By GritKitz
Mon May 28, 2007 9:44 pm
rinseout wrote:GritKitz wrote:There is no magic in it. think on it like this. why does an akai filter still sound better then a plugin?
The reason is not cpu power. Its that they had a better design.
I hope you dont mean analog filters, cant compare them to any digital ones. The filters in the akai samplers are well crafted, but there are plugins that are in no way inferior to them.Anyway.. as some one said to me once,, knowlege is like gold.. and should only be shared with the right peeps, fair enough this is a public access forum if u wanna call it that and anyone can read advice or post.. but theres certain persons i wouldnt directly answer questions for..
Dont like this view at all, shared information is doubled information, dont you know?
Back 2 topic, i worked with FL a lot and would recommend it too, but theres definitely a difference in the sound, compared to lets say cubase. If you just play a sound in it you wont hear much difference, it becomes obvious when you are mixing lots of tracks. When i learned to hear that stuff i started to render the tracks and mix it in cubase, it just felt like theres more space for the elements in the tracks, which i think has to do with the mixing algorithm.
Hey you might like to know.
Your tracks rendered will still carry all the fruity audio trashing.
Obviously when mixing and using all the fx you are gonna suffer horribly.
But you have to remember that is the sound the programmer hears. So any time you put your signal inside FL. Its gonna get it.
I can hear it now dead easy. Use some crisp sounding monitors. Low level.
Play your a commercial cd. Listen to the upper mid range (about 4-6k) and get accustomed to it.
Then go and load a sound in to fl studio. And one into a sampler like Kontact for cubase.
Ok its tricky working out what to listen to. But once you get it you will hear it every time. Also i dont think you will continue using FL. I dropped reason like a hot stone.
