Ableton Forum

It's the early stages so I'm sure most folks won't expect much. However, if the folks over at ImageLine sense that there is an opening and dive into the "Live" end of the pool, Ableton could finally see some heated competition. IL is not a new startup. They have a solid user base. FLS is in general a pretty stable app, and has been for quite some time. Oh, and they can code their collective asses off too.

http://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=4717540

Just sayin...

UncleAge wrote:It's the early stages so I'm sure most folks won't expect much. However, if the folks over at ImageLine sense that there is an opening and dive into the "Live" end of the pool, Ableton could finally see some heated competition. IL is not a new startup. They have a solid user base. FLS is in general a pretty stable app, and has been for quite some time. Oh, and they can code their collective asses off too.

http://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=4717540

Just sayin...

I don't mention it too loudly in these parts, but I positively love FL Studio. To me, it's the one to watch. What ImageLine has done with that product during the past few years is nothing short of amazing and a lot of their cool plugins are Da Shiznit. It "feels good" to work with too for some reason...maybe it's just me. I find the AL UI just sort of blech....always did although for what it does, AL was waaaay ahead of their time but they're losing that edge rapidly. In the circle of DAW/Sequencer users I know, there seems to be a unamious immediate association of AL with the whole "DJ" thing, not that that's a bad thing, but many think it's not a serious tool beyond loop mangling and therefore avoid it like the plague.

I actually welcome the other DAWs building more live performance stuff in. One big thing they seem to have missed in their implementation though is visual feedback for where you are in a clip. Like the circle thing in Session View in Live. I stare at that constantly when performing to time when i fire new clips or scenes. I don't see anything like that in the new version of FL "performance mode".

if fl ever switches to mac, i might be quite tempted to switch.

stonee wrote:if fl ever switches to mac, i might be quite tempted to switch.

get ready to be tempted then. they put the call out for beta testers about a month or two ago.

scutheotaku wrote:I just don't like the interface (especially the mixer).

True, the mixer could use some love. The last time I tried FLS I was recording a lot with my guitar and bass. I don't know if its still the same now, however, that need to keep saving each take to a file drove me crazy. I much prefer the apps that just make files in a directory with some incremental naming system.

A couple of years ago it was that single issue that kept me from buying the program when I was on a pc. I'll give the new version a spin on my Mac but I wont buy it if that is still the same.

UncleAge wrote:

stonee wrote:if fl ever switches to mac, i might be quite tempted to switch.

get ready to be tempted then. they put the call out for beta testers about a month or two ago.

Yes you're right but you need to precise something it won't be a native mac app, only the windows app tweaked to be able to be launched with crossover (so it will support only windows VST - but this can be also really interesting tho)

FL Studio wrapped etc. I dunno man sounds like a pain in the ass to me, and ripe for instability.
You still have to run PC VSTs to use it, why not just use Boot Camp at that point? It would be far less problematic.

FL Studio was coded in Debian [sic I think?] a Windows only code, so it's never truly going to be OSX compatible, sitting in a little PC bubble on OSX is only useful in the sense that you could sync it to Live I guess or not have to reboot to use OSX, but all the other advantages are dodgy at best.

scutheotaku wrote:

Machinesworking wrote:FL Studio wrapped etc. I dunno man sounds like a pain in the ass to me, and ripe for instability.
You still have to run PC VSTs to use it, why not just use Boot Camp at that point? It would be far less problematic.

I disagree - I think a developer-supported, official wrapper would be much less trouble than using Bootcamp.

Yes because Fruity Loops with Windows VSTs in a wrapper in OSX is going to be so much more stable than Windows and Fruity Loops with VSTs.
The only thing you'll get is convenience, stability will of course be an issue, every time OSX updates, some VST updates, Fruity Loops updates, there will be room for bugs. Not to mention that some VST manufacturers will charge you for using both versions etc. My guess is this will bomb, sorry to be a party pooper, but it's a dumb idea, they should just port their fucking code to C++ like every other DAW maker and be done with it.

All porting applications have issues, you're basically running foreign code inside a translator, which has to speak to the host OS at some level, there's no way around the simple fact that every change in that translation is going to cause problems. Let's put it this way Apple has ZERO interest in debugging any problems FL and Crossover might run into, and for good reason really.

Every OS9 developer had to learn a new code for OSX, every OSX developer had to recode for intel which was no simple task, twice. When it comes to OSX Image Line are being as lazy as they can be with this, anybody that doesn't already have a nice stable version of FL running in Windows is going to be flaming the shit out of their forums in a few months when they announce this as cooked and they realize what a half baked solution this is. Again this is the kind of thing that will be fun for the Windows guys with a macbook lying around, but anybody thinking this is a good solution to work in OSX only with is in for a ride.

You're a Windows guy I'm pretty sure, those of us that had mac only software rode through all kinds of porting and wrappers and Windows code badly ported etc. with the transitions to OSX and Intel, and before that badly ported Windows VSTs. The simple fact is if you want a good stable product you have to do the work, and I'm not a coder, just a very "partial" observer. Have fun with it, but I would not trust it for any serious work.

UncleAge wrote:It's the early stages so I'm sure most folks won't expect much. However, if the folks over at ImageLine sense that there is an opening and dive into the "Live" end of the pool, Ableton could finally see some heated competition. IL is not a new startup. They have a solid user base. FLS is in general a pretty stable app, and has been for quite some time. Oh, and they can code their collective asses off too.

http://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=4717540

Just sayin...

sorry for jumping in guys, I will read the whole thread. Just have to say that this first video gave me an thought. We can do the exact same thing in live: drop some long clips in session, and slice them up quickly vertically. (Cntrl e.) Then drag the whole bunch to session in one go. Play! Its one more drag n drop, but thats just 1 second of work.

Ok, now I will see the rest of the videos and look for racks..

Machinesworking wrote:The simple fact is if you want a good stable product you have to do the work, and I'm not a coder...

I was a programmer for about 15 years and I can't argue with this statement as a general rule. However I will state that long before I heard about the IL/CodeWeavers partnership I loaded a demo of Crossover and the FLS demo, version 10 in fact. I had no problems getting it to work. Now I didn't throw all of my vst's at it but I was impressed with how responsive it felt. It did not feel like it was going through a lot of translation. However, ymmv...

scutheotaku wrote:If you're familiar with Delphi at all, you'll know how huge the task of translating that to C-language would be.

it wouldn't pay for them to do that.

my only concern would be with the audio and midi drivers. i wonder if they will find a way to use the core audio stuff?

scutheotaku wrote:Let's not assume that they aren't doing the work. If you're familiar with Delphi at all, you'll know how huge the task of translating that to C-language would be. A highly customized wrapper seems like a good idea in this case. A large portion of cross-platform stuff is done that way now anyways...

Honestly no cross platform stuff I know of in the audio world is. It's coded in cross platform code like C++ etc. and ported to either platforms UI/GUI specifications. The "wrapper" analogy was used to describe Audio Unit plug ins that had elements ported from the OSX VST versions, which generally was/is a bad idea. Let's put it this way, even FXPansion who made a marketed VST to AU wrapper plug in haven't bothered developing that application in years. Most people aren't buying it as developers actually taking the time to get the AU right themselves is 98% of the market now. Believe me dealing with wrapped anything is a piss poor idea. I think NI serve a great example of how difficult it can be to port code, for years Reaktor was a POS on Mac, and Absynth was a POS on PC. Absynth was Mac only originally, and Reaktor was PC only. I think if NI had stuck to the concept of porting with wrappers they wouldn't be in business now.

I guess it's something as far as that's concerned, just count me as not impressed with having to duplicate plug ins for wrapped FL Studio which will probably not work with reWire, and definitely not as a VST in Mac OSX Live.