I was referring to spelling the word "many" properly.
The above technique is what we've been doing since the start of digital audio.
Copying something onto mutiple tracks and treating different frequencies separately.
I really like Maximus though. That's a nice tool for this.
Crazy he says the cpu usage will be high when going to the same resolution that all proper daws have.
Lower res will also affect your MIDI sequencing.

 

lol, so I need to buy a better processor btw

 

I really need some english lessons, I appreciate that correction

 

Really? But you've made tunes, I know.
Does FL lag when you run @960?
If so, I have heard this is an FL problem , not your computer.
What is your processor speed?
Any other daw can run full res with no problem even on a 2.4Ghz processor.
I bet you have an even higher speed cpu, don't you?

If you want that old-school 80s Linn drum quantization in all of your MIDI, run at lower, by all means!
In fact, I did detect something a bit strange in your 20Hz demos, but I didn't want to mention it...

 

what would be it?
I have an xeon 2620 3,20ghz 12cores
no audio interface yet :c already saving for it, 100U$D already gotten, now I need just more ten
I'm not used to do some groovie beats as my main style is plug/trap and its pretty quantized
But i'd love to hear any feedback

just tried running it in 960, no way, it lags as hell, many audio glitches too

 

I don't want to say FL is a piece of poo, but...

 

I could hear you were on a low res because the quantization sounded bad in your 20Hz demos.
What res was that at?

 

96, wait, so is there a thing with quantization? lol

 

maybe is the lack of an audio interface?

 

Hmm. Well, an external interface does alleviate the strain on your internal digital to analogue processing, yes.
This is more of a strain for a computer than coming out at 24Bit digitally.
But if FL does this with 3.2Ghz, that is not a good start anyway!

Yes. The early drum machines, which are sequencers obviously, were at 48.
Some people think that the reason FL seems to be favoured for Hip Hop and Trap is because it defaults to a lower res and therefore sounds more authentic and old school.
But I can't imagine working in that way.
True, the MPC MIDI groove templates were created from a lower res, but this doesn't matter if one knows what they are doing.
I always imagined that you FL people maybe created your drum beats at a lower res, and then changed the res back to higher after, to do the more intricate stuff?

 

bruuuuuuuuuuuuh, to be honest I never had dedicated study to this, like, I learned everything I know on fl almost only by ytb videos, dont know much about analog and hardware story, also dont know much about this tempo infos, I guess I should, but this had never bothered me before, if I felt like Im on a oldschool vibe I just use the time shifter...

I had 3 processors

Phenom II x4 ( 3ghz, quad core ) struggles easier with anything
FX 8300 ( 4,2ghz 8 cores ) struggles with the same things that Phenom
and finally this Xeon, that is 6 cores 12 threads 3,2ghz, doesnt struggle with anything at all, but now that I tried the res changing, I found that it struggles, but strangelly enough if I open a new project with it it seems to not feel anyhing at all

 

Most songs like Travis Scott, XXXtentacion and other main-trap guins doesnt sound much detailed in quantization, they are more bass heavy and cool melodies than groovie sounds, maybe thats why I never realized this

 

It's not about detailed quantization.
It's where the beats fall, where they are on the grid. And I can hear the difference between 48 PPQN and 960 PPQN!
But that's because I play an instrument and have been using MIDI since about a year after it was invented.
And I absolutely killed the Harvard MIT Music IQ test when it came to the rhythm/click track test! I beat those two chinese geniuses on YT, and some other huge YT guy that I really respect! Whose name I can't remember now!
I could hear it in your 20Hz examples! Sorry, but it sounds bad! The idea was musically nice though, and the sounds.
Some daws go higher than 960 PPQN, you know?
Regardless of if I use strict quantization on the drums, I need my EP or piano overdubs to sound as real as possible, as if I am recording to tape.
So there is no way I can do that with less than 960 PPQN, imo.
Others will disagree, but then they will be the ones that can't hear the difference! lol
Pulses Per Quarter Note...

This...is a strange thing to say. And I don't understand it.
It's not about groovy, or detailed or whatever, versus simple, if that's what you mean?
I think you need to let go of whatever you are thinking that makes you say this. It doesn't make sense.
The same, simple drum beat will sound different with different PPQN settings.

 

you mean that it sounds off-time?

 

What? I highlighted the word analogue because you don't have an interface so you are coming out on analogue audio cables, and this does take more work for the computer compared to coming out via USB, because the computer has to convert it to analogue to output it, you see?
But even with an interface, FL will still have this problem.

Most interesting thing is that you say that if you set the res and then start a new project, it's okay?
Maybe the bug is simply that FL doesn't like to switch PPQN resolution midway through a project, or after you have opened a new project but changed the setting after.

 

Last edited: Jan 13, 2021

I just tested something, if I change from fl studio asio to asio4all it kills about 70% of the glitches, and if I set the buffer size to 2000 it get almost normal

 

Well yeah, but just try hitting a key on your sampler now!
But fine if you are only chopping up audio.
Very interesting about asio4all !

To me it really is, yes. The kick and the bass especially.
Which at first made me think that you were trying to do the glitch/neo-soul thang with your kick! Which wouldn't be the element you'd want to mess with anyway. Usually the hats.
But I thought you might be playing with off-setting things by like 20 ticks or something. Which IS a technique, but @ 96 PPQN your 20 ticks will not be the 20 ticks of my 960 PPQN, or probably even people on YT videos you've watched.
So if you've picked up techniques like that, I'd suggest to forget about them at the moment.
I'm just guessing. You might not have done this though. But either way it didn't sound quite right my friend.
And to me, that problem comes from a low PPQN res, prior to any off-setting you may have done.

 

I just KNOW that eventually somebody will storm in here and try and shoot me down and say "No, quarter notes, 8th notes or 16th notes at 96 PPQN will be the same as at 960 PPQN, it's only 32nd or 64ths that will sound wrong" but it's not true.

 

Just to be sure, could you tell me if it changes something if I change the PPQN to the maximum and send to you? I didnt changed anything about time, I dont even know what is a tick haha

 

woah how exactly does it works?? Lol this looks like a thing that I missed