making fruity tracks sound less fruity

[MangaFish]

i've heard people rant on about how tracks sound like they've been made in fruity loops (especially percussion). i use all my own samples (by that i mean non from fruity loops). i do run a few fruity fx through (usually free filter with my own settings, compression (again my own settings) and riverb (fruity preset: subtle)) yet people still say it sounds like its been made on fruity loops.

whys this and how can i fix it?

[Barely Human]

Fruity tends to make a mix very muddy. Everything seams to mash together. I find that to get the best results i have to over-exagerate the sepperation between the different elements. be vary wary of clashing freqancies. The render on fruity isnt too hot either, so its best if you can record the output to a different source if you have a decent enough sound card.

[Stu Cox]

which percussion samples do you use? there are a few particular sets that, although not packaged with fruity, everyone seems to have and use.

if the effects you use are having an impact on making your tracks sound more "fruity" it's probably not so much presets as actually the algorithms they use to apply the effects.

also, which synths do you use? for example, the 3xOsc is only available to people who use fruity so can be recognised as being from fruity. synths like pro-53, vanguard and v-station are used a lot by a lot of new producers starting in fruity so can tend to make tracks sound like one another if everyone uses them

at the end of the day, reason and cubase both have a particular sound too (logic probably does too but it's not something i can spot myself cos i haven't had a lot of experience with it) for people relatively new to production and it can take a while to break out of it, i think it's just that there's been a massive influx of people starting to use fruity in the last year or so which has kinda emphasized the case for fruity.

i'm not actually sure if the sound i really recognise now is due to fruity itself as much as the way a lot of the new producers using fruity work, using the same synths, same samples etc... it would be interesting to see if someone tried to duplicate one of their tracks made in fruity in cubase or something, using the same synths and same sequencing etc to see if it still sounded like fruity.

if it didn't then it would suggest that a lot of it is down to the way the different programs render samples (i'm not implying a hierarchy here, just that they will sound different, in the same way that 2 decent hardware compressors may be considered to be just as good as one another but have their own unique sound, for example)

ooooh i'm writing a lot about this one lol, probably cos i've talked to a lot of people about it recently


hope this helps or at least you find what i've said interesting!

[MangaFish]

cheers guys - you've beena great help. no i can blame fruity for my muddy mixes rather than bad workmanship :lol: ;)

damn i need to get logic :cry:

[audioinjection]

doesnt your soundcard also affect how your tracks sound too?

[MangaFish]

i'm only using a sound blaster 128 at the mo :headache:

in the process of hunting down a new soundcard though:
http://www.blackoutaudio.co.uk/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=32541

[eyes without a face]

u cant blame fruity for ur tracks sounding muddy, thats silly, altho i know u were joking im sure there are people who would use that excuse and it doesnt wash im afraid, the tracks can sound how u want them to sound, its just a case of working out how to get that sound, the render on fruity is spot on and if ur only using a soundblaster then unfortunately mate ur not going to get the results ur after, its not a dedicated production soundcard and is a cheap mainstream card for general computer use

try using fruity as just its bare bones, totally discard the synths that come with it and get some professional VST's, the v-station and any of the novation range are superb, Korg Legacy Collection is AMAZING, altho very pricey indeed.... i tend to just use its sampler and sequencer, even the effects i use are mainly wave's, plus various other bits and bobs i have, and yeah a unique and personalised sample library is the key also, alot of people just get hold of Fruity and use what comes with it hoping that they are gonna create something unique and releasable, which is not often the case.... stick at it ul get there no doubt

[Stu Cox]

something i didn't mention earlier, as well as using different soft synths is using hardware synths can make things sound more original, but obviously they really aren't cheap!!

[Jimfish]

tell you what i notice about fruity users is the lack of automation, fileters etc and big lack of mad edits..

[Jimfish]

oh and re. the muddy thing.. no fruity itself sounds crisp and clear like anything else does, but ive heard its mixer is pretty rubbish... a bit Like a cheap hardware mixer doesnt have much headroom i guess

[fresh_an_funky_design]

tell you what i notice about fruity users is the lack of automation, fileters etc and big lack of mad edits..


:clap:
automation and edits to me really make a good tune they just add that final finishing touch

[schlongfingers]

That's a problem with the users, everything in Fruity is automatable :lol:

[loopdon]

tell you what i notice about fruity users is the lack of automation, fileters etc and big lack of mad edits..

yeah, i must admit even though you can do everything, i find it difficult at times to work intuively with edits and stuff in fruity, but you can def. get used to it.

anyone got more details on the mixer issue??

[Stu Cox]

this might be a big part of it actually - the automation issue. as i think i may have or maybe just tried to imply lol, in fruity you do have to go to more effort to create variation (create a whole new pattern if you just want a double kick at the end of a phrase, etc), so the arrangement can tend to be relatively basic.

i personally don't think my first couple of tunes in fruity really had the 'fruity' kinda sound, and this could well be because i always had something being automated (quite often loads of things at once)... took me ages to make the tracks too! lol

[Dan Devious]

too be honest i dont really find the automation thing a problem. ?

[Mirsha]

I still haven't worked out how to automate stuff in fruity to be honest, though I've not really probed the issues. I managed to work it out quickly and easily in Reason but I prefer to use those programs to rip out loops and stuff then fire them through Ableton to arrange them, at which point I can automate effects over a track.

[John Ferraris]

I think that 'fruity' sound comes from using the fruity samples and plugins. Step away from these and you'll be fine. As for the having to create new patterns... ctrl-shft-c duplicates the selected pattern ;) :lol:

[MangaFish]

i've only just worked out how to automate things (as i refuse to read manuals :oops: ) and now that i've sussed it its actually amazingly easy :shock:

i do find the pattern thing mentioned earlier a bit of an irritation, but what i tend to do is write the basic skeleton pattern in the one pattern then have several extra patterns with the variation alone so i can drag the skeleton over and then on top of that paste which ever variation that is nessisary for that sequence - its the quickest easiest way i've found unless anyone has any better tips?

[eyes without a face]

automation is easy within fruity

excuses excuses..... u get out what u put in!

[sash]

get some analogue in there somewhere

[Stu Cox]

I think that 'fruity' sound comes from using the fruity samples and plugins. Step away from these and you'll be fine. As for the having to create new patterns... ctrl-shft-c duplicates the selected pattern ;) :lol:yeah but i just find it an awkward way to work

in cubase, you just double click on the part (equivalent of a little block in the playlist in fruity, just they're all independent of the others on that "row" of the arrangement), change what i want to and it's done



automation is easy within fruity

excuses excuses..... u get out what u put in!well exactly, if you want to work with a program, you've got to put the effort in to make it do what you want it to

it's the same with anything, some things in cubase/reason/logic etc take ages but if you don't do it then your track will suffer

i agree automation is very easy in fruity although it's easy to get confused about which pattern contains automation for what and there isn't actually a way of telling from a controller whether it has automation applied to it. also, as it's all just done by drawing on a continuous scale i'm not a massive fan of how you write the automation in fruity (have to keep redrawing it if you want to change something slightly) - i'd much rather use the point-to-point system cubase/acid use (can't remember about the others)

although i see fruity are now adopting this technique for automation on audio clips in version 5... maybe they'll apply the same to automation of controls and see the light about the playlist - if this happens i'd almost certainly go back to using it myself

but that's just me :p

[Barely Human]

although i see fruity are now adopting this technique for automation on audio clips in version 5... maybe they'll apply the same to automation of controls and see the light about the playlist - if this happens i'd almost certainly go back to using it myself

The automation clips can automate any parameter mate. And i personally think that the playlist is a brilliant. Its what sets it apart from standard sequancers.

[Dan Devious]

I LOVE FRUITY AND I WANT ITS BABIES! THANKYOU

DAN :clap:

[Dave Elyzium]

I dont think you can blame fruity for muddying tracks, in theory thats liek sayign if you sample a whole track as a one shot and play it back through fruity it will sound muddy? i dont think so....
dont scrimp on your mix, get it mixed correctly, master it properly, give it a good dose of master compression analogue processing if you can.
you cant polish a turd so get it as right as you can before mastering

[Stu Cox]

The automation clips can automate any parameter mate. And i personally think that the playlist is a brilliant. Its what sets it apart from standard sequancers.ok at first i thought you'd misunderstood me here as i was talking about audio clips, but on second inspection - automation clips are a new thing in fruity 5 yeah? didn't know about them! :oops:

just had a look into what they can do and i'm very impressed... i now like fruity a lot more :lol: cheers for pointing that out to a daft rambling fool

but it's still got the silly playlist... ;)

i was planning to have another go at a tune in fruity soon anyway, this has just bumped that up the priority list a bit hehe

[Dan Devious]

wehay, Stu has seen the light! praise the lord! :lol:

[eyes without a face]

also u dont have to write the automation in, i record it like i would in Logic or Cubase with my midi controller keyboard, and its easy to tell which channel has automation because u can name each channel on the sequencer and u simply put ur automation on a certain channel and call it "synth auto" or "loop auto" etc etc..... ways and means son ways and means!

Fruity rocks, aint no lie!

[xfive]

I think Fruityloops is plagued by BAD MARKETING DECISIONS DUE TO ITS NAME



hahahaha




:lol: :lol:




The program itself ain't so bad :)

[eyes without a face]

definately, its name and interface have done it no favours id say

[Dave Elyzium]

oo but they added "Studio" to the name........so it has to be pro level! right?

[AcidTrash]

Fruity is fine and so is the render function. If your tune sounds muddy do some EQ'ing and get rid of sounds that don't serve any real purpose.

I've heard soem awesome stuff sone with fruity and it's every bit as good as Cubase. Anyone argueing to the contrary simply just doesn't know how to work it.

Do your homework with any audio package and you WILL get good results.

[Lorenzo_Shivu]

It's better to mix in another program like cubase etc..

Fruity is really 'one little' box where all the music comes from and sometimes you can hear that.

For me fruity is my little baby. I make everything with fruityloops.

[dirty_bass]

I`m not sure about the audio engine in fruity.
It`s still alittle under the standard of other sequencers.
I`ve heard a few pro`s complain about the audio engine.
I think it does add a certain archetype to finished mixes.

[Evil G]

i expect that most people who say "that sounds like fruity" either recognize a preset, or are really meaning "that sounds like somebody without much experience".

if you make your own synth patches and get into the nitty gritty of nudging midi events around to break the robotic feel that comes from a computer sequencer, fruity can sound just as good as anything else.

[rounser]

i expect that most people who say "that sounds like fruity" either recognize a preset, or are really meaning "that sounds like somebody without much experience".
That's simple to fix, though; just junk all the synths that come with FL and get used by everyone and their dog, and the "gimmicky" effects, like wavetraveller, then feed it new plugs and hook it up to external gear and your own samples. As if it's going to sound like anything but "you" after that...

[Barely Human]

I`m not sure about the audio engine in fruity.
It`s still alittle under the standard of other sequencers.
I`ve heard a few pro`s complain about the audio engine.
I think it does add a certain archetype to finished mixes.

Aye, have to agree with this as stated in my first post. The engine deffinately has its own character.

[Stu Cox]

i expect that most people who say "that sounds like fruity" either recognize a preset, or are really meaning "that sounds like somebody without much experience".
well i think it may be partly this, but to me an under-experienced producer in cubase or reason sounds different to an under-experienced producer in fruity... and i tend to still be able to tell with producers further down the line which program they use, although there's a point where you've got to ask whether just being able to tell what program it was made in actually means that it doesn't sound professional

on the rendering quality, someone put a post on another messageboard with a link to some full testing done on the sample rendering quality of fruity and it came out just as high as cubase and logic, with reason slightly further behind (if i remember correctly)...

although this doesn't mean it doesn't give it it's own characteristic sound - maybe fruity's is just slightly more recognisable

[AcidTrash]

i expect that most people who say "that sounds like fruity" either recognize a preset, or are really meaning "that sounds like somebody without much experience".

if you make your own synth patches and get into the nitty gritty of nudging midi events around to break the robotic feel that comes from a computer sequencer, fruity can sound just as good as anything else.

here here.

[John Ferraris]

I believe its healthy to have discussions like this but all to often it seems like people get bogged down by (in the grand productional scheme of things) by irrelevent details. I don't mean that in a rude way, but I really don't think it matters too much. To me, the best sounding software is the software a producer fels most comfortable using.

[AcidTrash]

I believe its healthy to have discussions like this but all to often it seems like people get bogged down by (in the grand productional scheme of things) by irrelevent details. I don't mean that in a rude way, but I really don't think it matters too much. To me, the best sounding software is the software a producer fels most comfortable using.

:clap:

[massplanck]

Although I dont use fruity to make my tracks I reckon its sounds BETTER than programs like ACID & Reason and its simple to use. Your problem with people saying it sound like it was made in fruity well is probably because it WAS made in fruity. Its like some guitarist saying to another guitarist.. that sounds like a fender or a vox amp or something. Fruity just does something to the characteristics of the sound to er.. well make it sound like fruitlyloops. The key (if you are just using software) is to mix and match.. sounds from fruity/mixed with sounds\sequences from abelton/acid etc. Even better.. start collecting that hardware...

PS: The fruity playlist sucks... i gave up on it ages ago but the best tip for people who find that they are having to go back over the track to make edits is just to draw PATTERNS 1-200 in a diagonal line all the way across\down before you even start making the tune. That way you will always be able to make edits wherever is necessary without having to delete patterns and resize them.. also gets rid of the whole 'I can seeeee the break coming in 2 minutes before it does' bullshit which wrecks my head.. I hate 'seeing' my songs...!

[log:one]

i dont understand this problem with doing edits in fruity....

just ctrl+shift+C on the pattern you want to do an edit of, do the edit and plonk it in there... is that too easy for you?

[MangaFish]

i expect that most people who say "that sounds like fruity" either recognize a preset, or are really meaning "that sounds like somebody without much experience".

if you make your own synth patches and get into the nitty gritty of nudging midi events around to break the robotic feel that comes from a computer sequencer, fruity can sound just as good as anything else.

what do you mean by nudging midi events and how would i go about doing this?

[Stu Cox]

PS: The fruity playlist sucks... i gave up on it ages ago but the best tip for people who find that they are having to go back over the track to make edits is just to draw PATTERNS 1-200 in a diagonal line all the way across\down before you even start making the tune. That way you will always be able to make edits wherever is necessary without having to delete patterns and resize them.. also gets rid of the whole 'I can seeeee the break coming in 2 minutes before it does' bullshit which wrecks my head.. I hate 'seeing' my songs...!
again, that all depends how you like to work. when i used fruity i always only had one instrument or sound per pattern as i found it a lot easier to know where everything was and lay things out

i agree watching everything happen can make it harder to think of things as "music", but if this is a problem i either turn off my monitor while i listen or minimise the window :)

[JohnnyDigital]

Well.. i've heard lot's of bad stuff about frutty but there's little arguments to sustain most affirmations

Sometimes i hear some noize in my mixes but it's hard to tell were it did come from... was it really frutty fault?

although someone one day should creat a mix in frutty and another in cubase/logic using exactly the elements/vsts and figure out what wrong with it...

off course some one did it before: http://audiotests.batcave.net/article0001.htm

that article spawned a lot of controversy in some foruns...


joao

[Evil G]

i expect that most people who say "that sounds like fruity" either recognize a preset, or are really meaning "that sounds like somebody without much experience".

if you make your own synth patches and get into the nitty gritty of nudging midi events around to break the robotic feel that comes from a computer sequencer, fruity can sound just as good as anything else.

what do you mean by nudging midi events and how would i go about doing this?

i don't actually use fruity myself (but i have friends who use it and get good results) so i can't tell you specifically, but you ought to be able to either turn off "snap to grid" and move some of your hits off of the 16s or use a groove or swing quantize to do it for you.

[JohnnyDigital]

[quote}
i don't actually use fruity myself (but i have friends who use it and get good results) so i can't tell you specifically, but you ought to be able to either turn off "snap to grid" and move some of your hits off of the 16s or use a groove or swing quantize to do it for you.[/quote]


you can do that...


:D