EDIT: What music program do you prefer?

[TheOtakuBrony]

Hi, i'm The Otaku Brony.

I have used FL Studio in the past but people have told me others are preferred.

What do you all prefer?

EDIT: Poll taken down due to valid points made in the replies.

[S.P.P]

They are both equally as good in their own separate ways. Putting it to vote will end up with you getting FL Studio as people are gonna vote for what they use; and probably most of us use FL (me included).

I'd urge you to go and get the demo version of both and see which you prefer. Some people, like myself, hate Ableton and it's layout. Same for FL. It's really all down to what works for you.

Edit: Oh! And welcome to MLR. :3

[TheOtakuBrony]

They are both equally as good in their own separate ways. Putting it to vote will end up with you getting FL Studio as people are gonna vote for what they use; and probably most of us use FL (me included).

I'd urge you to go and get the demo version of both and see which you prefer. Some people, like myself, hate Ableton and it's layout. Same for FL. It's really all down to what works for you.

Edit: Oh! And welcome to MLR. :3

I guess that's true. But everyone's opinions will help, as I am almost certain that mostly everyone on this forum has been using music production programs longer than I have. So having the opinions of people who have used the programs in the long run will help.

Oh, and thanks.

[Captain Ironhelm]

I'm an FL user for a few major reasons:
-I love the workflow of FL, which works perfectly for my needs.
-upfront price is less (unless you go on a rampage buying their plugins), and you don't have to spend more for future upgrades.
-FL does stay on top of the market (with most things)
-as a semi-organized person, I don't have the problem of a "messy interface" that seems to be a common theme for people that switch to ableton.

[ROFLPIZZA]

Here's what I think: I currently own both DAWs and I actively use FL for all of my work. I've found that Abelton really seems to reflect 'Mac-style' layouts and interface and FL is kind of its own thing(?) So if you're fond of Macs and their interface, Abelton might be the better option. But as PYR3LIGHT said, it really is about the layout. FL is more basic while Abelton is pretty advanced. If you decide to go with FL, I suggest trying LMMS for a little while just to get the feel of things. LMMS and FL have a very similar interface, but LMMS is much simpler to use. But, simple interface also means simple music. You won't get much out of LMMS other than a learning experience.

[Captain Ironhelm]

just saying, Foozogs and Circuitfry used LMMS for their music.

[TheOtakuBrony]

don't let popular opinion control your choice.

what you need to look at, is what program works best for your workflow. I assume Ableton might have some sort of demo version to test it out, if not you can see what it's like on youtube.

both programs are really great, both competitive and on top of the market. One is not better than the other (as a whole), the difference is what is better for you. saying one is better is kind of silly.

that aside I'm an FL user for a few major reasons:
-I love the workflow of FL, which works perfectly for my needs.
-upfront price is less (unless you go on a rampage buying their plugins), and you don't have to spend more for future upgrades.
-FL does stay on top of the market (with most things)
-as a semi-organized person, I don't have the problem of a "messy interface" that seems to be a common theme for people that switch to ableton.

my opinion is that if you're good with a good program already, there's no reason to run off and get another program because some other people are pressuring. IMO it's actually bad for newbies to software hop and spend time learning new interfaces, instead of buckling down and getting good. I'd relate it to people telling you Macintosh or PC makes better music, you can run faster using this brand of shoes, this camera takes better pictures, a certain brand of pencil will make you a better artist, this frying pan makes better eggs than that frying pan, etc. sure there might be a few differences, but in the end the real magical difference is the person using the tools.

no I'm not going to participate in the vote as that would be contrary to everything I just said.

I'm not really software hopping as i'm terrible and don't know how to use all of the programs and don't have any software installed at this moment to be honest. But thank you for your opinion.

EDIT:

just saying, Foozogs and Circuitfry used LMMS for their music.

I don't know who those people are.

[CitricAcid]

I've only done minor fiddling with Ableton Live Lite and haven't used any of the others, but don't forget that there are a bunch of other good DAWs out there besides the ones you listed. If this is your first DAW, I would research all of them. Cubase, Sonar, Logic, Digital Performer, Reaper, Acid, (Reason), they all have different price points, advantages, disadvantages, etc. Find out which ones others are using and which features you think you will want based on what people have to say about them. I recommend first listening to people who make music similar to the music that you make.

[TheOtakuBrony]

I've only done minor fiddling with Ableton Live Lite and haven't used any of the others, but don't forget that there are a bunch of other good DAWs out there besides the ones you listed. If this is your first DAW, I would research all of them. Cubase, Sonar, Logic, Digital Performer, Reaper, Acid, (Reason), they all have different price points, advantages, disadvantages, etc. Find out which ones others are using and which features you think you will want based on what people have to say about them. I recommend first listening to people who make music similar to the music that you make.

I can't really label my music with a "genre". I just kind of play instruments and sing.

But thank you for your opinion.

[CitricAcid]

I can't really label my music with a "genre". I just kind of play instruments and sing.

But thank you for your opinion.

If that's all you plan to do initially, then I would recommend starting with a free program like Audacity or LMMS. If all you're doing is recording, then you may discover that you want to invest in a better microphone setup before you go and buy expensive recording software.

[TheOtakuBrony]

I can't really label my music with a "genre". I just kind of play instruments and sing.

But thank you for your opinion.

If that's all you plan to do initially, then I would recommend starting with a free program like Audacity or LMMS. If all you're doing is recording, then you may discover that you want to invest in a better microphone setup before you go and buy expensive recording software.

I already use Audacity for recording songs I make. But that's just simple guitar chords and singing. With a better program I can make better music. Also, I was told "LMMS" is a really really bad program.

[ClaviSound]

Let me put it this way: Not knowing a "good" program will produce inferior music to knowing a less powerful program well. I've never switched to something "professional" like Adobe Audition because I don't know how to work those programs, while I'm able to easily manipulate what opportunities Audacity provides. Production value isn't the only thing that makes good music good; if anything, it's a peripheral benefit. You can work your way around a low-quality microphone; practice is much more important.

I can tell you from personal experience that you shouldn't give up on Audacity so quickly. What benefits you will get from alternate software (that you'll probably have to pay for) are marginal. I started using Audacity regularly in mid-2012, and it sounded awful. Do you know why? Because I didn't know how to use it. As time went on and I learned how everything worked and was able to apply that to my music, the production value jumped tenfold. Forgive me if this seems rude, but the problem is more often the user than the equipment.

I understand the desire to have every tool available to make music. I would love to have a massive studio of instruments and top-of-the-line recording equipment, and I'm sure I'm not the only one. But whether you have a webcam mic or a Yeti Blue, they're still just tools to express music, which is what we all want to make, right?

I've used LMMS before. It's only a bad program in that it doesn't have as many bells and whistles as FL or Ableton or other professional music producers, not that it can't make good music. Throw the concept of "standards" out the window, because that's not important. Use a program for a while, and don't switch unless you want to do something that is physically impossible within the boundaries of that program and you want to grow out. Just because a program's more powerful doesn't mean it's easy to use or learn, and just because a program is relatively simple compared to others doesn't mean it's worthless.

This is why there is no one good DAW. It's not that they make music "better," it's that they provide a means to work with the music that varies from one to the other. Sometimes one of those means is more effective for a given person than any other means. Don't take just my word for it; this post is mostly just paraphrasing what Captain Ironhelm already pointed out. But it's worth repeating.

Programs are tools. A sword may seem wimpy compared to a gun, but the person skilled with the sword will almost always beat the person who doesn't know how to operate the gun.

Some of my music friends regularly ask me to mix vocals for them. I use Audacity. It's not what it is, it's how you use it.

[Injustrial]

After reading a LOT of DAW discussions, I have come to the conclusion that there is no straight answer. Some people have told me that Logic is a brilliant program, and I'm not going near it since it's a Mac exclusive and I'm never getting a Mac. I tried to have a look at Reason a while ago, and shelved it because it was just too complicated for my mind to wrap around. I'm on FL Studio now and have been able to learn the program and most of the functionality I need is there. All of it, in fact.

The people who argue the most about these sort of thing are the people that haven't produced a single song and probably never will. Go with what you find comfortable to use, and which you think you'll be able to take advantage off without spending three years in school :)

[Conchetupony]

Audacity for quick, destructive audio editing - noise removal, volume changes, and cutting audio. It's powerful enough for these purposes while still simple. But I wouldn't use it for serious mixing because it doesn't support live effect processing, and simply because it's made for destructive editing, i.e. all changes are definitive. But it's certainly possible to produce actual music with it; this guy records and mixes lo-fi indie entirely in it.

REAPER for recording and mixing, because it's very simple and straightforward: "folders" instead of buses to group tracks (so buses are strictly for routing audio), responsive and intuitive GUI and a powerful plugin suite that is just as simple to use (and can be used in your favorite DAW free of charge!). It's very portable - the installer is a few MB and you can carry it in an USB stick. Relatively cheap, at US$50. Runs in pretty much every platform including GNU/Linux with Wine. The only drawback is that it's a bit hard to edit MIDI tracks (double click to place note instead of single), but that's not a problem for me.

FL Studio is probably the best if you're gonna make electronic: it's just as simple to use and it's oriented toward synth work rather than recording tracks, like REAPER.

[Injustrial]

I really like how simple FL Studio is making things for me, but there's still a level of depth to it. Really don't see why it gets so much shit from "DAW elitists"

[S.P.P]

FL Studio is probably the best if you're gonna make electronic: it's just as simple to use and it's oriented toward synth work rather than recording tracks, like REAPER.

Weird. I find what shines with FL is its playlist. I find it really easy to handle samples in it compared to what ive tried with for instance ableton or reason.

The playlist really is wonderful. I use Logic at college which is widely considered the most professional DAW (industry standard, blahhh), and I find FL's playlist to be massively nicer to use; despite them being very similar.

[Alycs]

FL Studio is probably the best if you're gonna make electronic: it's just as simple to use and it's oriented toward synth work rather than recording tracks, like REAPER.

Weird. I find what shines with FL is its playlist. I find it really easy to handle samples in it compared to what ive tried with for instance ableton or reason.

The playlist really is wonderful. I use Logic at college which is widely considered the most professional DAW (industry standard, blahhh), and I find FL's playlist to be massively nicer to use; despite them being very similar.

p sure that Ableton is getting to be the industry standard, other than Avicii and Afrojack I can't think of any of the big-name artists that use anything else. (Actually Zedd uses a mix of Cubase and Ableton but still)

Ones that use Ableton I can think of off the top of my head:
David Guetta
deadmau5
Skrillex
Knife Party
Dada Life
Calvin Harris
...

[Injustrial]

I really like the piano roll as well. And the easy to customize mixer, although I've seen people do some pretty sick setups on Cubase.
I guess it just boils down to how you like to work, really. And since all VST's can be used with any program (Not you Reason. You're special) there really is no big difference. I hear that Logic is less taxing on your computer, but wouldn't that have more to do with the optimization of VST's for MAC VS PC?

[ArisingFlame]

Really, I stick to FL cause I've been using it for ten years. I should branch out though. I just love the learning curve as far as I was able to use it on day one, but here I am ten(ish) years later and I'm STILL learning new things. I should know a lot more than I do though. Military got in the way of my musics. XP

[LFP]

Weird. I find what shines with FL is its playlist. I find it really easy to handle samples in it compared to what ive tried with for instance ableton or reason.

The playlist really is wonderful. I use Logic at college which is widely considered the most professional DAW (industry standard, blahhh), and I find FL's playlist to be massively nicer to use; despite them being very similar.

p sure that Ableton is getting to be the industry standard, other than Avicii and Afrojack I can't think of any of the big-name artists that use anything else.

Most studios and pop artist producers use logic/pro tools (at least around here :p ) which is what has given it it's industry standard status.
The artists on that list all do live shows which instantly makes abelton superior.

[Mr. Bigglesworth]

I like FL Studio, but in all honesty I rather enjoyed Ableton when I had a 30 day trial of it. I couldn't do much, because I couldn't load my own VST's, but a lot of things clicked for me.

But right now my (stupid) workflow is best suited to FL. I find it easy to use and navigate. And I'm actually gonna upgrade from producer to signature when I get the new laptop for uni (because having some extra syths to use would mean if I have some issues with liscences with Massive or something won't leave me completely handicapped). The demo versions of Harmor and Harmless have impressed me a fair bit, and Sytrus seems like a pretty capable fm synth from what I've seen.

[ArisingFlame]

and Sytrus seems like a pretty capable fm synth from what I've seen.

Sytrus is pretty glorious IMO

[Injustrial]

Harmor is my go-to synth for sounddesign. Just love how I'm able to turn random knobs and make sounds I like.

[tymeworkbeats]

Logic Pro X

[Captain Jack3h]

I like to use garageband because it's easy, it's free, and it's actually pretty decent once you get familiar with it.