Maschine...

To anyone concerned about what the "pros" think of the exact subject of NI Maschine VS The MPC, there is a full article about just that in the current issuse of Future Music. Just thought I'd throw that out there.

FL Studio > Maschine.

Doglamp wrote:FL Studio > Maschine.

This comparison doesn't make sense. Maschine is not a DAW. And FL Studio doesn't come with a MIDI controller.

why so much on this product ?
looks schweet to me

Lotuz wrote:FL Studio > Maschine.

Is it fair? No. Does it make sense? ****. The original title of the thread was: Bye bye MPC, Hello Maschine. So MPC vs Maschine is a nonsense comparison as well? FL Studio is not even a DAW. I'm saying that FL Studio is better than Maschine for making beats.

Lotuz wrote:This comparison doesn't make sense. Maschine is not a DAW. And FL Studio doesn't come with a MIDI controller.

Is it fair? No. Does it make sense? ****. Both are tools to make beats. The original title of the thread was: Bye bye MPC, Hello Maschine. So MPC vs Maschine is a nonsense comparison as well? FL Studio is not even a DAW. I'm saying that FL Studio is better than Maschine for making beats.

FL Studio is a DAW. It has all the features of a DAW. And Image-Line also says it's a DAW.

Why is it a better tool for making beats than Maschine in your opinion? I'm interested in your arguments.

Maschine and the MPC are very similar, so I consider that a fair comparison. Especially when Maschine will be able to sequence other MIDI instruments (upcoming 1.1 update).

Imo, FL Studio isn't really a DAW because:
1. It's main feature is the step sequencer for patterns.
2. No one really uses it as a sequencer.
3. Or for mixing / EQing.

And do you still think FL Studio vs. Maschine is fair or no? MPC, Maschine, FL Studio can all make music. So why not.

I just made a thread: viewtopic.php?f=5&t=114802 It's not a Maschine vs. FL thread, but you might be able to figure out why it's better?

Doglamp wrote:Imo, FL Studio isn't really a DAW because:
1. It's main feature is the step sequencer for patterns.
2. No one really uses it as a sequencer.
3. Or for mixing / EQing.

so because no one uses it for features it CAN do as well as any other DAW it isnt a DAW?

Lotuz wrote:Maschine and the MPC are very similar, so I consider that a fair comparison. Especially when Maschine will be able to sequence other MIDI instruments (upcoming 1.1 update).

What else is planned for this update? Timestretch i hope (thats the only feature keeping me from copping this)

vibewithTy wrote::lol: so because no one uses it for features it CAN do as well as any other DAW it isnt a DAW?

Yeah.

Doglamp wrote:Imo, FL Studio isn't really a DAW because:
1. It's main feature is the step sequencer for patterns.
2. No one really uses it as a sequencer.
3. Or for mixing / EQing.

Everyone I know who seriously uses FL would strongly disagree with your analysis of the typical FL user.

Ok fine it's a DAW. But when one goes "DAW-hunting" is FL really the first thing in mind? If someone starts a thread asking what should they track out there beats, from their MP, to; do people suggest FL Studio *cough* Pro Tools *cough*? Maybe it's just me, but I always thought of FL as a program for music creation; rather than music editing, arranging, mixing, etc.

But I still feel FL is greater than Maschine.

Doglamp wrote: Maybe it's just me, but I always thought of FL as a program for music creation; rather than music editing, arranging, mixing, etc.

Same here.

well fl studio can do a lot in one package, that is what I like about it. it is very adaptable and it doesn't take up much system resource.


I admit, I dont really use it for recording live but it is possible to do it.



I find that people often consider software multi track recording programs such as cubase as DAW's.. I just look at the acronym :digital audio workstation. If it is a digital audio workstation then it is a DAW (which is why I consider reason to be a DAW where a lot of people here consider it a digital instument.)

mr_debauch wrote:well fl studio can do a lot in one package, that is what I like about it. it is very adaptable and it doesn't take up much system resource.

Your right it is a very capable tool to be reckoned with in the electronic music world,......EEEEspecially at the price point,.... Sam Ash was selling what I think was the "big" version of FL Studio 8 for under $200 USD

mr_debauch wrote:

I find that people often consider software multi track recording programs such as cubase as DAW's.. I just look at the acronym :digital audio workstation. If it is a digital audio workstation then it is a DAW (which is why I consider reason to be a DAW where a lot of people here consider it a digital instument.)

Very true.