Ayjent wrote:I think sometimes people get a little to too defensive of the architecture. For longtime users like myself, it is clear that FL Studio is very, very powerful and I enjoy using it, especially in the beginning of making a track, but when I start to get more and more content into the project and try to work fast all hell breaks lose unless I'm methodical and anal in coloring, moving, and renaming all of the following: the playlist lanes, the clips in the playlist, the channels, and the mixer tracks and there is really no visual cue to associate what mixer track is associated with what playlist lane. FL Studio could benefit from being more customizable to allow for linear features when people want to use them, and more importantly could really benefit from better organizational features that allow people to really make powerful set ups and templates.
This is especially true when it comes to audio and automation of single parameters - people want clear linkage between audio clips/pattern clips and the automation and want it to be organized without getting sidetracked by organizational tasks and need features to streamline and reduce the housekeeping chores of the modular architecture. It is also true when it comes to recording audio and recording any automation of mixer levels
I would simply ask that playlist lanes be given the following features:
-Capability to designate a lane to be locked for recording from a particular mixer track (this could be a right click option in the playlist lane header or a button that bring up a prompt to assign a mixer track that has buttons where the user can select to autoarm the mixer track for recording and autoname and autocolor the playlist lane and clip with the Mixer track name and color)
-True lock on Playlist lanes - a new lock feature that does not allow other clips to be inserted into the lane with drag and drop. Users could designate permitted clips, but trying to drag and drop unpermitted clips would prompt users about the locked lane and give them immediate options to: 1) add to permitted clips, 2) add new subgrouped playlist lane below (autonaming and autoccoloring consistent with clip would be an additional option for this selection); 3) add new playlist lane (not subgrouped - same option for naming and coloring as option 2); 4) cancel
- More hierarchy abilty to organize clips with more than one sublevel (e.g., I may want to keep all of my parent Playlist lanes consistent with my Mixer Tracks for mixdown purposes and for rendering to audio files- Volume Automation, Panning Automation for the mixer track fit nicely for a one level subgroup, but when I want to have pattern clips for only one particular generator per lane as a subgrouped lane and want to have automation clips for the particular paramaters of the generator in those pattern clips another level down there is no way to do that (you could keep that automation within the pattern clip, but events are editable in the playlist) - moreover stacking clips in the playlist is not a reasonable solution when you want to select just one clip with the select tool (you get everything stacked).
The bottom line is that FL Studio could be even more powerful if it allowed users to designate portions of the playlist to behave in a linear manner while allowing the other parts to stay free form.
I'm all for new features and ideas to accommodate those that need certain features, however the guy was suggesting that imageline turn fl studio into a linear DAW. I'm not willing to lose fl's fast and flexible workflow which doesn't let formalities get in the way of you putting down a creative idea right then and there in the moment, for a supposed “streamlined” workflow.
Like I've always said here, fl problems require fl solutions, this video here is the perfect example of that. At 0:47 the ability to select multiple patterns and audio clips in different tracks and consolidate them into one audio clip, it doesn't mess with your flow.