If you want more current stem separation that is faster because it uses your GPU, use Ultimate Vocal Remover. You can do multiple separation algorithms and things like that. Only thing recommended is you have more than 8GB of VRAM as some of the more involved algos or running multiples of them can easily use more than 10GB of VRAM.
I have done this with old beats I have made 30 years ago and reused or mastered with other products
You are 
correct..
FL Studio is a poor DAW though, so i wouldn’t even entertain it. It started off as Fruity Loops, its aimed at non musical kids who want to be famous quickly, its not a serious engineering program.
It looks like a video game interface, every time i see it i think of Mario Brothers or Nintendo.
Im not surprised stem separation is a big issue in FL Studio, seeing as most people i know who use it are clueless about actually creating there own original music.
The 1st thing an FL Studio user asks an audio engineer = ‘How many likes do you have’
1 Like
I remember when fruity loops first came out i saw it at circuit city for sale. I never knew how big it would be inbthe hip hop music scene..
FL Studio = in 2025, rappers who cant rap, singers who cant sing and for the 1st time in 40 years no Hip-Hop in the billboard top 40, studios full of weed smoking, cough syrup drinking wannabees who all think there as talented as Motown records because they got 1 billion streams/likes (most by bots) on Social media.
Michael Jackson used to take 5 years to refine 9 songs on a album that would sell 50 million copies.
Today its a kid smoking weed, taking 15 minutes of mumbo jumbo and throwing 300 tracks a year onto youtube.
1 Like
Mike Oldfield uses FL Studio btw.
1 Like
A genius could fart into a microphone and make a symphony.
I agree with some but most of what you say is not true.. dont type cast all and that sounds a bit racist also.
1 Like
Yeah this guy must be drinking the cough syrup he says artist that use fruity loops use..
Maybe you should try your a little bitter..
Welp, this thread devolved. 
2 Likes
Musicradar just released an article comparing many of the various stem-separation implementations out there. According to them, Cubase 15’s didn’t hold up. Here’s a direct quote from the article:
As previously stated, I feel like Steinberg missed an opportunity here implementing such of crippled version of what they’re capable of.
Whatever. The underlying code on everything is either spleeter or demucs, with various commercial devs deciding how they want to tweak.
Steinberg HAS Spectralayers Pro available to buy. They certainly aren’t missing an opportunity by not sticking something you define as higher quality into stock Cubendo features. Your review link certainly praises sl Pro.
All of these routines vary based on source…and as the reviewer states…all of them will advance as the decade proceeds.
You may not WANT to spend the money on Spectralayers Pro. That’s your decision.
Steinberg is a bright bunch of guys. They’re not missing anything opportunity-wise imo.
1 Like
I’m not sure how you came to that conclusion considering this is the first I’ve heard of spleeter code. That’s not even mentioning that I haven’t looked into FL’s implementation personally.
They seem like a bright bunch of guys, I agree. Bright guys miss opportunities too. I’m a big fan of Steinberg as a whole, in case you need that clarification.
And it’s fine for you to feel that way. Have you purchased SpectraLayers Pro? If so, you’ll see they didn’t “miss an opportunity to implement it.” They did implement it - they just didn’t give away full capabilities for free in Cubase.
I’m not really sure what your point is other than what seems to be you saying you want stuff for free. I guess everyone does.
3 Likes
Great! Buy Spectralayers Pro after a trial run…especially if it works well for your expectations.
Cubendo stem separation is a new addition. SL Pro has been in the Steinberg family for a while now. A lot of bases are covered really well imo.
You don’t want to pay the $ for the SL capabilities? That’s the way it is.
Yeah….the “fl is best” thing was someone else.
I guess it’s just a bad look when the “free” Cubase stem separation is bottom of the barrel compared to the “free” competition (at least according to this article).
But that’s not what the article said. Of the 11 “tools” selected, only 5 are DAWs. The “free tool” isn’t even a “competitor.” The only DAW in the “top 5” was Logic, and of course you have to purchase an Apple Silicon-based Mac to use Logic’s separation.
The article goes on to say “All in all, SpectraLayers Pro has by far the greatest potential of anything in this roundup.” And SpectraLayers’ ARA extension works inside Cubase, which (as of the last time I checked) iZotope’s doesn’t (though some DOP tools do). And though I’m no fan of iZotope, placing Logic as #1 but saying RX didn’t even make the cut seems off to me. But then again, they relied on “listening tests” which is also rather silly.
It’s obvious you want more free options stuffed into Cubase. And that’s great - rock on. The only reason I even replied is because you already made that point clear in a previous post, but then came back with more “missed opportunity” stuff based on an article which I felt was cherry-picked. If you want to say that’s “bottom of the barrel” because of one line out of some article, then Live, S1, and FL are floating down there too, and all based on what a guy thought “sounded good.”
You’ve already made a feature request, so maybe they’ll listen! Cheers.
Are SCnet and BS-RoFormer models based on demucs or spleeter?
I thought they were newer and different models/tech, since the quality has gone way better