The Most Stupid Features and Mistakes in Reason ?!?!

[gak]

the "drag and drop/import a MIDI file, and it creates an ID8 and puts it on that track" thing

e gads, that IS remedial. 

Probably the first time I've really been bummed since switching over (even though I don't really need to use it)

[Gaja]

When I push myself to really focus in on what doesn't sit well with me in Reason, it comes down to one underlying thing.

Everything is deliberate.

Anything I want to do requires a lot of work involving steps that often feel like the program is second guessing me or discouraging me from accomplishing my goal; as if my ambitions fall under the "what the hell are you trying to do?" or "are you *really* sure you wanna do that?" category. Count how many steps it takes you to do even basic things and take notice of how far apart certain text boxes or related GUI elements are from each other. It creeps in after a while.

Computer programs require the user to participate and I get that. But they don't have to transform the user into a linearly programmed micro controller lurching through sequential commands to get things done.
Most of the "work" in Reason really comes down to how non-intuitive the program is, and that's a shame considering the state of the art.

If I could change anything, it would be to leave the past where it belongs and modernize the platform to emulate the future instead of the bygone days. But that's not a specific feature so much as a total overhaul of the philosophy.

For now, I'm going to try and create solutions for some features that Reason lacks and then teach people how to set them up and use them.

I disagree with pretty much Everything you said in this post . Are we using different incarnations of Reason?
I have never ever in over 10 years of working with Reason felt like I'm being transformed into a linearly programmed micro controller, whatever that means.
I feel you should give an explanation as to what exactly you mean, because this way I feel you are entirely wasting your time trying to argue they turn Reason into an entirely different piece of software that probably already exists.

[deankay]

When I push myself to really focus in on what doesn't sit well with me in Reason, it comes down to one underlying thing.

Everything is deliberate.

Anything I want to do requires a lot of work involving steps that often feel like the program is second guessing me or discouraging me from accomplishing my goal; as if my ambitions fall under the "what the hell are you trying to do?" or "are you *really* sure you wanna do that?" category. Count how many steps it takes you to do even basic things and take notice of how far apart certain text boxes or related GUI elements are from each other. It creeps in after a while.

Computer programs require the user to participate and I get that. But they don't have to transform the user into a linearly programmed micro controller lurching through sequential commands to get things done.
Most of the "work" in Reason really comes down to how non-intuitive the program is, and that's a shame considering the state of the art.

If I could change anything, it would be to leave the past where it belongs and modernize the platform to emulate the future instead of the bygone days. But that's not a specific feature so much as a total overhaul of the philosophy.

For now, I'm going to try and create solutions for some features that Reason lacks and then teach people how to set them up and use them.

That's quite an interesting perspective, and one I have thought about. There are numerous things that I do in the software that I feel there could just be a feature setup for that desired result.
Groups was a big one a few years ago. Groups never bothered me because I felt it was easy enough to create my own groups through some sub routing and get the exact same result. It was quite satisfying even. But with the implementation of actual grouping functionality it was obvious how much time i was spending and not getting anywhere close to the cool functionality that Reason offers(muting, soloing)
It's made my life so much easier and better to not have to create groups in the old way.
So I totally get what you're saying but it's really what makes Reason, Reason. You have to "work it" to get good results which is extremely gratifying. I have a special bond with this software because of how it works, it forces me to have to think(and oh how we hate that )
I would never be as good as an engineer if it weren't for Reason.

[Tumble]

what are the most stupid features that kill your workflow or worst in Reason at the moment ?

I find that the poor implementation of midi-editing impedes workflow a lot.

[devilfish]

The keys in Piano Roll did not flash when i Play some notes on my Midi Keyboard !!!

Annoying!! Really annoying!! !

[Raveshaper]

Others' results may vary, but those are my thoughts. My experience differs from those of other users.

The amount of workaround wizardry that is required to approximate easier methods in other software is the simplest way I could explain my feelings.
It also does not help that there are multiple redundant ways of doing the same thing because while there are subtle differences, they're often so minute that the multiple paths just present the obstacle of too many choices. Look up "the power of undecision" for more on the concept of getting more done through fewer choices. This flexibility is acceptable, however, because it permits an organic approach to producing that allows different kinds of people with different types of thought processes to still make music "their way" among the available paths that lead to a shared destination. Admittedly, this comes down to allowing people to equally flail and call for a lifeguard, just in different parts of the pool. That premise also holds the curse that someone's understanding or ways of working won't translate over to someone else when disseminating knowledge. It won't make sense to them because those decisions within the abundance of available choices that Reason permits wouldn't be the ones that they would make. Effectively, the degree of catering to individuality can cause a closed loop around each user in addition to the already layered onion of closed loops surrounding Reason as a platform. The whole "you're somebody because you're a member of 'The Loop'," culture is one that is self-destructive in its worship of isolation in my opinion. But I digress.

What I was talking about was linear processes that impose on the user, like having to select each note, then go up to the top of the edit mode window, select the tiny text box for velocity, either numerically enter a value or drag up or down to the desired value, then move on to the next note and repeat. That's editing velocity in Reason 7.1. You used to be able to drag the velocity bars by clicking on them, but now they are just for visual reference. This specifically is a very linear and monotonous effort of note after note adjusting velocity with deliberate and needlessly mechanical precision, as if making these adjustments is highly unusual or catastrophic and should be treated with extreme care rather than ease of use. Extreme care that favors deliberate and specified input from the user in a arduous case by case basis is the meat of what I meant by "linearly programmed". I don't mind programming my beats that way, but I do mind my interaction with the program itself operating that way.

Another thing is having to alt+click a control, switch to the sequencer, go into edit mode, resize the window to see the automation lane if necessary, then drag the default value marker on the left (with almost microscopic text) to manually adjust with superfine resolution if you prefer to not edit every control with fine mouse adjustment set to max all the time. Numeric entry for control values should replace this. What about being able to ctrl+shift+click multiple controls all over the rack or on the mixer and then adjust them all while dragging? I would love that.

Drawing in actual curves for automation instead of straight lines requires a lot of trickery, and even using LFOs limits you to four bars in length if snapping to subdivisions of the tempo is essential to your project. Maybe Synchronous is different; I don't have it.

Even if you only setup a patch once so you can reuse it later, or if you develop template systems full of things you just want to be there, you still have to wade through figuring out that stuff, then building it, then troubleshooting unexpected behavior, coming here to ask why it isn't working, then finally achieving the result that you were after. If it's in a template, it's a feature you wish was available from the word go. That's why people put stuff like that in templates. My point is that if you're trying to develop things before you get started, yeah it's nice to have that leeway, but it gets in the way of getting started. I'd rather post about my accomplishments rather than my confusion.

Again, I do respect that we actually can do all this stuff, and I'm working very hard to help provide new solutions that will broaden what is possible in Reason, but just because something takes a long time to do does not make it worthwhile. As someone who takes music creation and music technology very seriously, I value my time more than I value an excess of options. The greats of the past had far less to work with and they made all those classic tracks.

That's my tl;dr version.

I just want this to be more of a collaborative effort between myself and the program, and often times it feels like I'm fighting to get stuff done.
Speaking of accomplishments over confusion, that's why I'm relatively scarce here now. I read more than write to take my mind off my projects here and there. What has launched me into this many weeks long journey of hard work has been the desire to get as much of the mechanical feel of composing digitally in Reason out of the way up front. One massive push to build the methods of free expression that I want at my disposal. One massive push to remove the jerky, methodical vibe and open up Reason to as higher potential than it has had up until now. Rather than abandon Reason, I am fighting to create a solution to my frustrations that can also provide benefit to others suffering from the same dissatisfaction. Even though I'm a nitpicker, I should thank Reason for being imperfect, seeing as how it has lead me to develop things I haven't seen anyone else doing.

Since some of the stuff I'm working on could literally change the game for a lot of people, I don't want to be considered a whiner. I accept that some features just won't ever exist in Reason. But some features that seem impossible, aren't. I hope I can prove that.

[raymondh]

I do a lot of editing in the piano roll, so the workflow killers for me are the weaknesses of the piano roll in Reason, compared to other DAWs.
Specifically;
- I'd like better visual queues about where I'm about to click a note, even when snap is turned on. Might be a better grid pattern or even better when I'm hovering with the pencil tool it would be great if there was a running highlight on the picture of piano keys on the left and the timeline on the top. 
- enter notes in step time from a MIDI keyboard. That would double the speed of programming in notes.

There's a bunch of other items on my wishlist, but from a workflow view, I'd mostly like sequencer improvements.

[gak]

Sorry my friends, I have to add a comment about "midi editing" since that seems to be an area on contention.

You are correct. It's not the bee's-knee's considering it's 2015. But I disagree in some ways that "other" hosts are "way better"

W/O the long boring tit-tat comparisons, I can get more done in reason than anything else. Main reason (no pun intended) ? Grooves. Where maybe reason lacks in some editing areas, the fact that I can have so many groove options outweighs it imho.

Maybe that is because I'm a me-myself-and I guy and want to do all the guitar/drums/bass/synths myself, but nothing (and I mean nothing) can give you the groove flexibility that reason can. My only gripe (and yes, you can work around it but...) is that audio (since it can easily be sliced any number of ways) doesn't apply "groove"

Anyways, I understand what you are saying and I can go on for a long time about the midi editing I'd like to see as well, but unless you are talking about logic or FL (both of which I hate for different reasons) I don't think it's true that reasons midi editing is way off. 

[Gaja]

Last time I was editing velocity it worked exactly the way it worked in 2.5. I use the cmd key to switch from the cursor to the pencil and edit away. I usually don't need to do it a lot, so maybe it was back in R7, but I'm pretty sure that still works...
I guess different people feel different about different stuff, but I personally like the way I can personalize my Reason experience, and change it often. I like being required to use my brain in order to get where I want, because it makes me consciously realize what I'm doing and probably why I want to do this.

[jam-s]

And I guess they're totally cool leaving out important standard things like advanced audio editing, crossfade, a simple comprehensible PH brand STOCK multi-band compressor. Nah- who needs that anyway..

I really don't get why you're still looking for a multi-band compressor from PH when there have been some in the FSB since Record.

see: Reason Factory Sound Bank -> ALL Effect Patches -> Dynamics -> General Purpose

The combinator patches from there can also be used as insert FX in any mix-channel.

[Tweak]

Hey Guys, my input on this thread:- 

In my opinion Propellerheads made a mistake when they decided to compartmentalise editing of midi notes and also audio clips to single tracks at a time.

I often find myself wanting to compare the midi notes of another track during an edit. I also find I often want to try to line up transients in audio across different tracks, but can't look at both tracks easily at the same time.

I'd be super-pleased if this got added to a future version.

Peace,

Marc

[Faastwalker]

I honestly couldn't think of anything off the top of my head. Then I read Tweak's post above this one. I agree with this completely. It would be cool if you could zoom multiple tracks at the same time when editing. It's neat the way it works now. But not particularly practical. But generally I'm pretty happy with Reason. More so than anything else that's for sure. Obviously there is room for improvement. But this is always the case with anything. Looking forward to Reason 9 / X

[Last Alternative]

I really don't get why you're still looking for a multi-band compressor from PH when there have been some in the FSB since Record.

see: Reason Factory Sound Bank -> ALL Effect Patches -> Dynamics -> General Purpose

The combinator patches from there can also be used as insert FX in any mix-channel.

There is nothing simple or user-friendly about that thing.

[mattpiper]

And I guess they're totally cool leaving out important standard things like advanced audio editing, crossfade,

Getting granular here: Just wanted to mention in case anyone didn't know, crossfades are available in the Comp Editor. To crossfade between two clips, first Join the two clips, then double-click on the joined clip. Either you'll already be in the Comp Editor, or you'll see an "Open in Comp Edit" button to the left. Once in the Comp Editor, you'll see a vertical line where you joined the clips. Click the arrow at the top of that line, and a crossfade handle appears above it that you can click and drag to create a crossfade. 
Maybe not as fast of a workflow as you were looking for, but at least it's a legitimate crossfade that's not too hard to deal with.  

[mattpiper]

Loss of cancel function in the R8 patch browser. Guys, put it back!

They must have heard you. From the Reason 8.2 release notes:

• When browsing patches, you can now Revert back to the patch that was loaded when you started browsing.

(The Revert button is just to the left of the Load button at the bottom of the browser.)

[jfrichards]

...Click the arrow at the top of that line, and a crossfade handle appears above it that you can click and drag to create a crossfade...

Still learning something new every day!  Thanks Matt.  Easy to move the clips and the fader curves too.  Very nice.

[wikholm]

In my opinion Propellerheads made a mistake when they decided to compartmentalise editing of midi notes and also audio clips to single tracks at a time.

Yes, indeed. Just being able to zoom in on a track to make it (and its neighbors) editable instead of having to flip between modes would reasonably feel more intuitive as well.

Well, besides saying "me too", what can I add? Hum... clips! I've actually never been able to really make friends with them, even though they've been there since Reason 4.

Sure, they're obviously needed for audio, but I preferred being able to put my midi notes directly onto the lane, and only use groups when I wanted to. All this clicking on clips to be able to edit them, the view, more often than not, jumping around when I do, and the flickering back and forth between color and grey scale... nah. It's one thing I actually think was better in Reason 3.

Overall, though, I think the "new" sequencer is better. Now, if only we could edit multiple tracks at once. I'd want to surface lock two midi controllers to two synths, set up a loop for recording, play with both hands and be able to pencil out bad notes from both tracks, all while the sequencer is still running. I can do all that, but only for one track at a time, so, again, yeeess. Please. 

Oh, well, maybe I should be nagging the props rather than my fellow reasontalkers. Maybe I should go to bed too. G'night.

[ebop]

Is there a way to 'go back to shopping' after downloading an RE from the shop? Clicking back on the browser 3 times or whatever seems a bit clunky.

[plaamook]

The list of editing shortcomings is so long it's not worth putting down at this point. But as I said in another thread, one that I started in fact just so I could rant about it, the fact that you can't zoom out so as to see an entire track of say 1 HR duration or even multiple songs, is bloody ludicrous.