Exam Help Anyone? Comparing DAWs.

This feels morally wrong but it's not like it's against any rules or anything. Basically I've gotta revise up on the comparative pros and cons of two DAWs, I chose FLStudio and Cubase.

If anyone can give me some pros and cons, even if it's from their opinion that would be amazingly helpful. Thanks in advance guys.

You're better off trying them both.

You're better off trying them both.

Dude, already have. ^w^ Just checking out what other people thought and if there's anything I've missed.

• At the moment one of FL's biggest limitations is the lack of a 64-bit version; addressable somewhat by jBridge, etc., but until Delphi itself is x64 compatible, FL will remain rooted in 32-bitdom
  
• Cubase uses syncrosoft dongle for software protection, FL uses serial I believe?
  
• Gonna go out on a limb and say that Cubase is more "pro" - yeah, I know, that's a loaded term, and I've made stuff that sounds like ass next to plenty of tracks made in FL, but you'll find Cubase in more pro studios (of course, pro tools is the king there)
  
• Cubase is multiplatform, FL is Win only
  
• Cubase has a loooooong history, going back to the days of the Atari ST. While FL has certainly been around awhile, Cubase is still a senior citizen to its... twentysomething.
  
• Again, loaded term, but I think Cubase is more of an innovator.., Steinberg/Cubase designed the VST standard to begin with, way back when. DXi, AU, etc. followed.
  
• Cubase used to be like Fruity - pretty much the flagship product of a company primarily devoted to software dev. Now they're owned by Yamaha, and it's taken a direction towards favoring some Yamaha tech. I'd just emphasize that Cubase is more "corporate" whereas FL still feels a bit less tethered.
  

You now owe djp a new ReMix. Please make sure the original composer is Tim Follin.

* Cubase has better auto plugin delay compensation.

* Cubase has better support for scoring to picture, as well as a notation view.

* Cubase supports streaming audio from the hard drive, FL Studio does not.

* FL has a more advanced mixer in terms of routing (completely free routing to any channel, from any channel, free sends, etc.)

* Creating "tracks" in FL is faster as audio and MIDI tracks are by default integrated into a single "channel". Creating a sampler, its component audio track and MIDI track would take several steps in Cubase, whereas in FL it literally takes only one.

For software protection, FLStudio requires a regkey file that is downloaded from the Image Line store.

I read on another thread a while back that the reason you won't find sections devoted to FLStudio in say, Sound on Sound magazine, is because the first release was for your average Joe user instead of professional users/studios. It has come a long way since then and is a powerful enough DAW that personal preference and ability are the decisive limitations when comparing or choosing one over the other. Despite this, it remains on the fringe in professional audio production culture (that I have seen anyway) If one of the big music corporations acquired Image-Line and FLStudio, I am positive that would change.

I haven't used Cubase so I can't say how it compares but:

-I have heard that FLStudio is the best suited DAW for automation. You can automate like everything.

-FLstudio is very condusive to, well, loops. And sequencing. I don't know how easy it is to make a generic techno track in Cubase, but FL almost pushes you into it. It is very friendly toward anything beat driven.

-FLstudio offers Free lifetime upgrades of the version you purchased. FL8 basic -> FL9 basic is free for example. If you want to step up from basic to XXL you may do so for the current price difference I believe.

Hope it is helpful.

To respond to the above, not to be a know-it-all, but just want to have the correct information out there...

The fact that FL can automate nearly anything isn't unqiue. What is unique is that you can use virtually any kind of data for automation with FL's "Peak Controller" and "Formula Controller" tools. These let you convert audio data or generate pure code to control any parameter. You can also apply formulae to standard automation. So, for example, you could have your modwheel modulate any parameter for any VST logarithmically, if you wanted, or cut the modulation value in half, or cut it into one third and multiply by 10, whatever.

Compared to Cubase, I honestly have to say that FL probably doesn't have any loop-editing or manipulation features that make it particularly stand out from Cubase. Ableton Live is superior to both in that department. FL does have the better overall workflow for using oneshot samples and *creating* loops, but I've actually been frustrated on more than one occasion at how FL deals with changing tempos, stretching, etc. It's getting better but remember that FL was a drum machine app first and didn't even have audio importing and time manipulation until later.

Cubase 5 has

. Basically, a somewhat more organized way of dealing with keyswitches for a sampler. As far as I'm aware, the feature is currently unique to Cubase, although it will probably be picked up by other DAWs in the next update cycle.

I've tried both and between the two, I chose FL Studio. Reason being, with my instruments (mainly guitar and bass being plugged into my computer via the TonePort from the Line 6 Gearbox set I bought) Cubase seems to only want to pan them to one side and not the other. But that's a matter of my setup i think. I use Adobe Audition for those instruments until I find a superior setup. As for FL Studio, I like it cause it was really easy for me to learn. Not that Cubase is difficult, but I'd rather stick with what I already know. So if this is the case for you, just stick with what you know.

Dude, already have. ^w^ Just checking out what other people thought and if there's anything I've missed.

I see. Good luck choosing

Seriously, I can't thank you enough guys, this stuff is honestly perfect.

I see. Good luck choosing

Choosing? I have to write about it in my exam that's all! ^w^ Personally I go for FL, but I really can't be biased just because I'm not used to Cubase. It's so much more advantagous getting an opinion from people who understands more about it than I do.

Seriously, I can't thank you enough guys, this stuff is honestly perfect.

Choosing? I have to write about it in my exam that's all! ^w^ Personally I go for FL, but I really can't be biased just because I'm not used to Cubase. It's so much more advantagous getting an opinion from people who understands more about it than I do.

It seems that I just keep misunderstanding, I think I will leave your thread alone from now on

It seems that I just keep misunderstanding, I think I will leave your thread alone from now on

Haha, don't worry man.

All DAWs suck.

There are competing standards for plugin formats. RTAS (PT), AU (Logic won't do VST) and VST - that's horribly stupid. Pick one, deal with it, though VST dropped the ball on things like sidechaining, AU can't properly deal with MIDI only stuff, and RTAS plugins are RTAS only a lot of times.

If you own MIDI gear, Cubase punched you in the nuts - no Midex 8 anymore, sorry. Logic punched you in the nuts, though with more OS X gloss and somewhat gentler (AMT8s and USB Unitor 8s still work, apparently, but aren't supported or made anymore).

None of 'm seem to give a damn about people with more than 3 synths that don't have USB. Even USB is bad, because even though its throughput speeds may be high, its latency and jitter may suck pretty badly. The only 8-port MIDI interface left is MOTU, which only supports improved timing in Digital Performer. Yay. None of the manufacturers have picked up on that.

All GUIs suck. Like zircon mentions, the number of steps in Cubase is well, pretty much stupid. A particularly grating example for myself was Cubase SX3, which didn't allow you to change the order of the effects in the chain - you had to save the settings you were working on, delete the plugin, reload it in another unoccupied slot (lots of fun if you already had several of 'm filled, because that means deleting every single one of 'm), and load the preset again. To add insult to injury, you were limited to 6 effects in a chain at most. Also, a dozen steps to get a plugin going in the first place.

High-bandwidth connectivity for audio interfaces can still be improved. USB is too slow. Firewire is phased out. Alternatives are horribly expensive. Also, writing good drivers is hard.

We still have a long way to go .

Cubase is capable of 5.1 surround sound mixing and has a pretty decent notation component to it.

To respond to the above, not to be a know-it-all, but just want to have the correct information out there...

The fact that FL can automate nearly anything isn't unqiue. What is unique is that you can use virtually any kind of data for automation with FL's "Peak Controller" and "Formula Controller" tools. These let you convert audio data or generate pure code to control any parameter. You can also apply formulae to standard automation. So, for example, you could have your modwheel modulate any parameter for any VST logarithmically, if you wanted, or cut the modulation value in half, or cut it into one third and multiply by 10, whatever.

Compared to Cubase, I honestly have to say that FL probably doesn't have any loop-editing or manipulation features that make it particularly stand out from Cubase. Ableton Live is superior to both in that department. FL does have the better overall workflow for using oneshot samples and *creating* loops, but I've actually been frustrated on more than one occasion at how FL deals with changing tempos, stretching, etc. It's getting better but remember that FL was a drum machine app first and didn't even have audio importing and time manipulation until later.

Thanks for expounding on my post and clarifying a bit Zircon, good info. I also have been frustrated with tempo changing in FLStudio.

This summer I might explore different DAW's and see what else is out there as all I really know is FL.

BTW, did the exam. Had a crisis because I'd never come across the term "zero crossings", then worked out what they were at the end so rushed back and answered the question.

Thanks so much for the advice, that section of the exam was crazily easy because of you guys.

BTW, did the exam. Had a crisis because I'd never come across the term "zero crossings", then worked out what they were at the end so rushed back and answered the question.

Thanks so much for the advice, that section of the exam was crazily easy because of you guys.

What are zero crossings, anyway? I've never heard of them, either.

EDIT: n/m, wikied it.