I'll keep the post updated with your suggestions.

LIST

> *Being able to copy/paste MIDI notes and their linked MIDI CC event data together, from instrument to instrument. A pop-up window could ask wether we'd like the CC events to be carried with the notes.*

_Makes duplicating or switching melodies & chords between instruments super fast, without the need to copy/paste each MIDI CC from the event editor... takes ages when you have 3 or more CC playing along with the notes. Speeds up sketching and arrangement ideas._

> *An option to copy/paste, duplicate and move CC data along with the notes INSIDE the piano roll. *(Glue them together)

_Similar to above, but inside the piano roll. Right now, moving or cutting a group of notes in the piano roll doesn't do anything to the CC data under it - adjusting the CC curves position separately is horrible._

> *A button to merge all pattern piano rolls in some kind of "master piano roll" to be able to see the full orchestration and edit all notes from there *(could also work by highlighting multiple playlist patterns and double-clicking on the selection)

_- A must-have feature for any serious DAW, don't think I need to elaborate._

> *Being able to see and control multiple MIDI event curves under the piano roll, instead of constantly searching through the list of CC to find the right parameter.*

_- DAWs like Logic have this, and writing for instruments that need multiple CCs to work is painful. The single MIDI CC list expands as you add more MIDI controls. Imagine working with a full orchestra, with each section having 2 or 3 CCs..._ 

> *A brand new, up-to-date MIDI event editor that would work with curves and keyframes *(like automation clips)* while keeping the pencil draw and other existing tools available *(makes editing & refining curves super easy) 

_More and more composers feel like the event editor is outdated and the MIDI curves system isn't on par with the more powerful playlist automations. Sure, it's packed with features, but the curve tweakabiity isn't there. Drawing smooth and precise curves is super hard, not to mention tweaking them._

That's all for now. I've only highlighted the most frustrating parts of composing in my own FL experience. I feel like these aspects of MIDI handling are completely overlooked and keep being ignored by the devs.

I can't repeat this enough, but Image Line should really take into account this growing part of the FL community, as they're losing many, many customers who are forced to move to other DAWs. We're not asking for fancy features, just better MIDI handling out of the box and a more composer-friendly workflow. 

Hope we can somehow make FL Studio developers see this. FL21 will be out soon... let's hope for the best!

Jim


----------



## Braveheart (Feb 23, 2022)

why don’t you simply speak with your wallet and move to another DAW. FL Studio was never marketed as a DAW for orchestral music.


----------



## timbit2006 (Feb 23, 2022)

FL Studio:





Any legitimate DAW made for professionals:








I hope that helps. FL Studio is pretty well almost entirely directed at hobbyist electronic musicians, not full on composers. Why are you intentionally using something that's putting this much of a disadvantage to yourself?


----------



## blaggins (Feb 23, 2022)

I am just an amateur but I screwed around in the FL Studio space for many years (just entertaining myself doing tiny and never completed "projects" for my own satisfaction). Never got to a serious level with it like you have. That being said, switching to Cubase was like a breath of fresh air for me. I didn't even know what I was missing at first. The power and flexibility of it, compared to what was possible in FL, is like a slow burn that unfolds over time. You keep asking the question "hey is this thing/optimization/workflow improvement possible?" And the answer keeps being "yes with a bit of learning and tweaking it sure is". The learning curve is steep, but probably not for someone who already has a lot of experience in another DAW. Honestly it made me mad that I stuck with FL Studio for so long. I think you'd find a similar situation with Logic or Studio One. It's expensive as hell though, comparatively.


----------



## darcvision (Feb 23, 2022)

try reaper


----------



## ThisFellowPlayingTheCello (Feb 23, 2022)

Braveheart said:


> why don’t you simply speak with your wallet and move to another DAW. FL Studio was never marketed as a DAW for orchestral music.


He already mentioned why.
Why shouldn't the DAW improve? I mean sure, they don't have to.
But the cinematic userbase is growing with libraries getting cheaper and cheaper.


----------



## ThisFellowPlayingTheCello (Feb 23, 2022)

Totally agree OP.
I don't want to leave FL Studio either. It really needs a lot of improvements though.
They have mentioned interrest in improving the experience. More mixer tracks is coming soon etc.

I have started using automation clips for most stuff, just because it's such a pain to work with CC in the piano roll.


----------



## ThisFellowPlayingTheCello (Feb 23, 2022)

timbit2006 said:


> FL Studio:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That's just not true.
FL Studio is a very capable DAW that many proffesionals use, including composers.
But yes, it's lacking in features for orchestral music.


----------



## ImJim (Feb 24, 2022)

Braveheart said:


> why don’t you simply speak with your wallet and move to another DAW. FL Studio was never marketed as a DAW for orchestral music.


Sorry to sound rude, but this is exactly the kind of useless reply I expected to read. What I tried to explain isn't limited to orchestral composers by the way. Anyone would benefit from these changes - the "features" we're asking for aren't even features at this point, but just proper tools for composition and arrangement ANYONE would benefit from, regardless of the genre they're making.


----------



## ImJim (Feb 24, 2022)

timbit2006 said:


> FL Studio:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You must be pretty ignorant about FL to caricature it this way. Funny that in 2022 people still think FL is a program for "hobbyists". Not only it's a contemptuous remark but it clearly shows you don't have a clue on how powerful FL is.


----------



## ImJim (Feb 24, 2022)

ThisFellowPlayingTheCello said:


> He already mentioned why.
> Why shouldn't the DAW improve? I mean sure, they don't have to.
> But the cinematic userbase is growing with libraries getting cheaper and cheaper.


And with little efforts to enhance the MIDI workflow, FL could expand that userbase a lot. Glad to see some people recognize a DAW can evolve for the better, and not just remain limited to a restriced audience.


----------



## ImJim (Feb 24, 2022)

ThisFellowPlayingTheCello said:


> Totally agree OP.
> I don't want to leave FL Studio either. It really needs a lot of improvements though.
> They have mentioned interrest in improving the experience. More mixer tracks is coming soon etc.
> 
> I have started using automation clips for most stuff, just because it's such a pain to work with CC in the piano roll.


Thanks! Do you draw curves on automations like you would do in the piano roll window? Playlist automations can't receive MIDI data recording btw, so how do you deal with that?


----------



## ThisFellowPlayingTheCello (Feb 24, 2022)

ImJim said:


> And with little efforts to enhance the MIDI workflow, FL could expand that userbase a lot. Glad to see some people recognize a DAW can evolve for the better, and not just remain limited to a restriced audience.


Also worth mentioning that the poll Image Line made on their forums, where they asked what genre people was making, a lot of the userbase voted "cinematic".
So it's clearly in their best interrest to improve on this aspect.
And they seem to be taking steps towards it, it's probably going to take sometime though.


----------



## ImJim (Feb 24, 2022)

ThisFellowPlayingTheCello said:


> Also worth mentioning that the poll Image Line made on their forums, where they asked what genre people was making, a lot of the userbase voted "cinematic".
> So it's clearly in their best interrest to improve on this aspect.
> And they seem to be taking steps towards it, it's probably going to take sometime though.


Yup! Image line can't just keep on ignoring this part of the community. "Cinema" composers are really showing the limits of FL in terms of MIDI handling, despite its superb overall workflow and modern features. Hope they don't screw up with FL21.


----------



## ThisFellowPlayingTheCello (Feb 24, 2022)

ImJim said:


> Thanks! Do you draw curves on automations like you would do in the piano roll window? Playlist automations can't receive MIDI data recording btw, so how do you deal with that?


Yes you can draw, allthough I do feel like you still have more precision in the piano roll. I still use it sometimes when I need a lot of precision. But I don't want to deal with tabbing through windows all the time, so I mostly use automation.
After setting up a template where every automation is ready in the playlist, it's just so much easier to work with.
I would prefer drawing in the piano roll for sure though, if they improved the workflow.

I only use my midi piano for ideas. I prefer drawing in the notes in the piano roll, so if that's the case, I can see how this is not a solution for most people (it's not really a solution in the first place, but it works for me)


----------



## Piotrek K. (Feb 24, 2022)

Sorry for obvious, but you should ditch FL. Really. As much as I love FL, it's limitations for orchestral music are just too annoying (event editor, one CC lane, BRSO is great, but limited). Also setting certain things is much more convoluted than it should be.

I went for Studio One artist. It's 100 bucks. It does everything you want. Looks neat. Plus if you buy any Presonus audio interface you will get that DAW basically for free.

I really miss FL though, because I feel there at home. Maybe with FL 25 I will revisit :(


----------



## Montisquirrel (Feb 24, 2022)

I use FL Studio now since almost 20 years and every 2 or 3 years I have that "Oh I hate missing this and that options like other DAWs have"-thoughts. Than I install a demo or trial version of another DAW, try hard for one or two weeks and start missing all these wonderful and beautiful workflow options that FL Studio has a no other DAW can give me and I go back to FL Studio, say sorry to it and start again having fun making music.

Some month ago I had this situation again and I tried Studio One, I really tried, but it just didn't work.
Just seeing these windows-like context-menues in Studio One kills all my immersion and I rather accept some midi-problems in FL Studio than seeing this uglyness (not only that of course, main reason was that my workflow takes deep advantage of FL Studios Channel Rack and Patterns and I can't live without it)

In the end I also always realize I blame my DAW for my personal lack of musical skills so I go back to some Score Club lessons and after that I write beautiful music in FL Studio.


----------



## visiblenoise (Feb 24, 2022)

I hope you continue making some noise over at the Image-Line forum! I like all of the ideas in the list, but the lack of features around MIDI CC are my main frustration.


----------



## antic604 (Feb 25, 2022)

Montisquirrel said:


> ...Some month ago I had this situation again and I tried Studio One, I really tried, but it just didn't work.
> Just seeing these windows-like context-menues in Studio One kills all my immersion and I rather accept some midi-problems in FL Studio than seeing this uglyness...


Can you elaborate on that? Studio One has like 10% of the context-menus FL that has! With FL I feel like every window has multiple of those multi-level drop-down menus with arcane options that mean nothing to someone who hasn't used it for years. And sometimes those drop-downs require modifier keys.

Frankly, FL's UI is much worse than Reaper's and I never thought it's possible...


----------



## Montisquirrel (Feb 25, 2022)

antic604 said:


> Can you elaborate on that? Studio One has like 10% of the context-menus FL that has! With FL I feel like every window has multiple of those multi-level drop-down menus with arcane options that mean nothing to someone who hasn't used it for years. And sometimes those drop-downs require modifier keys.
> 
> Frankly, FL's UI is much worse than Reaper's and I never thought it's possible...


My point was not about the amount of context-menus. I mean they look exactly like a Windows context-menue in graphical sense. It feels like working in MIcrosoft Office. Of course, in a professional way this should not be an problem.

The main problem is that people like what they are used to use. Like I said, I use FL Studio since almost 20 years and after starting as a hobby I use it now professional for filmmusic. I know its flaws, and the OP is right about some missing midi functionality. But every DAW has its flaws, I have tested many of them ( Cubase, Studio One, Ableton Live, Reaper and Logic back when it was available for Windows)

I am so deep into this FL Studio workflow and I love it, the Channel Rack, the Patterns.

My wife is also sometimes getting on my nerves, but I stay with her and I love her with all her flaws and after decades of beeing together a divorce would still make me miss her even with a new wife (and new flaws). And often I realize that it is me that has to change and not her (nor the DAW).


----------



## John Judd (Feb 25, 2022)

One feature that they have totally screwed the user base on: if you have tempo changes within the piece, and a mixture of long printed audio + midi in the playlist - you are in for an unholy living nightmare. 

After multiple discussions with Image Line support and their acknowledgment of the existing-yet-not-fixed problem, this very issue forced me to use another DAW. Not a decision that was easy (using FL since 2006). 

I went with Studio One 1 1/2 years ago. It’s been a learning curve, but it’s pretty intuitive. I still use FL as a backup and for other creative processes. The ideal DAW for me would be a mixture of the two. In daily workflow I still miss the FL Mixer and Piano Roll, which totally crushed.


----------



## Piotrek K. (Feb 25, 2022)

Montisquirrel said:


> My wife is also sometimes getting on my nerves, but I stay with her and I love her with all her flaws and after decades of beeing together a divorce would still make me miss her even with a new wife (and new flaws). And often I realize that it is me that has to change and not her (nor the DAW).


If software world would be about feelings and attachment I'd still be using Internet Explorer, because it was awesome when I started web surfing in 1997 ;D

But yeah, to be honest I had really hard time leaving FL, I romanced with Reaper for a year or so, got back to FL but now we are in full separation because of Studio One. I still follow FL updates though and the moment they fully integrate BRSO, add more colors and multiple CC lanes I'm back on board! So it's not a divorce yet.


----------



## ImJim (Feb 25, 2022)

visiblenoise said:


> I hope you continue making some noise over at the Image-Line forum! I like all of the ideas in the list, but the lack of features around MIDI CC are my main frustration.


Would love if any of you guys could copy/paste my post or suggest some of these features on the IL forum. For some reason my post got deleted by the admins, don't know why. We need to be vocal bout those issues and encourage other active users there to do the same!


----------



## ImJim (Feb 25, 2022)

ThisFellowPlayingTheCello said:


> Yes you can draw, allthough I do feel like you still have more precision in the piano roll. I still use it sometimes when I need a lot of precision. But I don't want to deal with tabbing through windows all the time, so I mostly use automation.
> After setting up a template where every automation is ready in the playlist, it's just so much easier to work with.
> I would prefer drawing in the piano roll for sure though, if they improved the workflow.
> 
> I only use my midi piano for ideas. I prefer drawing in the notes in the piano roll, so if that's the case, I can see how this is not a solution for most people (it's not really a solution in the first place, but it works for me)


I've tried converting MIDI CC to playlist automation and work like that too, but I found that having to constantly switch between piano roll and playlist (to draw curves as I add notes) was even more tiresome and slower than selecting CCs in the event editor directly inside the piano roll.

Also, the (naturally) bigger size of the curve visualizer in the piano roll makes it easier to see what you're doing... unless you expand the playlist automation size? Then how do you deal with multiple CCs for each section/isntrument? Your playlist must be cluttered with many automations, unless you have multiple monitors?


----------



## ImJim (Feb 25, 2022)

Piotrek K. said:


> If software world would be about feelings and attachment I'd still be using Internet Explorer, because it was awesome when I started web surfing in 1997 ;D
> 
> But yeah, to be honest I had really hard time leaving FL, I romanced with Reaper for a year or so, got back to FL but now we are in full separation because of Studio One. I still follow FL updates though and the moment they fully integrate BRSO, add more colors and multiple CC lanes I'm back on board! So it's not a divorce yet.


It's funny how many users "ditch" FL for other DAWs but, deep inside, wait for FL to upgrade to instantly get back to it.

And funnily I know that's *exactly* what will happen to me if I ever have the courage to do the same, which is why I definitely won't switch DAW. I know the outcome lol. I'm just to accustomed to the ease of use, flexibility, speed and power of FL, and I think I won't be able to appreciate any other interface.


----------



## ThisFellowPlayingTheCello (Feb 25, 2022)

ImJim said:


> I've tried converting MIDI CC to playlist automation and work like that too, but I found that having to constantly switch between piano roll and playlist (to draw curves as I add notes) was even more tiresome and slower than selecting CCs in the event editor directly inside the piano roll.
> 
> Also, the (naturally) bigger size of the curve visualizer in the piano roll makes it easier to see what you're doing... unless you expand the playlist automation size? Then how do you deal with multiple CCs for each section/isntrument? Your playlist must be cluttered with many automations, unless you have multiple monitors?


1 monitor only.
Not at all cluttered. You just need to set it up right.
I dedicate a track to the section name "Strings" etc. Then under that I have a track for 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ,7 ,8 etc. These are all the same across channel rack/mixer and playlist.
I also place a pattern above the automation and mute it, so I can see what's happening in the piano roll on the playlist.
Then under each number I have a track with dynamics and expression, then I "group with above" so I can collapse them.
Yes I just zoom in.
You can press F5 when in piano roll to quickly return to playlist, then press F5 again to go back.


----------



## ThisFellowPlayingTheCello (Feb 25, 2022)

But also worth mentioning that I use the "1 pattern" workflow.
Almost only in the playlist UI when I edit automation and place samples etc.
Patterns, automation is setup already in the playlist when I load my template, and then i'm ready to compose from the channel rack.


----------



## ImJim (Feb 25, 2022)

_s_


ThisFellowPlayingTheCello said:


> But also worth mentioning that I use the "1 pattern" workflow.


Are you writing big orchestral pieces with many sections? I found using one single pattern was quite terrible for quickly finding / accessing certain instrument sections. I imagine there's an advantage using a single pattern, which is seeing all the notes in the piano roll at once (I guess) ?


----------



## ThisFellowPlayingTheCello (Feb 25, 2022)

ImJim said:


> _s_
> 
> Are you writing big orchestral pieces with many sections? I found using one single pattern was quite terrible for quickly finding / accessing certain instrument sections. I imagine there's an advantage using a single pattern, which is seeing all the notes in the piano roll at once (I guess) ?


It's no different than it would have been otherwise if you name your instances of BRSO articulate so you can locate them.
Yeah you can see everything in the piano roll as ghost notes.


----------



## ThisFellowPlayingTheCello (Feb 25, 2022)

In my case 1,2,3,4 .. But you can name them whatever you want


----------



## KEM (Feb 25, 2022)

FL Studio is made for making beats, that’s basically it’s sole market, and it’s really good for that purpose. It’ll never be geared towards media composition, I’d look elsewhere


----------



## ThisFellowPlayingTheCello (Feb 25, 2022)

KEM said:


> It’ll never be geared towards media composition


You don't really know that though, unless you are employed at Image Line
I don't understand this reasoning I see a lot in this thread.
"Something lacks features in a certain aspect, so lets not improve it."
It's not like it's unthinkable that a company might want to expand their customer base by making their product appeal to a wider audience.
For a new customer who also have to pay for kontakt or komplete and libraries, a 200$ DAW with lifetime free udates would certainly seem appealing to some.
While it will probably never blow away the competition for this purpose, I see absolutely no reason why they shouldn't improve it to work well with more genres.

Edit: BTW, I know you didn't say that. It was just the vibe I was getting from many in this thread overall


----------



## joebaggan (Feb 25, 2022)

Using FL for composition is like using Microsoft Paint for graphic design. Why handicap yourself when there are proper tools for the job?


----------



## Loerpert (Feb 25, 2022)

I wholly agree. And to everyone who still says FL Studio is for hobbyists only. You don't know your shit..


----------



## Loerpert (Feb 25, 2022)

joebaggan said:


> Using FL for composition is like using Microsoft Paint for graphic design. Why handicap yourself when there are proper tools for the job?


I'm sorry but this is just not correct at all.. I would be happy to show you my workflow.


----------



## ImJim (Feb 25, 2022)

ThisFellowPlayingTheCello said:


> In my case 1,2,3,4 .. But you can name them whatever you want


Yup, this is pretty much how I organize my instruments too. But often I need to visualize or arrange passages of certain instrument sections in the playlist, so I like having 4 or 5 patterns each containing a section or family of instruments, typically Strings, Brass, Winds, Perc, and extra stuff. I find it easier to see what and where you've written notes when playing back your track. 

The downside of this is that you have to highlight the right pattern first before writing a new line. Sometimes I forget to do that and realize all my stuff has been recorded in the wrong pattern. And as mentioned earlier, moving MIDI data from a pattern to another is an absolute pain. :D

IMO, it's pretty stressful to have a single pattern playing every section and dozens of MIDI notes condensed into one box. How does it look like on your own playlist? Would you mind to take a screenshot of a finished/WIP project so I can see how you visualize stuff?


----------



## ImJim (Feb 25, 2022)

Loerpert said:


> I'm sorry but this is just not correct at all.. I would be happy to show you my workflow.


It's almost like trolling at this point, though I'm sure he just doesn't have a clue of what he's talking about.


----------



## David Cuny (Feb 25, 2022)

ImJim said:


> Hope we can somehow make FL Studio developers see this. FL21 will be out soon... let's hope for the best!


Are FL Studio developers known to frequent these forums?

If not, you're mostly going to get responses from DAW users who will continue to point out the obvious: there are already other DAWS with those features.

Good luck!


----------



## Peter Satera (Feb 25, 2022)

Hi Jim.


> > *A button to merge all pattern piano rolls in some kind of "master piano roll" to be able to see the full orchestration and edit all notes from there *(could also work by highlighting multiple playlist patterns and double-clicking on the selection)



Select the patterns on the playlist, and hit ctrl G, that combines the patterns together you've selected as well as any CC data in your piano roll, no matter the instrument(s) / repetitious patterns. It makes a new pattern, therefore not deleting your previous patterns.



> > *Being able to see and control multiple MIDI event curves under the piano roll, instead of constantly searching through the list of CC to find the right parameter.*


Do you mean searching through the Browser? Like any DAW, if you connect a Midi Out to it or a BRSO then you can assign any CC, once you have you can right click the parameter and say 'Edit in Piano Roll' you can draw this in, or use a controller. This will then be visible during your project by right clicking in under the control area. Naming conventions are key to organisation.








> > *A brand new, up-to-date MIDI event editor that would work with curves and keyframes *(like automation clips)* while keeping the pencil draw*


Coming in FL21, it's in the teaser thread (FL 21 is "right around the corner"), according to the FL20.9.1 video they uploaded yesterday.



> * and other existing tools available *(makes editing & refining curves super easy)


I'm not sure I agree with this. To me, it's quite straight forward to draw a curve and edit it in the piano roll. I rarely ever use Automation Clips, all my CC data is with my instrument.






Don't get me wrong, there are many things that FL needs to incorporate. I won't go through them again though, to me, the mixer is the biggest offender with the 125 restriction, patcher workarounds are awful. BRSO though makes FL a powerhouse, it can trigger multiple articulations at once within a single instrument, which is better than expression map key switching, as there is no "switching".



It's quite capable for scoring to picture though. 



The preset save function is awesome. It allows you to build full modular templates and drag them and have it all instantly ready. You can do it with instruments / mixer channels etc. For instance, if I want CSS, I grab my CSS instance and all the BRSO which are prelinked to the kontakt port, and drop it in, and it's ready to go, CC parameters, and everything.


----------



## Daniel James (Feb 25, 2022)

ImJim said:


> Sorry to sound rude, but this is exactly the kind of useless reply I expected to read. What I tried to explain isn't limited to orchestral composers by the way. Anyone would benefit from these changes - the "features" we're asking for aren't even features at this point, but just proper tools for composition and arrangement ANYONE would benefit from, regardless of the genre they're making.


As much as you don't seem to like it, that was probably the most accurate answer. You did not say you wanted features, you even specifically listed 'film scoring' in the title, so you are pushing for features that suit your particular needs, and whilst helpful you don't speak for all users, if you did these features would probably exist.

You have to look at how DAW's are updated to see where the developer is focused. DAW's like FL Studio and Ableton Live tend to update with features usually aimed at more 'pop' focused productions. Obviously not saying that is all it can do, but its obvious the company is looking at the musical industry and is trying to cater to a certain kind of user. I doubt they just choose what things to update at random.

If you don't like the certain direction your DAW is taking it is 100% honestly in your interest to learn one that wants to exist in a similar musical space to you. DAW's like Cubase, Logic DP, Reaper which will release updates specifically targeting our field, are going to serve your _specific _needs better in the long run.

Trying to lobby a EDM/Pop focused DAW to be more Orchestral is genuinely more effort than learning a new one. And trust me I have put my money where my mouth is on this one, people here who have followed my videos for a while would know that I was at a pretty high standard user of Ableton Live, and used it to work on my score to MGSV, but it lacked (what a composer would consider) basic midi features and the updates were not in line with the direction I was taking. So I picked up Cubase and learned on the job. Its now even more second nature to me than Ableton Live was, AND _because_ the features are so in line and focused on the kinds of things I am trying to achieve, I have much more power in my workflow.

-DJ


----------



## Piotrek K. (Feb 25, 2022)

I think that FL business model can be a bit of an issue here as well. Life time free upgrades means that Image Line monetize user only once per DAW licence. It's absolutely fantastic model but at the same time user retention is not that important. You ditched FL? No problem, we've got already 1k users on your place.

Saying that I do think that adding certain, more scoring oriented features would be good idea for IL if they want to grow even more.


----------



## AudioLoco (Feb 26, 2022)

I can't use my fork to eat soup! Things need to change!


----------



## Montisquirrel (Feb 26, 2022)

Peter Satera said:


> Coming in FL21, it's in the teaser thread (FL 21 is "right around the corner"), according to the FL20.9.1 video they uploaded yesterday.


Where exactly did you read the information about a new midi event editor?
In the teaser thread I just found new envelope features for audio clips and new skins, nothing about midi. Did I miss it somehow?


----------



## ThisFellowPlayingTheCello (Feb 26, 2022)

Piotrek K. said:


> I think that FL business model can be a bit of an issue here as well. Life time free upgrades means that Image Line monetize user only once per DAW licence. It's absolutely fantastic model but at the same time user retention is not that important. You ditched FL? No problem, we've got already 1k users on your place.
> 
> Saying that I do think that adding certain, more scoring oriented features would be good idea for IL if they want to grow even more.


They do provide a lot of updates though, so yeah providing updates that bring in new customers would only make sense


----------



## Peter Satera (Feb 26, 2022)

Montisquirrel said:


> Where exactly did you read the information about a new midi event editor?
> In the teaser thread I just found new envelope features for audio clips and new skins, nothing about midi. Did I miss it somehow?


It's not in the piano roll, but the event editor allows you to convert CC data to points. It's included in 20.9.1


----------



## Peter Satera (Feb 26, 2022)

Daniel James said:


> If you don't like the certain direction your DAW is taking it is 100% honestly in your interest to learn one that wants to exist in a similar musical space to you. DAW's like Cubase, Logic DP, Reaper which will release updates specifically targeting our field, are going to serve your _specific _needs better in the long run.
> 
> Trying to lobby a EDM/Pop focused DAW to be more Orchestral is genuinely more effort than learning a new one. And trust me I have put my money where my mouth is on this one, people here who have followed my videos for a while would know that I was at a pretty high standard user of Ableton Live, and used it to work on my score to MGSV, but it lacked (what a composer would consider) basic midi features and the updates were not in line with the direction I was taking. So I picked up Cubase and learned on the job. Its now even more second nature to me than Ableton Live was, AND _because_ the features are so in line and focused on the kinds of things I am trying to achieve, I have much more power in my workflow.
> 
> -DJ


What we need to see though is the positives in a DAWs direction too, to encourage growth and not just state moving is the answer, which incurs in more expense. It's easy to suggest the grass is greener on the other side too, but what happens is you move to one DAW lacking features to another which is equally lacking things you expect. As much as I love Cubase, it doesn't do some of the things FL can because it is EDM producer focused, or in the case of BRSO, I've yet to see expression maps achieve triggering variable articulations at once in a single instrument, the playlist picker makes it perfect for just sketching and pulling in and out ideas, and you can access multiple arrangements to have many different cues worked on in parallel. 

But, even the _simple _things...like undocking the right or left zones to support organisation for Super ultrawide screens, or there is no vertical scaling shortcut other than using a little icon at the bottom right, or holding ctrl and hovering your mouse under the track name to pull on it, and from my long hunt there is no way to assign a shortcut to it. To me, it's absolutely baffling that Cubase is not using _Alt and scroll_ _wheel _to do zoom vertically... especially when there is _*nothing *_assigned to it.

Don't get me wrong, if you are scoring to film as a career, then FL is not the tool of choice and I agree with you in most part as I bought Cubase Pro too. The freeze option is worth that alone. But, it's worth mentioning Image-line are taking notice of Composers that are using the DAW, and even promoting them on their feeds. The more users that do use FL in this capacity it supports the growth in that area, and if it gains some of the right kinds of features then it could easily become a powerhouse in composing due to the modern and non-linear workflow it uses.


----------



## Montisquirrel (Feb 26, 2022)

Peter Satera said:


> It's not in the piano roll, but the event editor allows you to convert CC data to points. It's included in 20.9.1



Ok, I know what you mean. You can make Automation Clips out of Piano Roll Events before 20.9.1, but I am not sure why I should use that. Do you have a good workflow idea for that feature? I use the Piano Roll Events for all Midi CC like Modwheel and Automation Clips more for other stuff like Filter Cut of or tuning FX on and off.

Here is something I like to see in the future, having Events and Velocity in one Screen (like one of the suggestions of the OP, here with a picture I windows-painted)


----------



## ThisFellowPlayingTheCello (Feb 26, 2022)

Peter Satera said:


> As much as I love Cubase, it doesn't do some of the things FL can


Yeah, lets not forget about FL's piano roll either. While it obviously lacks features when it comes to midi CC, it's seen to many as the best piano roll in any DAW.


----------



## ImJim (Feb 26, 2022)

Daniel James said:


> As much as you don't seem to like it, that was probably the most accurate answer. You did not say you wanted features, you even specifically listed 'film scoring' in the title, so you are pushing for features that suit your particular needs, and whilst helpful you don't speak for all users, if you did these features would probably exist.
> 
> You have to look at how DAW's are updated to see where the developer is focused. DAW's like FL Studio and Ableton Live tend to update with features usually aimed at more 'pop' focused productions. Obviously not saying that is all it can do, but its obvious the company is looking at the musical industry and is trying to cater to a certain kind of user. I doubt they just choose what things to update at random.
> 
> ...


Let’s be clear, no one will change my mind that FL Studio is the most powerful, flexible and modern DAW you can find today. Admittedly I regret a certain lack of essential features on MIDI management, which makes the workflow more complicated at certain stages of composition. This can be a brake to creativity and ease of use at times. Even if these 5% or 10% of shortcomings deserve to be adressed this does not in any way prevent me from enjoying the 90% or 95% of awesomeness FL Studio offers, and that I find in no other program. The shortcuts, the versatility, the modular capabilities of it, the hyper "functional" architecture, the ease of use. That’s why I refuse to change DAW, not only because I feel "at home" and I probably find a certain comfort sticking with it, but also because I know I'll miss its power and intuitiveness as soon as I'll try Studio One or Cubase.

Also, I'm not saying FL is taking any particular "direction", it's justly trying to become a more and more flexible all-rounder DAW that can handle every type of use, so much that it justly forgets to focus on the roots of compostion outside the pattern-based workflow. As a brilliant dude pointed out recently, it would certainly be way too much effort for IL to make those deep changes in MIDI management, which is why they constantly postpone this stuff.


----------



## ImJim (Feb 26, 2022)

Where exactly did you read the information about a new midi event editor?


Montisquirrel said:


> In the teaser thread I just found new envelope features for audio clips and new skins, nothing about midi. Did I miss it somehow?


It's not in the piano roll at all, it's a separate window to convert to automation. Doesn't take care of what we're talking about.


----------



## ImJim (Feb 26, 2022)

ThisFellowPlayingTheCello said:


> Yeah, lets not forget about FL's piano roll either. While it obviously lacks features when it comes to midi CC, it's seen to many as the best piano roll in any DAW.


...and every other DAW user is jealous of it 😋


----------



## ImJim (Feb 26, 2022)

Montisquirrel said:


> Here is something I like to see in the future, having Events and Velocity in one Screen (like one of the suggestions of the OP, here with a picture I windows-painted)


Here! That's exactly what we're talking about! We want to have several windows (we could be able to open or close them if we just want one) that could display all the CC info we want to visualize while writing. This exists pretty much everywhere except on FL.

Also, someone on IL forums made something similar for the curves in the event editor, here's his pic below. That's exactly how I would see the new event editor.


----------



## ImJim (Feb 26, 2022)

Hey Peter, thanks for the in-depth reply!


Peter Satera said:


> Select the patterns on the playlist, and hit ctrl G, that combines the patterns together you've selected as well as any CC data in your piano roll, no matter the instrument(s) / repetitious patterns.


That's certainly a nice solution for visualizing all notes, but only in a given point of time, as the new merged pattern is in no way linked to the others, so it doesn't act as a "master" pattern in which you'd control everything. It would just help for note checking purposes, but eventually you'd have to get back to your single patterns to change stuff.



Peter Satera said:


>


Thanks but nothing new here, like all FL users I've been dealing with this drop-down window for years, and it's justly a flaw to me. As I wrote in the original post, having a full orchestral template with every section each containing 4 or 5 instruments, each of them having up to 3 MIDI CC, you end up with a massive list and can easily get lost searching for your instruments. The point here would be to have multiple stacked event windows to check and control multiple CCs while writing notes.


Peter Satera said:


> I'm not sure I agree with this. To me, it's quite straight forward to draw a curve and edit it in the piano roll. I rarely ever use Automation Clips, all my CC data is with my instrument.


Well, I'm exactly like you then, I don't like having to deal with playlist automation and prefer to work with curves.

As I said they're packed with great features no other DAW offers, but I wish they were rendered as curves with key points in a similar fashion to automations. Fine-tuning those curves would be way easier and precise with only a few clicks. Right now, having to re-draw small portions of your curve just to smooth out an angle or get a particular shape is pretty annoying.


Peter Satera said:


> The preset save function is awesome. It allows you to build full modular templates and drag them and have it all instantly ready.


Love this modular approach to orchestral workflow, yet another feature I've never seen anywhere else other than in FL. That's the flexibility and modernity I'm talking about.


Peter Satera said:


> BRSO though makes FL a powerhouse, it can trigger multiple articulations at once within a single instrument, which is better than expression map key switching, as there is no "switching".


I think BRSO is THE thing that definitely made me stick to FL and never think again. The expression management is unmatched here, love this plugin. But again, all of this makes for an almost perfect configuration, except the things I mentioned that don't have any real fix.


----------



## visiblenoise (Feb 26, 2022)

Since we're in the weeds here - does anyone know if it's possible to quickly jump from viewing event data (i.e. CC) at the bottom of the piano roll to viewing that same data in the Event Viewer, which is has more editing capability?


----------



## ImJim (Feb 26, 2022)

visiblenoise said:


> Since we're in the weeds here - does anyone know if it's possible to quickly jump from viewing event data (i.e. CC) at the bottom of the piano roll to viewing that same data in the Event Viewer, which is has more editing capability?


Wish we could. Never found any way to do that, actually the event editor is kinda hidden in FL. You can only access it from the project tab, from certain native FL plugins, or via BRSO.


----------



## ThisFellowPlayingTheCello (Feb 26, 2022)

ImJim said:


> Wish we could. Never found any way to do that, actually the event editor is kinda hidden in FL. You can only access it from the project tab, from certain native FL plugins, or via BRSO.


You can also right click the "multilink to controllers" icon


----------



## Bluemount Score (Feb 26, 2022)

Honestly I'm probably just too lazy to actually do an in-depth try of another DAW, on the other hand there are many things about FL that I really like or at least got used to, to a point where I don't feel like I'm missing anything crucial... which might be because I haven't explored what's possible in Cubase of course
FL is the only DAW I finished a track in since I started "seriously" making music in 2018


----------



## AlbertSmithers (Feb 26, 2022)

I used FL Studio for a long time before deciding to switch to Reaper a few months back. Now I use FL studio to sketch my ideas and Reaper (specifically the OTR template which I LOVE) to orchestrate.


----------



## ImJim (Feb 26, 2022)

AlbertSmithers said:


> I used FL Studio for a long time before deciding to switch to Reaper a few months back. Now I use FL studio to sketch my ideas and Reaper (specifically the OTR template which I LOVE) to orchestrate.


Yeah Reaper is awesome for orchestration, not surprised to see so many people use it for this purpose. But using two different DAWs is probably the worst thing I could do, and even more on the same project.


----------



## rMancer (Feb 26, 2022)

ImJim said:


> Let’s be clear, no one will change my mind that FL Studio is the most powerful, flexible and modern DAW you can find today.


What other DAWs have you used?

If someone were to come into FL _without _having heard of BRSO Articulate, or any of the workarounds in this thread, they might think it was the wrong tool for them. That power and flexibility comes from the user and their experience, not just with the software itself. FL Studio (or any software) is only powerful because _you _are powerful with it (maybe even in spite of it).

I've seen basically the same things (most powerful, flexible, modern DAW) said about Reaper, Bitwig, Logic, etc. And I think a lot of that simply comes from having delved deep into the functionality of a particular piece of software. For instance, I've been using Reaper for like... 12 years now, and I think it is the most powerful, flexible DAW out there by a long shot. But if you had asked me after just 1 month of using it, I would have told you it sucks, that it was convoluted and unintuitive, and that FL (which I had since version 3, right around the time the piano roll was added and it was rebranded from Fruity Loops) was way better.

And hopefully things have changed, but I seem to recall that they were _not _very receptive to suggestions and criticism back then. If they're deleting your posts, maybe that's still a thing?


----------



## Daniel James (Feb 26, 2022)

ImJim said:


> Let’s be clear, no one will change my mind that FL Studio is the most powerful, flexible and modern DAW you can find today. Admittedly I regret a certain lack of essential features on MIDI management


Sort of contradicted yourself on that one mate. 😂



ImJim said:


> Also, I'm not saying FL is taking any particular "direction", it's justly trying to become a more and more flexible all-rounder DAW that can handle every type of use, so much that it justly forgets to focus on the roots of compostion outside the pattern-based workflow.


I think that might be where you are wrong. A DAW developer, much like any other business, will have people its trying to target. There are simply too many specific requirements spread across all the musical genres to create any one perfect software, so instead you look at who the developer uses to market their software (composers, producers, rappers etc) then look at their previous updates...you will then get an idea of who they are targeting.

And mate trust me, I used to think Ableton Live was unbeatable...and in many ways it was! It's just the type of music I needed to write for work simply wasn't a main focus, so all of those amazing features, regardless of cool they felt, didn't help me write what I needed to write, so I had to change. And by moving to Cubase, I realised that while some of the really unique features of live I was now missing...I was also having a much easier and fun time writing for my work because the DAW was getting out of my way, as it was designed to do.

Its much easier to adapt yourself to the reality of the world than it is to change the world to match what you want reality to be.

But anyway, you seem rather confrontational to anyone who isn't trying to join your crusade at lobbying the developers to bend to _your_ specific desires. So at the end of the day if you want to stick with FL Studio, just do that. They might add those features one day, they might not. If they are features you need to get where you want to go you are only hurting yourself in the long run, but I fully support your right and ability to do so. I just wanted to offer so advice from my own experience in this specific regard. And given the success it provided for me I simply wanted to try to impart some of that to you. Have a good one fella and good luck!


----------



## Daniel James (Feb 26, 2022)

Peter Satera said:


> As much as I love Cubase, it doesn't do some of the things FL can because it is EDM producer focused,


So use FL Studio when you write EDM and use something else when you score orchestral? There is no rule against learning two side by side. I still own and use Ableton Live, I just don't write music that makes using it more beneficial than using Cubase which is designed closer to the way I do work in cinematic scoring.


Peter Satera said:


> The freeze option is worth that alone. But, it's worth mentioning Image-line are taking notice of Composers that are using the DAW, and even promoting them on their feeds.


Right and that would be great, but they are at least 10 years behind in that field compared to the competition. So while it will be great for people like the OP who refuse to budge to have some more tools at their disposal, I can't help but think they will always be one or two steps behind in terms of what they can do. And I don't know if I see FL Studio leaning hard into it, like I could see a few features which would 'benefit' film composers, but I don't ever see them trying to present themselves as the DAW _for_ composers, or as a serious competitor to Cubase, DP, Logic etc for that type of writing...why would they when they have a solid market cornered in EDM. Money makes these decisions usually, not protest, lobbying or sentiment.


----------



## ThisFellowPlayingTheCello (Feb 26, 2022)

Daniel James said:


> So use FL Studio when you write EDM and use something else when you score orchestral? There is no rule against learning two side by side. I still own and use Ableton Live, I just don't write music that makes using it more beneficial than using Cubase which is designed closer to the way I do work in cinematic scoring.
> 
> Right and that would be great, but they are at least 10 years behind in that field compared to the competition. So while it will be great for people like the OP who refuse to budge to have some more tools at their disposal, I can't help but think they will always be one or two steps behind in terms of what they can do. And I don't know if I see FL Studio leaning hard into it, like I could see a few features which would 'benefit' film composers, but I don't ever see them trying to present themselves as the DAW _for_ composers, or as a serious competitor to Cubase, DP, Logic etc for that type of writing...why would they when they have a solid market cornered in EDM. Money makes these decisions usually, not protest, lobbying or sentiment.


Adding a few features, that most DAWs have already, does not = "FL Studio should completely change its focus to being a top tier DAW for composers"


----------



## Daniel James (Feb 26, 2022)

ThisFellowPlayingTheCello said:


> Adding a few features, that most DAWs have already, does not = "FL Studio should completely change its focus to being a top tier DAW for composers"


Yeah but they are features _you_ want them to add. Perhaps the other DAW's have those 'few features' _because _the developer are a bit more focused on the users that would need those. Again good luck with it all, but you are only slowing yourself down. 

FL Studio won't be hurt by the lack of those features if it hasn't been so already, meaning it isn't something that they _need_ to change. Otherwise, they would have had to add them to be able to sell, it probably also means the users to which this is aimed are not as desperate for them as you are.

So again I will reiterate that its much easier to adapt to reality rather than to try and change reality to be what you want it to be. The other DAW's are plenty powerful, you should try.


----------



## ThisFellowPlayingTheCello (Feb 26, 2022)

Daniel James said:


> Yeah but they are features _you_ want them to add. Perhaps the other DAW's have those 'few features' _because _the developer are a bit more focused on the users that would need those. Again good luck with it all, but you are only slowing yourself down.
> 
> FL Studio won't be hurt by the lack of those features if it hasn't been so already, meaning it isn't something that they _need_ to change. Otherwise, they would have had to add them to be able to sell, it probably also means the users to which this is aimed are not as desperate for them as you are.
> 
> So again I will reiterate that its much easier to adapt to reality rather than to try and change reality to be what you want it to be. The other DAW's are plenty powerful, you should try.


Dude chill.
I'm not demanding anything. But I will continue providing feedback as I have before on the FL forum.
But you are really just speculating here. You have no idea if they have plans to add those features, there's a few signs already they might.
They are expanding the mixer tracks etc. And that sure ain't because of demand from hip hop and EDM producers.
And as I've stated before, from the poll they did, asking the userbase what genre they were making, "score/soundtrack" was actually pretty popular.


----------



## ThisFellowPlayingTheCello (Feb 26, 2022)

Daniel James said:


> So again I will reiterate that its much easier to adapt to reality rather than to try and change reality to be what you want it to be. The other DAW's are plenty powerful, you should try.


Also, reality .. I have FL Studio. Started out making EDM and so on.
I like it. I'm not against getting another DAW at some point, but right now as a hobbyist there's plenty to spend on kontakt libraries. 
I think it's completely reasonable for me to suggest the DAW I use to add features I would like.


----------



## joebaggan (Feb 27, 2022)

If the OP really wants FL to target a different segment of the market, why is he stubbornly blathering on in this forum rather than taking his concerns to FL directly? Every DAW has a target market and focus that drives its feature set. Clearly, composition/scoring is not what FL developers are targeting and only they can change that if they choose to compete with the likes of Cubase, Logic, DP.


----------



## Peter Satera (Feb 27, 2022)

Daniel James said:


> So use FL Studio when you write EDM and use something else when you score orchestral? There is no rule against learning two side by side. I still own and use Ableton Live, I just don't write music that makes using it more beneficial than using Cubase which is designed closer to the way I do work in cinematic scoring.


What I mean by it's producer focused, is that it allows you to do things within a modern scoring context. Not for producing EDM. Hybrid work, as you are more than familiar with.


Daniel James said:


> Right and that would be great, but they are at least 10 years behind in that field compared to the competition. So while it will be great for people like the OP who refuse to budge to have some more tools at their disposal, I can't help but think they will always be one or two steps behind in terms of what they can do. And I don't know if I see FL Studio leaning hard into it, like I could see a few features which would 'benefit' film composers, but I don't ever see them trying to present themselves as the DAW _for_ composers, or as a serious competitor to Cubase, DP, Logic etc for that type of writing...why would they when they have a solid market cornered in EDM. Money makes these decisions usually, not protest, lobbying or sentiment.


It's not as straight forward as saying it needs 10 years to catch up to Cubase. The problem with that thinking; that they are two steps behind, is that it's a misguided perspective. When you have something like FL at your disposal you excel in other areas which can put you two steps ahead again, it evens out especially in a modern day context, it's really easy to create 2:30 trailers as a 30 second tv spot, and have both sessions swappable. Personally, I don't have the same frustrations as others and I have seen some awful workflows adopted in FL because of the multitude of approaches you can take.

IL do present themselves as a serious contender within Audio Production, and their quantity in sales allow them to give free updates because of the grasp on that market. If they have a solid market cornered and covered this is calling out for an expansion to other areas to adopt other types of users, not a decision to isolate to the users already invested, that creates stagnation, and as you say it's money.

It's not in protest, (to me anyway), it's in encouragement and it's working as it has seen Imageline adopt tasks to implement key tools for scoring, such as BRSO to be part of the core app. I don't have the same perspective as 'FL is the best DAW', that's an arbitrary statement unless you have used _all the DAWs, for an *extensive *time_. But I am in support of it and the dev team. It's common for them to discuss features in other apps with open analysis with the users considering how this could be incorporated to the DAW, and they genuinely get excited when teasing and releasing new tools. With it progressing, I do not think closing off and not embracing growth in the DAW in our field is ideal, to move, as I have said, you simply are going to adopt stifles in another app and want those addressed there.

Hope you're doing well, I've not caught up with one your streams for a while. Will you be buying and doing a Pacific playing session?


----------



## Peter Satera (Feb 27, 2022)

joebaggan said:


> If the OP really wants FL to target a different segment of the market, why is he stubbornly blathering on in this forum rather than taking his concerns to FL directly?


It's quite common to make a thread with _'I want this feeechur'_, but you are right IL are aware of these posts on the FL Forums, and they do take note. I don't think OP is looking for change from this thread, most likely just a hug or a chat with what would be nice to see.


----------



## Daniel James (Feb 27, 2022)

Peter Satera said:


> The problem with that thinking; that they are two steps behind, is that it's a misguided perspective


I fundamentally disagree. In a field of which they are not focused, I think they are behind, and Cubase for example will always be better for creating orchestral styles the same way FL Studio will always be better for creating electronic styles.... and I also think where I will leave this conversation. Lads, at the end of the day, do whatever the fuck you want. Just sharing how this exact scenario played out for me.


----------



## Peter Satera (Feb 27, 2022)

Daniel James said:


> I fundamentally disagree. In a field of which they are not focused, I think they are behind, and Cubase for example will always be better for creating orchestral styles the same way FL Studio will always be better for creating electronic styles.... and I also think where I will leave this conversation. Lads, at the end of the day, do whatever the fuck you want. Just sharing how this exact scenario played out for me.


They are behind, but I've seen this happen before.

I'm from the Games industry, as a 3D Artist of 2 decades. Lightwave was used in Tele 20+ years ago, the shift gone to Maya, Max and C4D. You'd never think a free software would be 'seen as a serious competitor'. But there is, as Blender 3D continues to make huge impact due to the flexibility at incorporating the likes of Mayas modelling and animation tools, Zbrush's sculpting, premiere's editing and tradigital 2D animation. With pros adopting the multi-flex app growing at a quicker rate over the bulky vet.

I'm not going to argue Cubase is not the better tool for you or me on scoring to picture but for others they may feel they substitute one set of problems for another. You don't seem to acknowledge this point. But it's important, such as, while everyone complained Sine crashed Cubase, FL had no problems with using JXL Brass.

Don't feel you need to reply, this is just my own experience of this exact scenario, too. Which is why I'll never be an elitist to any DAW or software. Powell uses Logic, Mick Gordon uses FL on "absolutely everything", Hans uses Cubase... and to quote him "The best DAW is the one you know."


----------



## jamessy (Feb 27, 2022)

Peter Satera said:


> They are behind, but I've seen this happen before.
> 
> I'm from the Games industry, as a 3D Artist of 2 decades. Lightwave was used in Tele 20+ years ago, the shift gone to Maya, Max and C4D. You'd never think a free software would be 'seen as a serious competitor'. But there is, as Blender 3D continues to make huge impact due to the flexibility at incorporating the likes of Mayas modelling and animation tools, Zbrush's sculpting, premiere's editing and tradigital 2D animation. With pros adopting the multi-flex app growing at a quicker rate over the bulky vet.
> 
> ...



So let's say that I'm a modeler but I'm mostly interested in sculpting. And let's pretend that Blender actually is just more interested in catering to the hard surface modeling crowd (it's not, to my understanding they are looking to revamp sculpting soon :D But for the analogy let's pretend that they care about sculpting as much as IL cares about orchestral composition.) 

Blender kinda gets the job done but it's missing a number of features that a certain dedicated sculpting program has. If someone mentions that maybe I should check out ZBrush, that's very much the most reasonable and obvious answer. And it's in no way trashing anything about Blender.

How is this conversation expected to go if I criticize the person who is recommending ZBrush? Most everyone in the industry who is serious about digital sculpting uses ZBrush. If I don't want to use it, it's one thing to say 'thanks, I might check it out', and just tough it out with Blender and move on. It's another to say 'Blender is the best and most powerful hard surface modeling software out there, and everyone else is jealous of how great the boolean tools are. If only it was better at sculpting.'


----------



## Peter Satera (Feb 27, 2022)

jamessy said:


> So let's say that I'm a modeler but I'm mostly interested in sculpting. And let's pretend that Blender actually is just more interested in catering to the hard surface modeling crowd (it's not, to my understanding they are looking to revamp sculpting soon :D But for the analogy let's pretend that they care about sculpting as much as IL cares about orchestral composition.)
> 
> Blender kinda gets the job done but it's missing a number of features that a certain dedicated sculpting program has. If someone mentions that maybe I should check out ZBrush, that's very much the most reasonable and obvious answer. And it's in no way trashing anything about Blender.
> 
> How is this conversation expected to go if I criticize the person who is recommending ZBrush? Most everyone in the industry who is serious about digital sculpting uses ZBrush. If I don't want to use it, it's one thing to say 'thanks, I might check it out', and just tough it out with Blender and move on. It's another to say 'Blender is the best and most powerful hard surface modeling software out there, and everyone else is jealous of how great the boolean tools are. If only it was better at sculpting.'


The person saying you should try out Zbrush, recommendations is just being helpful and it's a warranted, as Zbrush is a better sculpting app, like Cubase is a better scoring to movie app. But, just because it is, should we be shutting down usage of any other application? Would be giving John Powell that same advice because he uses logic? Now, you are absolutely right in the other extreme, an arbitrary claim like 'FL is the best' and you do get the whole, 'Blender is the best' because of the price, like what we're seeing here with FL, is redundant with nothing that can _actually _be taken away from. It's reactionary to being told you may have to look elsewhere to get what you want.

I'm not arguing with either, nor taking a side, Daniel is right in terms of looking elsewhere is key, even to expand your horizons, but at the same time we shouldn't be shutting down users looking for a few features to make life easier, I certainly wouldn't say no to them.

I see it as: I need to tighten a screw with an allen key. Do I buy an awesome allen key set that will fit any allen key screw, or, do I buy a swiss army knife which has the most common ones with loads of other tools attached? To me with all the money we spend on screws (libraries / hardware)...just pick up both...and like Alex Pfeifer, use what feels right at the time.


----------



## jamessy (Feb 28, 2022)

Peter Satera said:


> The person saying you should try out Zbrush, recommendations is just being helpful and it's a warranted, as Zbrush is a better sculpting app, like Cubase is a better scoring to movie app. But, just because it is, should we be shutting down usage of any other application? Would be giving John Powell that same advice because he uses logic? Now, you are absolutely right in the other extreme, an arbitrary claim like 'FL is the best' and you do get the whole, 'Blender is the best' because of the price, like what we're seeing here with FL, is redundant with nothing that can _actually _be taken away from. It's reactionary to being told you may have to look elsewhere to get what you want.
> 
> I'm not arguing with either, nor taking a side, Daniel is right in terms of looking elsewhere is key, even to expand your horizons, but at the same time we shouldn't be shutting down users looking for a few features to make life easier, I certainly wouldn't say no to them.
> 
> I see it as: I need to tighten a screw with an allen key. Do I buy an awesome allen key set that will fit any allen key screw, or, do I buy a swiss army knife which has the most common ones with loads of other tools attached? To me with all the money we spend on screws (libraries / hardware)...just pick up both...and like Alex Pfeifer, use what feels right at the time.


Sure, and I agree with most everything you're saying. I too would just pick up another tool to add it to the arsenal, which is all DJ was suggesting, and it's something I've done myself. And of course yeah there's nothing wrong with wanting your favorite DAW to have a few extra features here and there, and there's no need to abandon it outright just because another program is better at some things.

But if FL Studio is missing a lot of basic features that pretty much every DAW geared towards orchestral music has, and IL keeps not adding them, there's only so many conclusions you can draw. Coming to a forum and complaining to composers who have already chosen proper tools for the job, it's pretty obvious what the response was going to be. I think if John Powell was struggling with orchestration in a DAW that is geared primarily towards EDM, the advice would be the same.


----------



## Peter Satera (Feb 28, 2022)

jamessy said:


> But if FL Studio is missing a lot of basic features that pretty much every DAW geared towards orchestral music has, and IL keeps not adding them, there's only so many conclusions you can draw. Coming to a forum and complaining to composers who have already chosen proper tools for the job, it's pretty obvious what the response was going to be.


You're right, it should have been expected from users here, to point in favour of their chosen tools. To me, FL can do the job, if it couldn't I'd drop it, especially as I own Cubase. Stating overhauling certain things could e down to users doing something wrong, if it's so challenging... I literally show dragging and dropping libs which give instant playability. Cc controller + keyboard.. done. It's that easy.

I've scored to 7min in 48hour Film Projects, in a day, with changes. So it can be fast. I feel like my examples prove this is overemphasis of FLs lacking tool set. It's really decent, if you know what you're doing. 

I feel like we're fighting about who can give the best advice at times. 🤪


----------



## ImJim (Mar 4, 2022)

Daniel James said:


> Lads, at the end of the day, do whatever the fuck you want.


No need to be crude just cause you disagree with us. I'm not asking for a total rebuild of FL, just for a handful of basic features any daw should cover, whatever the genre or public it's supposed to target. I'm not a fan of your fatalism about DAWs in general, you make it sound like software can't evolve at all.


----------



## ThisFellowPlayingTheCello (Mar 4, 2022)

ImJim said:


> No need to be crude just cause you disagree with us. I'm not asking for a total rebuild of FL, just for a handful of basic features any daw should cover, whatever the genre or public it's supposed to target. I'm not a fan of your fatalism about DAWs in general, you make it sound like software can't evolve at all.


I'm also a bit surprised by the answers in this thread. I get that this is a forum where many people do this for a living, but I think we should put into perspective that there's a world outside this forum.
It's not like anyone was asking for FL Studio to completely change it's focus, just to add some bare bones features to make the workflow easier for composing.
Not everyone outside this forum, (and even some hobbyists on this forum) will not be able to (or want to) throw money at a DAW for trying there hand at another genre.
FL Studio is one of the biggest DAWs available. While it's mostly focused on EDM, there's a growing market as libraries gets cheaper and cheaper. 
One of the biggest tutorial channel for orchestral music on youtube is a guy making his music in .. FL Studio


https://www.youtube.com/c/AlexMoukala


He also reccommends FL Studio for composing (while acknowledging it has shortcomings)
That alone already seems like a reason to improve the DAW for this purpose, from all the free advertising they get from this channel.


----------



## Peter Satera (Mar 4, 2022)

Even Alex's workflow makes me cringe at times. XD dudes great to talk to. Imageline promote him too. As a Cubase owner Cubase 12 sums it up for me. Rather underwhelming, lacking anything really worth celebrating...and it's £85 to update.

This is why my point about FL is valid, FL 21 will be feature packed (from what we have already seen!) in comparison, and it'll be free. It's a prime example of 'the grass is greener on the other side'.


----------



## aeliron (Mar 4, 2022)

ThisFellowPlayingTheCello said:


> Dude chill.
> I'm not demanding anything. But I will continue providing feedback as I have before on the FL forum.
> But you are really just speculating here. You have no idea if they have plans to add those features, there's a few signs already they might.
> They are expanding the mixer tracks etc. And that sure ain't because of demand from hip hop and EDM producers.
> And as I've stated before, from the poll they did, asking the userbase what genre they were making, "score/soundtrack" was actually pretty popular.


er ... he actually seems pretty chill. And you do sound like you're demanding something.

So ... chill, dude.


----------



## ThisFellowPlayingTheCello (Mar 4, 2022)

aeliron said:


> er ... he actually seems pretty chill. And you do sound like you're demanding something.
> 
> So ... chill, dude.


The "chill dude" was probably a result of me not being in the best mood, and getting a bit annoyed, I can acknowledge that. But I don't see where you get the idea from that i'm demanding anything.


----------



## Tag (Mar 5, 2022)

Interesting thread, since I worked in FL for around 15 years and switched to Reaper in 2020. TL;DR: I wish I would have switched way earlier.

In the end I would not say that FL is a bad piece of software, while I think it just depends on your workflow, in the end. I also scored movies with it, so it *is* possible after all, yet totally clumsy, of course, since *it is not intended* to do so. I am in a german Discord community and I also have contact to people working for IL, by the way. So somehow I am still _"with FL"_ in a way. (-;

Now let me do a huge post going through some quotes I collected during reading almost the whole thread _(I just have a weird urge to clarify things from my perspective, since I was a FL user for 15 years and in the end I am still thankful for IL for this piece of software with which I earned my first money after all)_. Here we go; sorry for long post:





ImJim said:


> in 8 years I've never seen the crucial updates I desperately needed


As written: here it rather were 15 years of "waiting". Now I just recognized that it is a software intended to different people. And the history behind FL is just a different one as well. So somehow it's kind of "understandable" and "ok" (to me) that things won't change so quick.





ImJim said:


> With FL21 coming soon, I hope to shed some (further) light on the weaknesses of this DAW and maybe encourage developers to address those.


My guess is that it won't happen so quick. I would rather call FL22 or even later. The reason: the engine / code structure behind FL is just a thing, which is not easy to change, I guess. The intentional area was almost mainly the electronic musicians, I guess. And - no offensive, it's just my experience so far - this target group is just not the group using complex tempo automation, time signature changes and other things a film composer might do. So it never was more important than adding features, which suited the elctronic musicians more. Sometimes "we" might have been lucky and things were cool for "both" kind of musicians. E.g. I remember when I posted FRs to have playlist tracks to be renamable etc. And some day it was possible - even coloring them etc. It was a happy day for me. And yes ... I made filmmusic with the now deprecated blocks in the playlist back then, haha. :D





ImJim said:


> While there's always a workaround for pretty much everything in FL


I thought this, too. Then I demoed Reaper for the second or third time, it made click and I experienced a *whole new world* with Reaper. In the end some "workarounds" in FL could either mean spending a *lot* more time producing _(e.g. by revinding the playhead before the first tempo automation so that from there you could play the project back and the video would still be in sync ... this was a nightmare ... e-v-e-r-y-time!)_.

At such a point you really should ask yourself, if it really is worth the feelings and emotions one might have with a DAW and be less fast / economic during production. I wish I had dared to make the change way earlier after all ... but in the end I still learned things and stuff. So no problem. Still I would suggest everybody struggling with FL the way you do: give other DAWs a try. A very fair try. And then: do it again. And again, haha. _(like written: it took me two or three tries till I realized how great Reaper was for me)_.





ImJim said:


> LIST


I checked your list, and just a quick info: Literally everything is in Reaper already possible. Even better: things are possible I could not even dreamed about.

Again: the underlying engine / code / structure of FL might not allow such changes that fast, coding wise. It probably would take so much time to improve it in FL, I guess, that in the meantime other DAWs will come up with even greater workflow options already ... who knows.





Braveheart said:


> why don’t you simply speak with your wallet


My experience: it's not about Money _(e.g. Reaper can be bought for 60$ already ... which is nothing really)_, it's rather about the time and the personal will to switch. At least it was like this on my site ...

And again, cannot write it often enough:
To everybody being afraid of switching or so: I was as well and I am *so happy* that I finally switched. I literally boosted my workflow a lot and it even gets better and better. Go out, find your personal DAW, which suits *your needs* and just make the move. I guess even the DAW developers are totally ok with this thinking. I do not see it as a "war, which DAW is better", but as a "which DAW better fits to my personal workflow", which is totally legit. Some even use multiple DAWs - maybe this is an option for some people as well. (-;





John Judd said:


> One feature that they have totally screwed the user base on: if you have tempo changes within the piece, and a mixture of long printed audio + midi in the playlist - you are in for an unholy living nightmare


Basically my last 15 years. And I reported this issue in 2011 already. To be fair: FL can handle tempo automation a bit better now, while absolutely not perfect and moreover: it took some years (I guess around 7 or so) on ILs site to "fix" it. :D

While to be fair: I guess most people in EDM do not need tempo changes to fit to video or so ... so it's always a matter of demand as well.





ImJim said:


> Would love if any of you guys could copy/paste my post or suggest some of these features on the IL forum


AFAIK they are aware and working on improving many things, which might be "natural" in other DAWs. I guess it might be mainly an issue with the whole system behind it. If I understood it correct: it is due to how they coded FL in the first place and they have to rewrite huge parts of the whole program. Not 100% if this info is legit.





ImJim said:


> It's funny how many users "ditch" FL for other DAWs but, deep inside, wait for FL to upgrade to instantly get back to it.


To be honest: not me really at this day. I am so in love with Reaper. And again: I bet it would need *many* years till FL will reach the status of Reaper like it is now. And in this time Reaper probably evolved even more in the meantime.





ThisFellowPlayingTheCello said:


> I don't understand this reasoning I see a lot in this thread.
> "Something lacks features in a certain aspect, so lets not improve it."
> It's not like it's unthinkable that a company might want to expand their customer base by making their product appeal to a wider audience.


That's also something my previous words might explain according to *my* understanding. On the one site it's probably a matter of demand: why pleasing some hundred media composers, while not spending this time pleasing hundredthousends of electronic musicians? The other thing: the underlying engine / code structure etc. of FL may need to be recoded, in a way, I guess.





Peter Satera said:


> It's quite capable for scoring to picture though.


I am not sure if people really meant something would not be possible. I guess the main thing is workflow in the end. And according to my time tracking stats I only need 73% the workingtime _(compared to the time using FL)_ now where I found the DAW for my workflow.





AudioLoco said:


> I can't use my fork to eat soup! Things need to change!


This sure is a funny analogy, while I would try to be fair (meaning it serious): some people might really like to eat soup with a fork, since it is just their thing. Nothing wrong with personal tastes / workflows, in the end. (-;





Peter Satera said:


> but what happens is you move to one DAW lacking features to another which is equally lacking things you expect


1. There are people, who work in multiple DAWs and are totally fine with that. It's their workflow.

2. My experience again: after switching to Reaper I just found out how great this piece of software suits my workflow so unbelievable great. So far I absolutely don't miss a thing and after two years working in Reaper I even find out about new handy features from time to time or even script my own additional workflows. It's extendible for me, since I am a hobby coder. No thing for others maybe: *personal* workflow again!






rMancer said:


> That power and flexibility comes from the user and their experience, not just with the software itself. FL Studio (or any software) is only powerful because _you _are powerful with it (maybe even in spite of it).


Wow. I just love this quote. So true! <3 ... your whole post is great anyway. Thanks for sharing your experience and thoughts! (=





joebaggan said:


> his concerns to FL directly


As OP wrote: they did and threads were removed (according to OP).

Another thing in my experience: the community in FL is really toxic. Reapers community, by the way, is so much more likeable, in my opinion. So such things can also become interesting when thinking about using a specific kind of software. Not mandatory, but still somehow important, maybe. To be fair: I guess FL also has a much bigger community than Reaper, right? Not sure, but if it is so: more people can easily mean "more conflicts" after all.





Peter Satera said:


> "The best DAW is the one you know."


That's basically it. My post mainly was intended to those, who still might be afraid of testing out other DAWs due to feelings / emotions and so. (=


----------



## AudioLoco (Mar 5, 2022)

Tag said:


> This sure is a funny analogy, while I would try to be fair (meaning it serious): some people might really like to eat soup with a fork, since it is just their thing. Nothing wrong with personal tastes / workflows, in the end. (-;


You are right, although:
If you are eating soup as a hobby you can use a colander for what I care! (must be fun!)
But if your job is eating soup. You have to eat it cleanly without spilling and do it very fast and efficiently.


----------



## ThisFellowPlayingTheCello (Mar 5, 2022)

AudioLoco said:


> You are right, although:
> If you are eating soup as a hobby you can use a colander for what I care! (must be fun!)
> But if your job is eating soup. You have to eat it cleanly without spilling and do it very fast and efficiently.


Most fast and efficient you say? Drink it from the bowl


----------



## AudioLoco (Mar 5, 2022)

ThisFellowPlayingTheCello said:


> Most fast and efficient you say? Drink it from the bowl


fast but noisy!


----------



## kitekrazy (Mar 5, 2022)

There are plenty of DAWs that just don't work well for video. See Reason. You can't make a DAW do it your way. I'm sure Image Line will eventually improve in these areas.
I know they also use Vegas when they put out their videos. Sometimes you need and extra tool or another DAW to get something accomplished. People still use notation apps despite their DAW.
As a FL fanboy, film scoring doesn't even make me think of trying it in FL. They know where there market is and it's not there.


----------



## aeliron (Mar 5, 2022)

ThisFellowPlayingTheCello said:


> The "chill dude" was probably a result of me not being in the best mood, and getting a bit annoyed, I can acknowledge that. But I don't see where you get the idea from that i'm demanding anything.


Sorry, man. Apparently that came across to some, but it's easy for us to misread tone. Peace!


----------



## ThisFellowPlayingTheCello (Mar 5, 2022)

Tag said:


> That's also something my previous words might explain according to *my* understanding. On the one site it's probably a matter of demand: why pleasing some hundred media composers, while not spending this time pleasing hundredthousends of electronic musicians? The other thing: the underlying engine / code structure etc. of FL may need to be recoded, in a way, I guess.


Most of the suggested improvements would also benefit the rest of the community. 

Extra lanes in piano roll.
Better way to manage the midi data (copy, paste and move etc)
More convinient way to access what you want to edit.

Not only composers use this.


----------



## ThisFellowPlayingTheCello (Mar 5, 2022)

aeliron said:


> Sorry, man. Apparently that came across to some, but it's easy for us to misread tone. Peace!


I don't think it did, think you might be confusing my post with someone elses or smth 
Anyway, it's all good


----------



## Ed Wine (Mar 5, 2022)

Me: I have a car. Just lately I like helping people move home as a hobby. But I can't fit many things into it and have to do multiple trips. I have written to the manufacturers asking if they would consider making the model of my car much bigger cause I would like to fit a wardrobe in it. I suspect many customers would appreciate this. What's your thoughts?

Forum Member: Why not buy a van?

Me: F**k off, Troll. I like my car!


----------



## Peter Satera (Mar 5, 2022)




----------



## ThisFellowPlayingTheCello (Mar 5, 2022)

Ed Wine said:


> Me: I have a car. Just lately I like helping people move home as a hobby. But I can't fit many things into it and have to do multiple trips. I have written to the manufacturers asking if they would consider making the model of my car much bigger cause I would like to fit a wardrobe in it. I suspect many customers would appreciate this. What's your thoughts?
> 
> Forum Member: Why not buy a van?
> 
> Me: F**k off, Troll. I like my car!


Most suggestions are to improve already implemented features.


----------



## Montisquirrel (Mar 5, 2022)

Ed Wine said:


> Me: I have a car. Just lately I like helping people move home as a hobby. But I can't fit many things into it and have to do multiple trips. I have written to the manufacturers asking if they would consider making the model of my car much bigger cause I would like to fit a wardrobe in it. I suspect many customers would appreciate this. What's your thoughts?
> 
> Forum Member: Why not buy a van?
> 
> Me: F**k off, Troll. I like my car!


No. It is more like: "My car radio only plays CD and I would like it to read mp3 so I don't need to carry so many CDs in my car. But if I can't get this new radio, ok, I stick to the old, because I like everything else of this car".


----------



## Ed Wine (Mar 5, 2022)

Montisquirrel said:


> No. It is more like: "My car radio only plays CD and I would like it to read mp3 so I don't need to carry so many CDs in my car. But if I can't get this new radio, ok, I stick to the old, because I like everything else of this car".


Because you didn't understand. The moral of my ridicules story is: if one offers a reasonable solution to a problem, one shouldn't expect a harsh response in return. The End.


----------



## jamessy (Mar 5, 2022)

Tag said:


> Another thing in my experience: the community in FL is really toxic.


Yeah no kidding.

Pretending you're only politely suggesting a few features in a thread titled "Things need to CHANGE!" and then shouting down anyone who doesn't give you the response you were looking for is absurd.


----------



## ImJim (Mar 5, 2022)

Ed Wine said:


> Me: I have a car. Just lately I like helping people move home as a hobby. But I can't fit many things into it and have to do multiple trips. I have written to the manufacturers asking if they would consider making the model of my car much bigger cause I would like to fit a wardrobe in it. I suspect many customers would appreciate this. What's your thoughts?
> 
> Forum Member: Why not buy a van?
> 
> Me: F**k off, Troll. I like my car!


Again, totally not the point of the post. Could have been a funny comparison if it actually remotely illustrated my thoughts. But thanks anyway


----------



## joebaggan (Mar 6, 2022)

jamessy said:


> Yeah no kidding.
> 
> Pretending you're only politely suggesting a few features in a thread titled "Things need to CHANGE!" and then shouting down anyone who doesn't give you the response you were looking for is absurd.


"Things need to CHANGE", but FL is the best DAW and users of every other DAW are jealous. Uh huh, ok OP, I'm sure Alan Silvestri and HZ are jealous of random guy on a forum.


----------



## Tag (Mar 6, 2022)

AudioLoco said:


> You have to eat it cleanly without spilling and do it very fast and efficiently.


To be fair: maybe it is fast and efficient for their workflows after all. You don't know how fast their tongues are ... Everybody is different. (-;


Regarding the car analogy: for me it was not something like: _"Go, buy a van!!1"_. For me it was rather some kind of _"I personally was afraid to 'move on' for quite a long time, since I thought my old car / FL is the only thing, which can give me that kind of satisfaction / workflow I really like. And then I experienced rather late that there are other cars / solutions, which might fit better to my needs. I just want to share this experience, if some people are still not sure if they really should try something else."_. So after all, I want to say it again: stick to the DAW, which you really like and which brings *you* the best workflow. But stay open minded to other things and possible "solutions" - sometimes there can be better things suiting your workflow after all. It was hard at least for me in the first place and I thought for many years that I probably would stick to FL forever. And *personally* in retrospective it feels like a tiny time waste I did all the years. I really just wanted to help after all. Maybe my experience even motivated someone to retry FL and switch some day, who knows. (-;

I think there are no bad and good DAWs / things / workflows / solutions in general. It always depends and this is totally ok. One should just be aware of other options as well and stay open minded.


----------



## aeliron (Mar 6, 2022)

joebaggan said:


> "Things need to CHANGE", but FL is the best DAW and users of every other DAW are jealous. Uh huh, ok OP, I'm sure Alan Silvestri and HZ are jealous of random guy on a forum.


Yeah the title … can’t imagine why anyone thought he was demanding anything 😂


----------



## MarcMahler89 (Mar 6, 2022)

I feel so much relief reading the posts in this thread.
I work with FL Studio for about 18 years now. Basically started in the EDM/Trance genre back then, switched to orchestral about ~ 12 years ago.

Whats unique to my workflow, i assume, is that i do every single project in a SINGLE pattern. Basically a cubase-style workflow, without its advantages. I know, FL Studio isnt made for this, and i know that i have to switch the DAW. But thats what ive been telling me for years, yet i dread the learning curve and the work required for aquiring the new habits (hotkeys etc., everything muscle memory related) a new DAW requires.

Yet, if Image Line improved upon the Pianoroll for non-playlist oriented worfklows, specifically everything midi-cc related (more than 1 midi cc editable/viewable at once, easier automation using bezier-curve points in the events-edit instead of automation clips etc.), things could be so much better, because i actually love this daw, but like a toxic relationship, you gotta notice the point where one has to quit, because over the last 3 or 4 years, not a single update has resulted in anything benefiting my workflow. To be honest , im still using an old 20.8x version, because certain things im still using have been patched out later.


----------



## jamessy (Mar 6, 2022)

MarcMahler89 said:


> ...yet i dread the learning curve and the work required for aquiring the new habits (hotkeys etc., everything muscle memory related) a new DAW requires.


I can understand the feeling but as someone who has had to learn tons of new software constantly for their job, the dread of having to learn something has always been worse than actually learning it, and I always regret the amount of time I put it off. Sure, hotkeys change, the various ways you go about doing something aren't identical, etc. But getting to take advantage of all the things that made you want to learn it to begin with is where the fun is. You said you have a Cubase-style workflow without all the advantages. How long would it actually take you to learn it? A few weeks? And then you're mostly up to speed but on a better trajectory because you have all these extra tools at your disposal in a DAW that's going to cater to your workflow rather than one that's gonna fight with you.


----------



## MarcMahler89 (Mar 6, 2022)

jamessy said:


> I can understand the feeling but as someone who has had to learn tons of new software constantly for their job, the dread of having to learn something has always been worse than actually learning it, and I always regret the amount of time I put it off. ou.


Actually, one cant be more right than you are right here. Even i have done it like a hundred times in the past in other application areas, coming from an IT-background. But putting it off is just too comfy at times. The fact that im consiously writing about this here is maybe a telltale sign that its time to finally say goodbye to my old, beloved daw  Sigh.


----------



## R10k (Mar 6, 2022)

I've used thousands of software packages. I know what it's like to have amazing software fall a bit short in terms of features.

In the past I would have created a laundry list of ideas and submitted them to the developers, or made some noise on a forum. In all of my years this has never led to a satisfactory conclusion. (and I can elaborate on that)

The suggestion on here to look into other DAWs is a good one. Why wouldn't you want try out every software package time allows, to see if the tool you're using has been surpassed? It happens all the time in the software world. It doesn't invalidate the tool you know best. It is still a good tool - just not for every task.

Swimming upstream, trying to make one software package 'just good enough' to do everything is often like shooting yourself in the foot. I see a lot of the advice given here as very wise. To debate against it citing your vision will just lead to frustration in years to come.


----------



## Daniel James (Mar 6, 2022)

Montisquirrel said:


> No. It is more like: "My car radio only plays CD and I would like it to read mp3 so I don't need to carry so many CDs in my car. But if I can't get this new radio, ok, I stick to the old, because I like everything else of this car".


Lol you lots car analogies are not quite on point. Keep in mind our guy wants to be a film composer pro. So its more like saying, hey I'm a driver in Rallycross but I really want to join Formula One. I'm really good in my rally car but I just need the Rally guys to put a new engine in and add some new aerodynamics, which all drivers would benefit from. Which even if they added still wouldn't compete on the same level for driving F1 races....but likewise F1 cars are shit at driving rally, even though they are faster than RallyCross in different conditions. Each are just built a bit more specifically for their fields. Regardless of the fact they are both, at the end of the day, just cars.

-DJ


----------



## Tag (Mar 6, 2022)

MarcMahler89 said:


> yet i dread the learning curve and the work required for aquiring the new habits (hotkeys etc., everything muscle memory related) a new DAW requires.


For your information: it took me some days only to get used to new key bindings, which I even changed slightly. Max a week and I was already used to the new keybindings and workflow. (-;


----------



## jamessy (Mar 6, 2022)

Daniel James said:


> Lol you lots car analogies are not quite on point. Keep in mind our guy wants to be a film composer pro. So its more like saying, hey I'm a driver in Rallycross but I really want to join Formula One. I just need the Rally car guys to put a new engine in and add some new aerodynamics, which all drivers would benefit from. Which even if they added still wouldn't compete on the same level for driving F1 races....but likewise F1 cars are shit at driving rally, even though they are faster than RallyCross in different conditions. Each are just built a bit more specifically for their fields. Regardless of the fact they are both, at the end of the day, just cars.
> 
> -DJ


As a hobbyist who's years away from being able to consider film composition as a realistic career, I'm pretty content with Reaper but that F1 analogy makes me want to check out Cubase all the same


----------



## Montisquirrel (Mar 7, 2022)

Daniel James said:


> Lol you lots car analogies are not quite on point. Keep in mind our guy wants to be a film composer pro. So its more like saying, hey I'm a driver in Rallycross but I really want to join Formula One. I'm really good in my rally car but I just need the Rally guys to put a new engine in and add some new aerodynamics, which all drivers would benefit from. Which even if they added still wouldn't compete on the same level for driving F1 races....but likewise F1 cars are shit at driving rally, even though they are faster than RallyCross in different conditions. Each are just built a bit more specifically for their fields. Regardless of the fact they are both, at the end of the day, just cars.
> 
> -DJ


How long have you worked with FL Studio?


----------



## DANIELE (Mar 7, 2022)

I used FL Studio for many years, I felt the lack of many functions a long time ago. I never thought I'd find another daw to suit me but because I felt a lot disturbing all the missing functions and because my template was growing in complexity I documented myself and I decided to try Reaper.

Now I would never go back. You can customize Reaper as much as you want, you can write your own plugins, if you need something you can look for it or you can do it by yourself.

I feel so satisfied with the workflow and I keep improving it everytime I need to. I missed the FL specific option in the beginning but now I don't care about them anymore.

This is not so useful for you but I would like to poin a thing: maybe trying something else could open you some doors you never thinked about. FL studio is a great DAW but is lacking so much things for orchestral purposes (and I wrote a lot of tracks with it) that I think it is almost impossible to reach all of them, at least for now. FL Studio is a DAW thinked for other purposes.


----------



## R10k (Mar 7, 2022)

Montisquirrel said:


> How long have you worked with FL Studio?


Doesn't really matter, does it? He's saying software, like cars, is built specifically for certain uses.

In this case I think we can all agree FL has not been specifically targeted at film composers.


----------



## aeliron (Mar 7, 2022)

Daniel James said:


> Lol you lots car analogies are not quite on point. Keep in mind our guy wants to be a film composer pro. So its more like saying, hey I'm a driver in Rallycross but I really want to join Formula One. I'm really good in my rally car but I just need the Rally guys to put a new engine in and add some new aerodynamics, which all drivers would benefit from. Which even if they added still wouldn't compete on the same level for driving F1 races....but likewise F1 cars are shit at driving rally, even though they are faster than RallyCross in different conditions. Each are just built a bit more specifically for their fields. Regardless of the fact they are both, at the end of the day, just cars.
> 
> -DJ


And sometimes you’re starting in a minivan. Great for some purposes, not for others.

I mean, anyone here still on Windows 95, apart from me?


----------



## aeliron (Mar 7, 2022)

I was gonna start a thread “General MIDI and film scoring - things gotta CHANGE” - but changed my mind.


----------



## Daniel James (Mar 7, 2022)

Montisquirrel said:


> How long have you worked with FL Studio?


Never, whats your point?


----------



## ThisFellowPlayingTheCello (Mar 8, 2022)

I get that studio one and cubase is more feature packed for composing, but I think a lot of you are exaggerating how bad FL Studio is for composing. (and many probably have no experience with FL and just going with assumptions that FL Studio is that DAW with patterns, and not considering that you can adjust the workflow to your liking)
Biggest downside for me is lack of features regarding how you edit midi data. (only one lane, no copy/paste and move and inconvenient method to access what you want to edit.)
There's also no video features, that could be a big downside to many. And 100 mixer tracks (will be expanded soon to up to 1000 or so I believe). No freeze track, only export to wave.
I've caved and just began working with automation instead when I need to edit midi data. It works just fine, and all setup in the playlist when I load my project, you can draw in it too like you do in piano roll, but I would obviously prefer they expanded the features in piano roll).
Everythng in 1 pattern, so works similar to other DAWs.
I'm sure there's MANY things i'm missing out on, but since I have only tried studio one once, I'm not sure what, except for what I mentioned above.
What are the must have features (that I haven't mentioned) cubase/studio one (and others) has that FL Studio lacks?
Just thought it would be interresting to get these things straight


----------



## Akarin (Mar 8, 2022)

It feels like that you are trying to use a screwdriver (although a good screwdriver) to hammer a nail. 

Some DAWs are purpose built for a certain workflow and FL was definitely not made for orchestral writing or film scoring.


----------



## R10k (Mar 8, 2022)

ThisFellowPlayingTheCello said:


> I get that studio one and cubase is more feature packed for composing, but I think a lot of you are exaggerating how bad FL Studio is for composing. (and many probably have no experience with FL and just going with assumptions that FL Studio is that DAW with patterns, and not considering that you can adjust the workflow to your liking)
> Biggest downside for me is lack of features regarding how you edit midi data. (only one lane, no copy/paste and move and inconvenient method to access what you want to edit.)
> There's also no video features, that could be a big downside to many. And 100 mixer tracks (will be expanded soon to up to 1000 or so I believe). No freeze track, only export to wave.
> I've caved and just began working with automation instead when I need to edit midi data. It works just fine, and all setup in the playlist when I load my project, you can draw in it too like you do in piano roll, but I would obviously prefer they expanded the features in piano roll).
> ...


That would be interesting, but I'm a lowly Logic user, so I have no idea! As someone else said, this forum isn't going to have many (any?) who've used a fully updated FL along side of Studio One, Cubase, Logic etc.

FL is obviously fine for making orchestral works. You don't need to defend it. I just think you know what you need best. Use some other apps. Try every tool on the market. Redirect some of the energy you have to improving your workflow into making sure you have the tool that fits your needs best.


----------



## dylanmixer (Mar 8, 2022)

I don't see anything wrong with wanting FL Studio to evolve, I think its more-so the drama of the thread title and the "things HAVE to change" sentiment that gets me. FL Studio isn't broken. It doesn't "need" to be "fixed". FL Studio does exactly what it's meant to do, and well. If they wanted to cater to film composers and orchestral music composers, they absolutely 100% would. However, they have their target audience and that audience is pleased. I'd imagine they if spent resources and they released an update with a ton of film and orchestral composition features, the beat makers and EDM musicians would be disappointed. FL Studio will never cater to film composers. That is not what the software is for. They may add something here and there but I wouldn't be surprised if film composition accounted for even 5% of FLs user base. It would be irresponsible for them to shell out big money for some kind of overhaul. They're simply not interested in that market, and they shouldn't be. Other companies have that market covered.


----------



## ThisFellowPlayingTheCello (Mar 9, 2022)

dylanmixer said:


> I don't see anything wrong with wanting FL Studio to evolve, I think its more-so the drama of the thread title and the "things HAVE to change" sentiment that gets me. FL Studio isn't broken. It doesn't "need" to be "fixed". FL Studio does exactly what it's meant to do, and well. If they wanted to cater to film composers and orchestral music composers, they absolutely 100% would. However, they have their target audience and that audience is pleased. I'd imagine they if spent resources and they released an update with a ton of film and orchestral composition features, the beat makers and EDM musicians would be disappointed. FL Studio will never cater to film composers. That is not what the software is for. They may add something here and there but I wouldn't be surprised if film composition accounted for even 5% of FLs user base. It would be irresponsible for them to shell out big money for some kind of overhaul. They're simply not interested in that market, and they shouldn't be. Other companies have that market covered.


Thing is, it's not a major overhaul that's being suggested.
And the improvements asked for would benefit everyone.
It's expansion/improvements of excisting features. By simply going at your argument, those features wouldn't exist in the first place.
Almost everything OP asks for I've found workarounds for though, by using automation clips instead.
But I wouldn't mind seeing current features improved.
I get that OP came off a bit demanding, but i'm more interrested in the topic at hand, than the drama.


----------



## Lucas Bodenbender (Mar 10, 2022)

I've worked a lot with all major daws but the way Fl handles instruments and the piano roll is just the sweet spot I was looking for. Fl is the daw of my choice after working with Cubase and Logic. I follow the Fl forum a lot and it looks like composers are being heard and some features are already confirmed to get added (for example more mixer tracks). I think Fl 21 will be a great update even though it cant add everything we are asking for at once (i mean it's quite a lot what we are asking for). But I think IL is moving in the right direction because we were so loud over the past couple of years. So I think these kinds of threads here and at IL are important and do change something.


----------



## aeliron (Mar 10, 2022)

Lucas Bodenbender said:


> I've worked a lot with all major daws but the way Fl handles instruments and the piano roll is just the sweet spot I was looking for. Fl is the daw of my choice after working with Cubase and Logic. I follow the Fl forum a lot and it looks like composers are being heard and some features are already confirmed to get added (for example more mixer tracks). I think Fl 21 will be a great update even though it cant add everything we are asking for at once (i mean it's quite a lot what we are asking for). But I think IL is moving in the right direction because we were so loud over the past couple of years. So I think these kinds of threats here and at IL are important and do change something.


Assuming you meant "these kinds of *threads*"


----------



## Lucas Bodenbender (Mar 10, 2022)

aeliron said:


> Assuming you meant "these kinds of *threads*"


Oh yes, thank you


----------



## Dr Bensmir (Oct 2, 2022)

I have used FL for 4 years and I spent many hours on the official forum

FL is not marketed for orchestral composition and it never will be

I knew FL in and out, and though that I will never be able to switch to anything else.

I finally switched to cubase last summer, and it’s the best decision I have made. I realized that I was staying in FL more for the confort of a well known GUI and that basically every feature I loved was in cubase but 10 times more powerful


----------



## Montisquirrel (Oct 2, 2022)

Dr Bensmir said:


> I have used FL for 4 years and I spent many hours on the official forum
> 
> FL is not marketed for orchestral composition and it never will be
> 
> ...


Would be interesting to know the features which in your opinion are worth the switch to Cubase.


----------



## Dr Bensmir (Oct 2, 2022)

Montisquirrel said:


> Would be interesting to know the features which in your opinion are worth the switch to Cubase.


- Disabling/Hiding tracks and folder tracks alone worth the switch, it allows you to have a template, as big as you want, already organized, named, colored, routed, ready to go with 0 cpu and ram ressources taken. It saves you times and effort because you don’t scroll looking for things as you can only show the tracks you are using

- The way FL handles MIDI CC is horrific, you have to use midi tracks and it often forget the midi cc hardware you linked

- You have key commands

- You have macros

- Freezing midi or rendering audio is fast and don’t mess up the playlist organisation

- Automation are linked to their respective track, and not thrown in the other side of the project

- You have global Tracks such as Transpose track, chord track, tempo tracks, video track. it allows you to transpose the whole piece directly from the playlist and actually visually see the transposition as an automation curve. You have time warping so that when you work to a video you can change the length of a section to hit exactly a specific moment of the video to be in sync

- You have the control Room that allows you to have a reference track routing separately from your regular master channel so that you can switch between listening to your ref or to your project

- You can drag and drop an audio and have a rough estimation of the chords used

- Variaudio allows you to slice any audio and time stretch only a specific section of that audio by dragging the mouse, at the speed of light. You can also pitch shift a note of an audio sample directly from the main window

- When editing MIDI with your mouse, you can force the editor to snap the note to a scale while your moving that selected note so that it never land on a note that is outside the scale

- You have a tool to draw lines, straight or curved, to quickly draw automations, midi CC, or even a sequence of notes


----------



## Loerpert (Oct 2, 2022)

Dr Bensmir said:


> I have used FL for 4 years and I spent many hours on the official forum
> 
> FL is not marketed for orchestral composition and it never will be
> 
> ...


I was in the same boat as you. Used FL for 16 years. Made the switch to Studio One in may. I wish I had done that way sooner. It does pretty much all I ever wished for and was absolutely not difficult to learn.


----------



## Dr Bensmir (Oct 2, 2022)

Loerpert said:


> I was in the same boat as you. Used FL for 16 years. Made the switch to Studio One in may. I wish I had done that way sooner. It does pretty much all I ever wished for and was absolutely not difficult to learn.


Yes I have been so much more prolific and fast that I produce more tracks than before. And I assume it’s the same thing for you
Sure I’d probably still « feel better » in the FL piano roll because of it’s GUI and how snappy and responsive it is, but at the end of the day I’d rather choose more tracks per week


----------



## Nashi_VI (Oct 2, 2022)

Dr Bensmir said:


> - Disabling/Hiding tracks and folder tracks alone worth the switch, it allows you to have a template, as big as you want, already organized, named, colored, routed, ready to go with 0 cpu and ram ressources taken. It saves you times and effort because you don’t scroll looking for things as you can only show the tracks you are using
> 
> - The way FL handles MIDI CC is horrific, you have to use midi tracks and it often forget the midi cc hardware you linked
> 
> ...


Most of your points are either wrong or have been proven to be non-issue by FL users in this same thread EDIT: message edited because i realized it seemed aimed only as a response to a certain user because of this 2 lines, instead of being a message for everyone like i intended it to be. so the rest of this message that i cut from this one is going to get reposted without this 2 lines that are going to remain in this one instead.


----------



## Dr Bensmir (Oct 2, 2022)

You are mixing up things up. Can you be a Professional using FL and having success ? Hell yes you can

I still love FL studio very much, but I am only stating facts, and you didn't discuss any of my arguments, you just said that most of them are wrong and "have been proved a non issue". If by that you mean solving the fact that you can't disable tracks or have a large template by "not having a template at all", then to me it's not a solution.

Sure you can do anything with FL, but at the cost of many workarounds and some things you just can't do, so you end up convincing yourself that you don't need them anyway and you drop them from your workflow

Advicing someone that didn't chose a DAW yet for orchestral composition to chose FL is simply wrong, a DAW that didn't even have good internal solution to handle MIDI CC and have to rely on external vst (BRSO articulate)

FL Studio is an excellent DAW for EDM and Hip-Hop/Trap, but why is it so "non P.C" to critize a piece of software for what it's NOT.

It depend on your sub-genre too, if you are doing Trailer music with 15 or 20 tracks, or cinematic music using mostly ensemble patches, then yeah sure you can go just as fast with FL. But if we are talking about orchestration on individual instruments, you can't go as fast with FL.

"Every DAW has their weakeness and strenghts" And what we are doing here is just discussing the weakeness of FL, absent of any emotional investment.

*Did you try loading a 200 tracks template on FL ?* It's like eating 2 macdonald's and trying to go workout. Try it and tell me how much time you spend scrolling

I spent a year fighting with FL short comings in term of workflow, remapping MIDI CC' everytime I would open a project, experiencing crash after crash, scrolling for hours, spending too many times just moving MIDI CC automations next to the track they belong to, manually doing everything. I'd spent more time on organisation than on composition. And having the devs on the forum telling me that orchestral composition is not the direction that the software is heading to

Again if you are working with 20 tracks, and you don't care about having your project organized then fine. But good luck opening larger projects in a few months...


----------



## HotCoffee (Oct 2, 2022)

FL power users often talk about how great and fast the workflow is. I am genuinely curious about what superior worklow features FL have that other DAWs don't? 

(This is a real question, I am not trying to be an ass)


----------



## Dr Bensmir (Oct 2, 2022)

HotCoffee said:


> FL power users often talk about how great and fast the workflow is. I am genuinely curious about what superior worklow features FL have that other DAWs don't?
> 
> (This is a real question, I am not trying to be an ass)


It’s superior with a transversal workflow because patterns (midi tracks), playlist tracks, instruments vst and mixer tracks are all indépendant entities

Except large orchestration work best with a linear workflow, especially when you are on the clock


----------



## Nashi_VI (Oct 2, 2022)

Dr Bensmir said:


> You are mixing up things up. Can you be a Professional using FL and having success ? Hell yes you can
> 
> I still love FL studio very much, but I am only stating facts, and you didn't discuss any of my arguments, you just said that most of them are wrong and "have been proved a non issue". If by that you mean solving the fact that you can't disable tracks or have a large template by "not having a template at all", then to me it's not a solution.
> 
> ...


I didn't discuss any of your arguments because that was not the intention of my message..since, after those few lines about them, i talk about so many other things much more interesting to me than just arguing about the techical side of things and who is right and who is wrong, and what features FL have that Cubase doesn't have and vice versa.

"Did you try loading a 200 tracks template on FL?" ...yes i did and i have no problem doing it..i have no idea what you are talking about the need of scrolling for 20 min.....surprise surpise even if i never mentioned it on my message...i use FL....why didn't i mentioned it?...because it was irrelevant to the point i was trying to make.

"a DAW that didn't even have good internal solution to handle MIDI CC and have to rely on external vst (BRSO articulate)" yeah...and BRSO Articulate is a free plugin (promoted by Image Line pretty much everywhere) even better than the expression map in Cubase...but who cares, that is not the point i was trying to make with my message.

"If by that you mean solving the fact that you can't disable tracks or have a large template by "not having a template at all", then to me it's not a solution."

This is the only "argument" i am going to respond to you about since you are so adamant about it.

Cpu wise there is smart disable that dinamically turn off the cpu usage of any plugins without the need to manually turn off tracks.....as for the samples (so RAM wise) you can, if you use sample players that let's you do it, like Kontakt, just purge the samples but still have all of your patches/instrument loaded...or you can have a template, like many use even in Cubase, with all of you midi channels routed, all of your mixer track routed and ready , all of your plugins loaded...but no instruments loaded in the sampler you are using; sure it is a different workflow, but a lot of people (again even Cubase users) prefer it over having a predetermined set of intruments already loaded, because it helps tem with creativity and inspiration rather than always feeling like they are "forced" to be using the same patch, for example for violins, from the same sample library in every composition.....of course if you want the "freedom" but you also like the preloaded istruments and you like to spend days making a template (we all have been there) then with Cubase, you can have every patch from every sample library you own loaded at all times....then yes you "need" Cubase most likely...unless you have a lot of pc-slaves ( even tho most pros have them regardless and use Cubaseand VEP at the same time).

Also, side note, because talking about "empty" templates, something that just came to my mind, a lot of people praise the Studio One workflow of having the ability to just drag and drop plugins and patches and presets....a lot of people don't realise this, but in FL studio you can do the exact same thing...you can have as many plugins presets as you want...and you can make them drag and drop as well if you want to.

Maybe it is just me but, even if you are not using memes or making fun of FL (and its users), like the ones i was referring with my message (because i was not specifically talking about you, it was more of a generic message meant to be for everyone and not a direct response or attack to you or your message or a direct response to anyone in this thread in paritcular) you seems pretty emotionally invested...just read your last paragraph and tell me you didn't sound distressed and frustrated recalling how you couldn't work with FL the way you wanted..... again, i am not saying you were wrong in feeling that way, because, as i stated now too many times to count, if you feel like your workflow and composition was stunted by Fl and now you are happier with another solution...then it is only good, there is no need to dwell on the past and trying to dissuade people, or indirectly (and by indirectly i mean with no bad intention to harm anyone) trying to undermine the hours upon hours that people spend on another particular DAW that it is not the one you use, it doesn't help them...for the reasons i already mentioned before in my previous message, and that i am not going to repeat in this one.

Also i don't think you understood what i meant by saying "i am going to reiterate what Daniel James said but in a more P.C. way" maybe i was not clear enought, but i suggest you to re-read what i said right after, and to try and connect it with one of the previous message where DJ said "Lads, at the end of the day, do whatever the fuck you want." and the OP responded with "No need to be crude just cause you disagree with us.".

To conclude this, since i have no intention to start a discussion of the pros and cons of FL studio and Cubase, i am telling you right now, that i am not going to have a debate with you...i don't particularly like debates...even if i have been involved in many, because to me, a "Daw debate", is only gonna end up being like a debate between football fans about their favourite teams, and not a productive one for neither the people involved nor for the newbies that are only trying now to get into composition, for them, it is much better to read up documentations about it, look up videos of composers using the various daws, doing free trials of the various daws, and in the end, looking at their bank account and deciding how much money they can spend on it, sure, personal anecdotes can also help them, but not in a debate form in my opinion.


----------



## Nashi_VI (Oct 2, 2022)

I am going to reiterate what Daniel James said but in a more P.C. way so that people don't think i am attacking them, and i don't blame them for feeling like they are being attacked honestly (it is not your fault DJ LOL) ...i know that FL users have been suffering from being ridiculed by basically any other DAW users for many years (B3caus4 Fru1ty L0ops)...so most of them are on the defensive most of the times.
Use whatever DAW you like, there is no "better daw" there are daws that have different workflows...that's all, is Cubase made with Composers in mind more than ABleton and FL? yes, but is it possible to be as proficent and fast in professional composing using the strenght of a different workflow? i think so....or at the very least least, you can get very very close to it.
Every DAW has their weakeness and strenghts....their bulit-in plugins with their pros and cons, and the cost associated with said DAW and his mantainance fee, and cost is something we should also always consider...even if you are a professional... just a stupid example: Afflatus Strings seems to be regarded as one of the best String library out there, but it becomes a personal choice to spend 800$ for it...or spend 400$ for CSS...and most people choose to have the latter, surely because of the quality of the product, but also for the reduced cost.
As many people have said in this forum many times, new shiny libraries (or in this case daw) are not going to magically make your music be better, it is better instead, in my opinion, to try to use whatever you already have to their full potential, and, if you have the money for it, and you feel like you have hit a wall that you cannot overcome since you already mastered your tools to their max potentials (or if you just need new inspiration...that is also an important factor to consider) then, by all means, buy new tools and make great music with them, nobody is stopping you.
Some ex users of a certain daw (so i am not talking only about FL) tend to behave like i see a lot of people that move to another country behaving...they love to tell others how the new country they are in is so much better than the one they were born in and how their old one was terrible and how terrible it was at every level, starting from the goverment and ending up with the people living in it.....and they love to tell this, not only to their new countrymen...but they love even more to tell it to their old ones,i get it, if you are happy with your new life props to you, but there is not need to degrade something you are happy you left behind for some sort of confirmation that you made the right choice and to minimize the guilt you feel inside, just move on and be happy with the new experience you are having.
So in the end, there are many professionall and succesful composers that use Ableton, Bitwig, Logic, Reaper, Cakewalk etc. etc. are they all stupid? I don't think so; the beauty and variety of art is the result that we get from using different tools....music would become more stale, in my opinion, if everyone would just use the same sample libraries, the same DAW, the same plugins, the same Chord Progressions, the same loops and so forth....


----------



## Dr Bensmir (Oct 2, 2022)

I know about drag and dropping in FL. I even created for myself a folder structure with .fst presets of kontakt instances for all my most used patches, hundreds of them. It was kind of a modular template, where you only need to drag and drop the .fst to load a pre-made patch, assuming you made them one by one

Bottom line is, even if FL is not originally made for Orchestral, because of it's sandbox type workflow, it allows you a high degree of customisation that makes finding workarounds easy

I know what DJ said,. He also said pretty much the same thing I am saying : he left Ableton because it was heading toward EDM and he prefered to chose a daw that allow him to do the same thing, but faster. It doesn't make ableton inferior, he just said that for the specific things he was doing, cubase was faster, and I am saying pretty much the same thing

At the end of the day, when you feel like "you need a workaround for everything you want to do", then maybe it's time to switch DAW. It depend on the taste and the workflow of each one of us.

Maybe we should stop saying this daw is better at this or that, and rather just list the pro's and cons of what a daw is capable and not capable of doing, when someone post a thread asking for help


----------



## Dr Bensmir (Oct 2, 2022)

Also, I just wanted to respond to OP, by saying I have been there. Begging on the Image-line Forum for years for all those features, and the frustration of barely receiving any answear. 

We feel his frustration, that's why we suggested him to switch DAW as "one of the possible solution" because when someone is that frustrated with his DAW, isn't that an honest suggestion to make ?


----------



## Nashi_VI (Oct 2, 2022)

Dr Bensmir said:


> I know about drag and dropping in FL. I even created for myself a folder structure with .fst presets of kontakt instances for all my most used patches, hundreds of them. It was kind of a modular template, where you only need to drag and drop the .fst to load a pre-made patch, assuming you made them one by one
> 
> Bottom line is, even if FL is not originally made for Orchestral, because of it's sandbox type workflow, it allows you a high degree of customisation that makes finding workarounds easy
> 
> ...


i agree with both of your last messages 100%


----------



## Loerpert (Oct 2, 2022)

All daws are great at their own thing. That's pretty much all that can be said I guess.


----------



## Russell Anderson (Oct 2, 2022)

I think most of us FL users have been where this OP was, or is if he's still hanging onto hope. It's such a good DAW (Patcher is cool! It has.... kind of? a nice piano roll)! Surely the developers are beginning to take notice of this growing number of composers... I just need to wait another 2, maybe 3, maybe 5 years for the DAW to catch up to me!

Surely it'll be easier to wait 2-5 years for updates than to learn another DAW!

But nah, I was in love with REAPER within 3 hours. After switching I can't even believe I ever tried to make FL Studio work, it's.... sad. The silver lining for quitting FL Studio for a more useful DAW for this field is that you'll always have free updates for FL, so on the off-chance they do ever add a useful feature for media composition, it will be waiting for you with open arms.


----------



## LearningToCompose:) (Oct 2, 2022)

Russell Anderson said:


> I think most of us FL users have been where this OP was, or is if he's still hanging onto hope. It's such a good DAW (Patcher is cool! It has.... kind of? a nice piano roll)! Surely the developers are beginning to take notice of this growing number of composers... I just need to wait another 2, maybe 3, maybe 5 years for the DAW to catch up to me!
> 
> Surely it'll be easier to wait 2-5 years for updates than to learn another DAW!
> 
> But nah, I was in love with REAPER within 3 hours. After switching I can't even believe I ever tried to make FL Studio work, it's.... sad. The silver lining for quitting FL Studio for a more useful DAW for this field is that you'll always have free updates for FL, so on the off-chance they do ever add a useful feature for media composition, it will be waiting for you with open arms.


And if interrested in Cubase and you have at least producer edition, you can get it for much cheaper, even more so right now on the sale. Got the pro version for about $200
FL Producer edition almost payed for itself


----------



## Russell Anderson (Oct 2, 2022)

LearningToCompose:) said:


> And if interrested in Cubase and you have at least producer edition, you can get it for much cheaper, even more so right now on the sale. Got the pro version for about $200
> FL Producer edition almost payed for itself


I actually bought Cubase 12 Pro a couple months back while working many, many hours per week, with the intent of learning it once I had time. Then someone working in game audio in Seattle gave me a 2021 graphic combining information taken from something like 150-200 job postings, and 40% of them mentioned REAPER specifically, so while I own Cubase, I've learned REAPER... I love it.

I'm hoping at some point to learn Cubase also with a bit more time, at the very least so that I can see what I'm missing and what I'm not. There are threads here and elsewhere comparing the two, but like with any thread comparing DAWs _ahem_ much of the conversation is lost in "well you actually _can _do that in REAPER with this workaround..." and "You shouldn't have to program your own DAW!!!". 

Personally, at the very least, I think the stock Cubase MB transient shaper is pretty sweet, and I appreciate the ability to ramp velocity/14-bit CC data using value compression and not just outright slanting. Kind of a tiny thing, probably pales in comparison to how smooth one can get the workflow. The ability to view only tracks which are currently playing back sound is quite cool. Besides that, I have no idea. The colors can be nice? And the docked video track? At the current moment my primary concern is just getting better at composition and implementation, and working on 2 other concurrent audio projects, and REAPER isn't going to be slowing me down any. I hope to be able to get to Cubase within a few months, because the interest is there, but it seems more of a luxury to learn at the moment than anything resembling necessity. Rest assured I've already collected the generous freebies from this current Cubase sale!


----------



## Nashi_VI (Oct 2, 2022)

For the record, i have no interest in a subtweet war either, none of you need to agree with me, but i was very respectful even when i "called out" some general behaviour that i see online about people that have switched daw, i don't think i payed attention about the names of the people who did it in this thread, nor they were on my mind when i wrote my message...because my intention was not to call out anyone in particular, but just to express my distaste for daw wars in general and everything that comes with them, including that sort of "self-hate" that i quoted in my message that i see from, not only ex-daw users, but in a lot of other aspect of life, like my example, people that moved to another country.


----------



## LearningToCompose:) (Oct 2, 2022)

Russell Anderson said:


> I actually bought Cubase 12 Pro a couple months back while working many, many hours per week, with the intent of learning it once I had time. Then someone working in game audio in Seattle gave me a 2021 graphic combining information taken from something like 150-200 job postings, and 40% of them mentioned REAPER specifically, so while I own Cubase, I've learned REAPER... I love it.
> 
> I'm hoping at some point to learn Cubase also with a bit more time, at the very least so that I can see what I'm missing and what I'm not. There are threads here and elsewhere comparing the two, but like with any thread comparing DAWs _ahem_ much of the conversation is lost in "well you actually _can _do that in REAPER with this workaround..." and "You shouldn't have to program your own DAW!!!". Personally, at the very least, I think the stock Cubase MB transient shaper is pretty sweet, and I appreciate the ability to ramp velocity/14-bit CC data using value compression and not just outright slanting. And the ability to view only tracks which are currently playing back sound. Besides that, I have no idea. The colors can be nice? And the docked video track?


I tried Reaper too. Had a lot of fun with making my own workflow, Cubase has a better "out of the box" experience imo, that matter to me, but I can certainly see why someone would prefer Reaper.
When I saw the disable track feature while trying the Cubase demo, it would have been difficult to go back to FL hehe (maybe in Reaper too? If so I missed it while testing it). So I bought it. 
Being able to load all my libraries in a template even on a not to high spec PC is something else


----------



## Russell Anderson (Oct 2, 2022)

I bought a pretty high-spec 128GB-RAM PC since FL studio didn't come with track disabling and I had no intention of switching (why would I? FL Studio is a great DAW despite the naysayers). Now that I've switched to REAPER, I'm not coming anywhere near those RAM numbers yet because 700 tracks loads in 8 seconds with 0 RAM. Soon, 0 tracks will load in 2 seconds, and a modular template made possible with track templates will take place of my behemoth template, costing me nearly 0 production time but saving me all of the headache of navigating a large template. Man. 128GB of RAM was $700. The hidden costs of FL Studio they don't tell you in class. Purging is great, but even purging I never dropped below 80GBs being used, on two PCs. Who knows what was going wrong there.

I think DAW wars are great, healthy even. Sure, it feels bad when you just want to write music and you feel there's an obstacle of a new DAW to learn, but it's the pain of growth - and most of the work is in overcoming the reluctance. REAPER was a matter of hours for me, and from what I've heard that's supposed to be harder than Cubase to learn and setup properly. I also completely understand that DAWs cost money, and so do instruments, and many of these financial bits can be at odds with each other. If someone has already purchased FL Studio, more power to them. Learn production and composition. By all means, it can be done, it is plenty powerful and will help you grow into the professional you want to be.

If one expresses interest in media composition and hasn't bought a DAW yet, *BY ALL MEANS *do not buy FL Studio!It really cannot be recommended for that use case in good conscience unless it's already being used. It costs nearly 4x more than REAPER and is barren of many of the features that make modern DAWs so useful for scoring workflows, exacerbates CPU/RAM struggles and will eventually just get moved from anyway unless Image-Line changes what they are doing. Can it be done? Yeah. Do I look down on my FL-using contemporaries? No! Not only are they excellent people, many of them are better and faster than I am at writing because they're focused and skilled people. Would they be even better in another DAW? Yes.


----------



## kitekrazy (Oct 2, 2022)

Imagine that, DAWs better at creating dance genres and one wants to try them a film scoring and it's like putting a square peg in a round whole. Some developers don't consider it a priority when other DAWs are ahead in the game. This function is not even possible in Reason.


----------



## Nashi_VI (Oct 2, 2022)

Yep, time to ignore another thread.


----------



## aeliron (Oct 3, 2022)

kitekrazy said:


> Imagine that, DAWs better at creating dance genres and one wants to try them a film scoring and it's like putting a square peg in a round whole. Some developers don't consider it a priority when other DAWs are ahead in the game. This function is not even possible in Reason.


Well it's for dance films.


----------

