Who will upgrade to Reason 9 the day it's released and what new features do you think will be included?
So what? You can unfreeze and freeze and unfreeze it again, even year after. This is superb option which is NOT in Reason. Reason just bounces to track, it's dumb render and put rendered wave to track, you lost all raw track data, synth settings etc.
Just face it, Reason is behind the times in DAWs world.
Just face it, Reason is behind the times in DAWs world.
- platzangst
- Posts: 729
- Joined: 16 Jan 2015
No, you don't "lose all raw track data", unless you actually go ahead and delete the original track. And you shouldn't have to, if you know what you're doing, as Exowildebeest pointed out. Ableton may have a simpler and more convenient process, but inconvenient doesn't mean impossible.tumar wrote:So what? You can unfreeze and freeze and unfreeze it again, even year after. This is superb option which is NOT in Reason. Reason just bounces to track, it's dumb render and put rendered wave to track, you lost all raw track data, synth settings etc.
- submonsterz
- Posts: 989
- Joined: 07 Feb 2015
hmmmm lol .platzangst wrote:No, you don't "lose all raw track data", unless you actually go ahead and delete the original track. And you shouldn't have to, if you know what you're doing, as Exowildebeest pointed out. Ableton may have a simpler and more convenient process, but inconvenient doesn't mean impossible.tumar wrote:So what? You can unfreeze and freeze and unfreeze it again, even year after. This is superb option which is NOT in Reason. Reason just bounces to track, it's dumb render and put rendered wave to track, you lost all raw track data, synth settings etc.
reason does not do the same
final no more said
-
- Posts: 139
- Joined: 16 Jan 2015
Freeze tracks might be a bit awkward when you have CV connections going on between several different tracks. It might mean everything has to stay active. Reason isn't as simple as separate tracks. I think a lot of you forget that when comparing to other DAW's.
So this is pointless to keep original tracks AND "freezed" in one project. How do you want save CPU then? This is ridiculous.platzangst wrote:No, you don't "lose all raw track data", unless you actually go ahead and delete the original track. And you shouldn't have to, if you know what you're doing, as Exowildebeest pointed out. Ableton may have a simpler and more convenient process, but inconvenient doesn't mean impossible.tumar wrote:So what? You can unfreeze and freeze and unfreeze it again, even year after. This is superb option which is NOT in Reason. Reason just bounces to track, it's dumb render and put rendered wave to track, you lost all raw track data, synth settings etc.
- Aasmund1986
- Posts: 154
- Joined: 02 Apr 2016
- Location: Norway
- Contact:
Havent read the whole thread, but when/where/is it any possibilities to apply as betatester?
Reason 10 Intro
Parsec, Europa, Antidote, Predator, PX7, 4MER, eXpanse, SynthMaster One, ReSpire
Parsec, Europa, Antidote, Predator, PX7, 4MER, eXpanse, SynthMaster One, ReSpire
Mmmm...Not sure. Basiucally the tech is there to just do it, but it's not happening.Gaja wrote: It's not very likely at all to happen. Malström's Graintables are apparently quite difficult to make....
NNXT can shift through any sample however long but you can't automate the sample start knob. Maelstrom has a load of knobs but you can't get to em by using it as an effect.
It's already all there. Just can't plug A into B really. Ball ache.
Perpetual Reason 12 Beta Tester
You can check out my music here.
https://m.soundcloud.com/ericholmofficial
Or here.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC73uZZ ... 8jqUubzsQg
You can check out my music here.
https://m.soundcloud.com/ericholmofficial
Or here.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC73uZZ ... 8jqUubzsQg
- kuhliloach
- Posts: 881
- Joined: 09 Dec 2015
I'll be waiting 5 extra years for a sale on version 9.624b.
But seriously I pray they don't pull another stunt like the Reason 8 launch. That was a kick in the teeth with a steel toed Joker boot. It took a long time, many more features, and lower pricing to make me finally buy it. Hopefully whomever approved such a blatantly overpriced release as Reason 8 has moved over to a new job sweeping the floors at Allapeanutbutterhoopy.
But seriously I pray they don't pull another stunt like the Reason 8 launch. That was a kick in the teeth with a steel toed Joker boot. It took a long time, many more features, and lower pricing to make me finally buy it. Hopefully whomever approved such a blatantly overpriced release as Reason 8 has moved over to a new job sweeping the floors at Allapeanutbutterhoopy.
You got me thinking, try this out: http://www.reasontalk.com/viewtopic.php ... 54#p254454plaamook wrote:NNXT can shift through any sample however long but you can't automate the sample start knob.
It's exactly not there. Malström doesn't use "waves" or wavetables. And the graintables (which is what it uses as sound source) are difficult to make, because the process (when they talked about it) was not automatable.plaamook wrote:Mmmm...Not sure. Basiucally the tech is there to just do it, but it's not happening.Gaja wrote: It's not very likely at all to happen. Malström's Graintables are apparently quite difficult to make....
NNXT can shift through any sample however long but you can't automate the sample start knob. Maelstrom has a load of knobs but you can't get to em by using it as an effect.
It's already all there. Just can't plug A into B really. Ball ache.
Not trying to get into a fight over this, I think Malström is just fine the way it is. Having read propellerheads statement about it, I know that hoping for it will be a waste of energy. You hope for whatever you want.
Cheers!
Fredhoven
Fredhoven
- platzangst
- Posts: 729
- Joined: 16 Jan 2015
Go back and read what I've been saying: if you turn off the original tracks properly, and not just hit "mute" on the mixer, you ought to be able to cut CPU by virtue of the fact that a device that is not enabled can't be doing anything.tumar wrote: So this is pointless to keep original tracks AND "freezed" in one project. How do you want save CPU then? This is ridiculous.
If, for example, you had a real-life guitar plugged into a string of stompboxes, then plugged into an amp, each of those devices would be using power to perform their tasks. If you turn the amp off, you won't be able to hear the guitar any more, but the stompboxes will still be using power until you turn them off.
If you have a synth in Reason, and you hit the mute button on the mixer, then it is still possible for the sequencer to be sending note information to the synth, which will make it use CPU. To get it to stop using CPU, you have to hit mute in the sequencer, so that the synth stops doing anything.
Likewise, an audio track with a string of effects on it will still use CPU even if it is muted in the mixer. To get the most CPU reduction, you would probably need to actually turn the first device in the string off - you know, OFF, right there next to ON and BYPASS.
The question is: is reducing CPU really the goal, or is it to batch about how Ableton has one button to click where you might actually have to use some thought and consideration to do essentially the same thing in Reason?
No, malstrom is not a typical granular synth, hence the name graintable. It creates wave tables, which requires a much more complicated process than a typical granular synth, particularly if you want useful tones.plaamook wrote:Mmmm...Not sure. Basiucally the tech is there to just do it, but it's not happening.Gaja wrote: It's not very likely at all to happen. Malström's Graintables are apparently quite difficult to make....
NNXT can shift through any sample however long but you can't automate the sample start knob. Maelstrom has a load of knobs but you can't get to em by using it as an effect.
It's already all there. Just can't plug A into B really. Ball ache.
Judging by chat on kvr, people are beginning to think of tools to do just that by utilising tech from pitch correction.
- Soft Enerji
- Posts: 407
- Joined: 16 Jan 2015
- Location: East Lismore, NSW Australia
I might just stick with 8....................
Really depends. The pace of added features in Reason is slow indeed, and my needs are nearing the border where it becomes a crossroad.
But, then again, everytime I use Logic, I get very frustrated and wish Reason had certain functions so that I could do most inside Reason.
Video-sync for composing sound with a videoclip is high on my list, among some other things as well. I finally upgraded to R8 with the new convolution engine, as that made the drag and drop browser to be more valuable. But the whole discover thing did surely seem to take lot of time and effort from the company, and had me really looking elsewhere on greener grass. R9 will really have to bring improvements. I want to have core functions such as a handy zooming funktion in the rack/mixer as these are quite tiny, I want to quickly zoom in or enlarge RE:s or functions of the mixer, as that would make the workflow so much better. People talk about new synths etc. Well, for me, that sounds nice, but is it really what makes Reason a better DAW?
No, better improve the RE-making-platform as there are sooo many popping up there since the beginning and surely will continue to be released.
Build and put most efforts on the foundation and expanding its core as a DAW.
Things as folding the buses etc. can be added in 9.1 or something. But the release will have to have some major advancement.
But, then again, everytime I use Logic, I get very frustrated and wish Reason had certain functions so that I could do most inside Reason.
Video-sync for composing sound with a videoclip is high on my list, among some other things as well. I finally upgraded to R8 with the new convolution engine, as that made the drag and drop browser to be more valuable. But the whole discover thing did surely seem to take lot of time and effort from the company, and had me really looking elsewhere on greener grass. R9 will really have to bring improvements. I want to have core functions such as a handy zooming funktion in the rack/mixer as these are quite tiny, I want to quickly zoom in or enlarge RE:s or functions of the mixer, as that would make the workflow so much better. People talk about new synths etc. Well, for me, that sounds nice, but is it really what makes Reason a better DAW?
No, better improve the RE-making-platform as there are sooo many popping up there since the beginning and surely will continue to be released.
Build and put most efforts on the foundation and expanding its core as a DAW.
Things as folding the buses etc. can be added in 9.1 or something. But the release will have to have some major advancement.
Obviously you do not have problems with CPU so there is no point for you personally to need this kind of a feature. But others do and let me tell you what you suggested is NOT working. E.g. if you have a combinator with a synth and a chain of some effects, Delay, Compressor, Polar, Filter, ... it does not matter if you mute the sequencer track and it does not matter if you completely turn off the whole combinator it still needs a decent amount of CPU, less than if it would be on, but still. This has nothing to do with convenience but you cannot see the problem because it does not affect you.platzangst wrote:Go back and read what I've been saying: if you turn off the original tracks properly, and not just hit "mute" on the mixer, you ought to be able to cut CPU by virtue of the fact that a device that is not enabled can't be doing anything.tumar wrote: So this is pointless to keep original tracks AND "freezed" in one project. How do you want save CPU then? This is ridiculous.
If, for example, you had a real-life guitar plugged into a string of stompboxes, then plugged into an amp, each of those devices would be using power to perform their tasks. If you turn the amp off, you won't be able to hear the guitar any more, but the stompboxes will still be using power until you turn them off.
If you have a synth in Reason, and you hit the mute button on the mixer, then it is still possible for the sequencer to be sending note information to the synth, which will make it use CPU. To get it to stop using CPU, you have to hit mute in the sequencer, so that the synth stops doing anything.
Likewise, an audio track with a string of effects on it will still use CPU even if it is muted in the mixer. To get the most CPU reduction, you would probably need to actually turn the first device in the string off - you know, OFF, right there next to ON and BYPASS.
The question is: is reducing CPU really the goal, or is it to batch about how Ableton has one button to click where you might actually have to use some thought and consideration to do essentially the same thing in Reason?
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
https://soundcloud.com/aeon_eternal
https://soundcloud.com/aeon_eternal
- sinnerfire
- Posts: 184
- Joined: 16 Jan 2015
- Location: London
- Contact:
I prefer Cubase 8 to Ableton Live and tbh i think the R8 facelift was worth the upgrade money.
I will be upgrading the day R9 comes out regardless, I have some projects that rely heavily on the Line 6 Amps, they are a bit complicated so bouncing audio is not a option, these reason projects will not work when the Props take away the Line 6 Amps which is a bit annoying as this kinda breaks the Props promise of backward compatibility.
I will be upgrading the day R9 comes out regardless, I have some projects that rely heavily on the Line 6 Amps, they are a bit complicated so bouncing audio is not a option, these reason projects will not work when the Props take away the Line 6 Amps which is a bit annoying as this kinda breaks the Props promise of backward compatibility.
https://drumandbassasylum.com/ Free Samples + Presets for Reason.
I'm not saying the Maelstrom was ever gonna get a tweak. I'm sure you're right with that. I'm saying that what people want from being able to load their own samples into the maelstrom is basically possible. All you'd need to tweak, or make would be a sampler with full sample start automation and a big ol filter/lfo bank (which is basically all that maelstrom is when you take the graintable hoo haa away) that you can plug into it. And we're like a hair's breath away from that. So it's probably more realistic to ask for some new samplers with this capability. I'm sure we'll get em, just might take a few more decades.Gaja wrote:plaamook wrote: It's exactly not there. Malström doesn't use "waves" or wavetables. And the graintables (which is what it uses as sound source) are difficult to make, because the process (when they talked about it) was not automatable.
Not trying to get into a fight over this, I think Malström is just fine the way it is. Having read propellerheads statement about it, I know that hoping for it will be a waste of energy. You hope for whatever you want.
Perpetual Reason 12 Beta Tester
You can check out my music here.
https://m.soundcloud.com/ericholmofficial
Or here.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC73uZZ ... 8jqUubzsQg
You can check out my music here.
https://m.soundcloud.com/ericholmofficial
Or here.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC73uZZ ... 8jqUubzsQg
- platzangst
- Posts: 729
- Joined: 16 Jan 2015
Technically, every bit of this debate has to do with convenience. The problem does not affect me because I went and bought myself a computer that would have decent specs for many years of use. That in itself is a convenience. Believe me, I've had sub-par computers in the past, and had to go through hoops to get projects finished. In my experience, it is far more efficient to invest in better hardware than it is to wait around for the perfect feature that may or may not come regardless of how indignantly one demands it.satyr32 wrote:This has nothing to do with convenience but you cannot see the problem because it does not affect you.
I'll take your word for it that you have tried these things and they have not completely eliminated all CPU usage. But to be honest, I am fairly skeptical that some of the people clamoring the loudest for an equivalent feature to Ableton's freeze have even done that much.
The problem, to my understanding, is that muting from the sequencer does not eliminate the idle load of the instrument itself. It is possible to turn "off" effects, via the switch on the front panel, which eliminates their idle CPU load. However, instruments do not have the said switch. I have tested this several times via loading multiple instances of a high CPU instrument until my processor overloads and, then, attempting to remove the said CPU load. I did not find that it is possible. Please correct me, if I am wrong.platzangst wrote:Go back and read what I've been saying: if you turn off the original tracks properly, and not just hit "mute" on the mixer, you ought to be able to cut CPU by virtue of the fact that a device that is not enabled can't be doing anything.tumar wrote: So this is pointless to keep original tracks AND "freezed" in one project. How do you want save CPU then? This is ridiculous.
If, for example, you had a real-life guitar plugged into a string of stompboxes, then plugged into an amp, each of those devices would be using power to perform their tasks. If you turn the amp off, you won't be able to hear the guitar any more, but the stompboxes will still be using power until you turn them off.
If you have a synth in Reason, and you hit the mute button on the mixer, then it is still possible for the sequencer to be sending note information to the synth, which will make it use CPU. To get it to stop using CPU, you have to hit mute in the sequencer, so that the synth stops doing anything.
Likewise, an audio track with a string of effects on it will still use CPU even if it is muted in the mixer. To get the most CPU reduction, you would probably need to actually turn the first device in the string off - you know, OFF, right there next to ON and BYPASS.
The question is: is reducing CPU really the goal, or is it to batch about how Ableton has one button to click where you might actually have to use some thought and consideration to do essentially the same thing in Reason?
Overall, I am definitely in favor of a track freeze function, in addition to the present bounce function, as I believe these serve to different purposes. Props should have considered better methods of address CPU load when REs were released or, at the very least, when R8 was under development. DAWs, such as Studio One, have both options available. With that said, a switch to simultaneously turn off an instrument, as well as all of the devices included in its Mix Channel, would suffice.
To answer the OP's question, I never upgrade software when it is initially released. Therefore, I will not upgrade to Reason 9 upon release. Will I ever upgrade to Reason 9? It depends on the additional features included in the upgrade, which will need to be significant for me to open my wallet.
At this present time, I am doubtful that Props will add enough features to the Reason platform that are meaningful to me in version 9. But, I hope that Props proves me wrong, because if version 9 fails to impress, Reason 7 will be my final purchased upgrade.
For the past few years, I have primarily used Studio One for all my recording needs, but Digital Performer 9 and Samplitude X2 are also used on occasion. Investing further in Reason, as well as platform-specific REs, is not cost effective for a DAW that I rarely use due to a feature set that is not on-par with my other tools.
True, hardware is important, but I know I will always reach the limit. So it is also a matter of getting the most out of as few as possible instruments and effects and I think that is my problem, to stack more and more instruments and effects for only one sound. Very often I am already out of CPU if I have only 3 synth tracks plus the drums. Still I think it is feature that is worth implementing and probably it will.platzangst wrote:Technically, every bit of this debate has to do with convenience. The problem does not affect me because I went and bought myself a computer that would have decent specs for many years of use. That in itself is a convenience. Believe me, I've had sub-par computers in the past, and had to go through hoops to get projects finished. In my experience, it is far more efficient to invest in better hardware than it is to wait around for the perfect feature that may or may not come regardless of how indignantly one demands it.satyr32 wrote:This has nothing to do with convenience but you cannot see the problem because it does not affect you.
I'll take your word for it that you have tried these things and they have not completely eliminated all CPU usage. But to be honest, I am fairly skeptical that some of the people clamoring the loudest for an equivalent feature to Ableton's freeze have even done that much.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
https://soundcloud.com/aeon_eternal
https://soundcloud.com/aeon_eternal
- platzangst
- Posts: 729
- Joined: 16 Jan 2015
This raises a technical question or two (that at this point may only be interesting to me): If Ableton is able to "freeze" a track so completely as to eliminate the idle load of any instrument or effect on its tracks, how is it doing that? Is it, in essence, deleting and re-loading the instrument itself on command? Or is it even doing that? Is there idle load on Ableton's frozen tracks, but nobody notices it? If this is a crucial feature for some folks, I think being able to dissect said feature beyond just the level of "I want this" would serve the conversation better.txh003 wrote:The problem, to my understanding, is that muting from the sequencer does not eliminate the idle load of the instrument itself.
-------------------------
On a side note, let me share with folks a workaround I used for some projects way back when, when my computer was not as strong. The DAW I was using did not have a freeze, but it could bounce to track. Some of the VSTs I used had a bug where, because my machine also had a really huge number of fonts, for some reason the VSTs involved would scan my entire font folder before loading. (Yes, this was a real bug, at least according to one of the developers I asked about it. WHY it had to do that, I don't know.) So I was faced with about 5-10 full minutes of loading time each time I opened the project.
What I would do is get the tracks more or less close to where I wanted them, bounce the track to an audio track, and then cut, NOT delete, the original track, and paste it into a second scratch file. That way, I would have the original VST and all its settings, in a separate song file, if I really felt I needed to go back and tweak something.
Even without the long load times, this was sometimes a tedious process, but it served its purpose, it preserved my original track, but let me detach it from the main project unless absolutely needed, saving probably hours of loading time.
So if one really needs to shave off CPU usage that much in Reason, it might not be as elegant as just making one click, but it could be done.
- manisnotabird
- Posts: 475
- Joined: 20 Feb 2015
- Location: Austin, TX
What would actually be cool, and would require very little effort on PH's part, is making the Malstrom oscillator section available as an oscillator type in Thor.
-
- Information
-
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests