FL Studio All Plugins Edition $282 at producersources.com

[Leok85]

https://producersources.com/product/fl-studio-all-plugins-edition
Apply COUPON CODE :SP-BF-EXTRA10

10% cheaper than the official ongoing sale and across retailers.

 

some research about the roducersources.com:
website registered on 2016 with a good reputation at scamadviser.com
https://www.scamadviser.com/check-website/producersources.com

 

some discussion on reddit

 

Edited December 2 by Leok85

[dubdisciple]

This may not be allowed since competing DAW posts are no longer allowed 

[dubdisciple]

It's not far off of image line site price 

Edited December 3 by dubdisciple
Changed mind

[Wookiee]

4 hours ago, dubdisciple said:

This may not be allowed since competing DAW posts are no longer allowed 

To clarify,  posting about DAW's who's basic workflow can be considered direct competition for Sonar, or Next is not permitted.

Both Ableton and FL studio use a fundamentally different approach, and workflow, basically they are quite reliant looping, consequently they aren't considered a direct competitor. 

[kitekrazy]

Meanwhile I see some posts that seem to appear as free advertising.

[dubdisciple]

19 hours ago, Wookiee said:

To clarify,  posting about DAW's who's basic workflow can be considered direct competition for Sonar, or Next is not permitted.

Both Ableton and FL studio use a fundamentally different approach, and workflow, basically they are quite reliant looping, consequently they aren't considered a direct competitor. 

Thanks for clarification.  Not looking  a gift horse in the mouth, but looping is a small subset of each of those programs. Both are capable of functioning very similar to Calewalk.i honestly think one of the mistakes made by cakewalk is not doing a better job of providing the best parts of each of those programs, as well as the robust features that would be effective for classical music. The stereotypes associated with earlier versions of the program are outdated to say the least. FL has arguably the best piano roll of any DAW and now that they have added timeline style recording, there is not much that can be done in cakewalk that can't be done in either program . There are tons if Ableton users who never use looping.

[kitekrazy]

46 minutes ago, dubdisciple said:

Thanks for clarification.  Not looking  a gift horse in the mouth, but looping is a small subset of each of those programs. Both are capable of functioning very similar to Calewalk.i honestly think one of the mistakes made by cakewalk is not doing a better job of providing the best parts of each of those programs, as well as the robust features that would be effective for classical music. The stereotypes associated with earlier versions of the program are outdated to say the least. FL has arguably the best piano roll of any DAW and now that they have added timeline style recording, there is not much that can be done in cakewalk that can't be done in either program . There are tons if Ableton users who never use looping.

Well in some ways they did.   Cakewalk added a step sequencer and working with loops has been fine.  Strange as it is people unaware of FL don't know it was a midi first app. 

 I remember trials of FL came with the retail Home Studio CD.   I started to like it over what seemed to be a more cluttered GUI in Sonar.

Cakewalk was often first in innovation. They were first with 64 bit.  They started with the idea of the .OMF format.

The sad thing is when software is acquired the end user rarely benefits.  Sometimes those that acquire can run into problems. See Magix.

I guess Magix Acid is not a competitor either 

I have no issue with a company sponsored forum blocking such things.  Image Line did it long before here.

[Wookiee]

@dubdisciple Cakewalk can handle loops it just does it a more traditional way. Years ago in the Pro Audio versions if you created a loop, unlike todays Cakewalk where you have to drag out copies, it would loop for the duration of the song without having multiple copies. 

[Wookiee]

2 hours ago, Paul Young said:

Meanwhile I see some posts that seem to appear as free advertising.

If you see a post that you believe is direct selling, i.e. is being offered by its originator, report it don't do nothing and then moan. All the mods have lives and make music themselves, it is unfair to think we should spend 24/7 here to keep everyone happy. 

[dubdisciple]

7 hours ago, Wookiee said:

@dubdisciple Cakewalk can handle loops it just does it a more traditional way. Years ago in the Pro Audio versions if you created a loop, unlike todays Cakewalk where you have to drag out copies, it would loop for the duration of the song without having multiple copies. 

Before I start, I want to be clear I am not trying to be argumentative. I'm just having a frank conversation about one of the things I think has long been a stumbling block for Cakewalk.  Yes, Cakewalk has ability to handle loops, but it requires workarounds for usage that genres that are sample heavily rely on. I'm not an Ableton user, but  I think there are more things that I can do in Ableton but not in Cakewalk than the other way around.  Ableton functions like most linear DAWs in timeline view. Where Cakewalk falls woefully short when it comes to working with samples are:

 

the lack of robust integrated sampler

Lack of native ability to manipulate chopped samples in a musical way.

In most DAWs, "traditional" or not, a REX file can be imported into either an integrated sampler or integrated drum solution with slices mapped and a Midi file of slice patter generated. Even if using WAVs, I can slice a file and send all of those slices mapped to either drum pads or keys. Genres that manipulate breaks like Jungle or Breakcore are beyond tedious to do in Cakewalk. For those with tons of third party software it's not insurmountable, but  it does show that Cakewalk has always had a huge disconnect from younger audiences.  If I am missing something, please let me know . 

[dubdisciple]

7 hours ago, Paul Young said:

Well in some ways they did.   Cakewalk added a step sequencer and working with loops has been fine.  Strange as it is people unaware of FL don't know it was a midi first app. 

 I remember trials of FL came with the retail Home Studio CD.   I started to like it over what seemed to be a more cluttered GUI in Sonar.

Cakewalk was often first in innovation. They were first with 64 bit.  They started with the idea of the .OMF format.

The sad thing is when software is acquired the end user rarely benefits.  Sometimes those that acquire can run into problems. See Magix.

I guess Magix Acid is not a competitor either 

I have no issue with a company sponsored forum blocking such things.  Image Line did it long before here.

I agree that I don't mind them blocking competitors. I just suspect that Cakewalk is underestimating programs that have advanced a lot over the years. I firmly believe that Ableton and FL can do more traditional things that Cakewalk theoretically has an edge on than the other way around. I know folk  guitarists and singer songwriters who swear by Ableton. Cakewalks loop tools are aimed at producers who use loops in a straightforward way that conforms more to the stereotype of how sample loops are used than the reality. 

[Wookiee]

I also suspect that those that look at the Ableton/FL functionality alongside Cakewalk and don't realise they are as different as chalk and cheese. Made of the same stuff but completely different. 

Historically the first version of Cakewalk I had, had a Fruit Loops licence. But that's another story.

Cakewalk has never been a loop or sample software, where both Ableton/FL have. The whole paradigm for them both has been about manipulation of Audio loops, later MIDI loops, from the very start.

Cakewalk's paradigm has always been about linear recording of MIDI then audio when computers and technology caught up. 

Noted Cakewalk doesn't have the all singing, all dancing super sampler. Historically it did but it was based on DX technology. It does now have the X-Sampler, but as one who does not use samples, other than single shot I make myself, its functionality is opaque to me.

[kitekrazy]

On 12/4/2024 at 12:02 PM, Wookiee said:

If you see a post that you believe is direct selling, i.e. is being offered by its originator, report it don't do nothing and then moan. All the mods have lives and make music themselves, it is unfair to think we should spend 24/7 here to keep everyone happy. 

Maybe I'm wrong but when I see a username and product with username it seems like free advertising to me.  This shouldn't be too hard to miss.

[dubdisciple]

I think where there is a disconnect in this conversation is the references to the origins of each program is both misunderstood and somewhat irrelevant. Cakewalk predates both programs. All sequencers were midi then.  That was well over 30 years ago and none of these programs are even close to what they originally were. In TODAY'S market the versions of these programs very much compete unless Bandlab/Cakewalk is just basically saying they have no desire to make anything remotely similar to programs used to make modern pop music.  Not naming names, but two of what would seem to be Cakewalk's biggest competitors last few upgrades have been almost exclusively catering to sample manipulation. That goes way beyond simple loop functions. The fact that cakewalk  doesn't seem to understand that does not bode well, imo.  The Billie Eilish's of the world are going to keep cranking out hits on software that Cakewalk cannot compete with as is.  Don't get me wrong, modern pop and EDM CAN be made in Cakewalk, but the workflow pales in comparison to both DAWS some here underestimate based on their origins as well as DAWS that many that are more similar to Cakewalk in origin but have adapted better.   I will stop now, because I don't want it to seem like I am trashing Cakewalk, especially the free version that was offered . I am just hoping that someone with the ability to act will not have the same mindset as the comments. Not adapting to be friendlier to modern music, Cakewalk will not thrive as a paid product.  I hope I am wrong

[Wookiee]

6 hours ago, kitekrazy said:

Maybe I'm wrong but when I see a username and product with username it seems like free advertising to me.  This shouldn't be too hard to miss.

You would think but frequently they hide behind a "normal" type of username. 

[Wookiee]

@dubdisciple look at the Bandlab product line. You also are not completely informed as to why this policy has been implemented. As mods we get given a set of rules to moderate by, some of us stick our heads above the parapet to keep you guys/girls/its/thems/theys informed what those rules are, only to receive unwarranted abuse. Abuse that is not always public.

[Mark Morgon-Shaw]

On 12/5/2024 at 2:40 AM, dubdisciple said:

 Where Cakewalk falls woefully short when it comes to working with samples are: the lack of robust integrated sampler

Yeah it's been requested for years - see my 5yr old post - The first reply is a link to a similar request in 2016  - I suspect they go back further. 

At least we have the X-sampler now which is a start - Hoping they will use this as a starting point and build out from there. At least it's an acknowledgement that not every Cakewalk user is some hairy old hobbyist sat in a basement churning out synthesised drivel for a few forum likes. Some of us actually use it to make contempory music that gets used professionally and make income. 

Back in the day I had a hardware sampler but I've done it for so long now I can work around these shortcomings you mention.  However, if you've ever worked with younger musicians they have an expection that all this stuff just works seamlessly, and if it doesn't they will just use a different DAW and probably never come back.      

 

[dubdisciple]

10 hours ago, Wookiee said:

@dubdisciple look at the Bandlab product line. You also are not completely informed as to why this policy has been implemented. As mods we get given a set of rules to moderate by, some of us stick our heads above the parapet to keep you guys/girls/its/thems/theys informed what those rules are, only to receive unwarranted abuse. Abuse that is not always public.

Again, wasn't trying to give you a hard time. I will abide by rules , regardless.  Your explanation just seemed odd to me, but as you pointed out, you clearly have information I am not privy to. Thanks for taking time to respond.  

[dubdisciple]

10 hours ago, Mark Morgon-Shaw said:

Yeah it's been requested for years - see my 5yr old post - The first reply is a link to a similar request in 2016  - I suspect they go back further. 

At least we have the X-sampler now which is a start - Hoping they will use this as a starting point and build out from there. At least it's an acknowledgement that not every Cakewalk user is some hairy old hobbyist sat in a basement churning out synthesised drivel for a few forum likes. Some of us actually use it to make contempory music that gets used professionally and make income. 

Back in the day I had a hardware sampler but I've done it for so long now I can work around these shortcomings you mention.  However, if you've ever worked with younger musicians they have an expection that all this stuff just works seamlessly, and if it doesn't they will just use a different DAW and probably never come back.      

 

A few of us have been begging Cakewalk for this forever. The closest they came was Cyclone, which was a decent junglist tool released a little late.  The rest of sampler attempts were complete whiffs.  I do have some hope since the sampler in the bandlab site/app is decent.

[Wookiee]

Cyclone was unfortunately 32bit DXi,  which is why it died.