Reason 10: Not Very Impressed

This forum is for discussing Reason. Questions, answers, ideas, and opinions... all apply.
User avatar
Oquasec
Posts: 2849
Joined: 05 Mar 2017

21 Apr 2018

As much as I like the rest of reason I feel like Fruity edition's grid and sequencer view is unmatched.
Producer/Programmer.
Reason, FLS and Cubase NFR user.

Goodbye
Posts: 220
Joined: 21 May 2017

21 Apr 2018

The problem isn't the skeuomorphism. It's everything else.

jctarvin
Posts: 15
Joined: 13 Jul 2016

22 Apr 2018

I continue to become a bit disappointed with Reason and I've been a user since version 2. Many other DAWS have the ability to draw Bezier curves for automation. Especially helpful for orchestral pieces. Yet, here we sit with point to point straight lines. I know this has been an issue raised many times in the past and has not been addressed.

While the "rack" concept was really great in the past, VST plugins are very probably the future. If our Propellerhead friends don't get with the program, we may all be using Ableton or some other DAW in the not too distant future. My VST plug ins will work there just fine.

deepndark
Posts: 1270
Joined: 16 Jan 2015
Location: Finland
Contact:

22 Apr 2018

I use Switch to convert to mp3. It is as easy as right clicking on a wav files and then it pops up the program to do it.
But hell, I usually also need a wav format version of the songs as well, so.. but if this would be added I'd like to render both, the wav and mp3 in once too.

madmacman
Posts: 786
Joined: 18 Jan 2015

23 Apr 2018

jctarvin wrote:
22 Apr 2018
If our Propellerhead friends don't get with the program, we may all be using Ableton or some other DAW in the not too distant future. My VST plug ins will work there just fine.
I tried Ableton several times over the years, but we never became friends. It somehow doesn't match with my way to create music. But not a bad software at all. IMHO, for Mac users there's only one Logic(al) choice. Of course this tightens your lock-in into the Apple world (AU, Mac only, etc.)

User avatar
Krell
Posts: 73
Joined: 06 Aug 2017

23 Apr 2018

I've been following this very interesting thread and while I agree with many of the points made, both for and against; and I certainly sympathise with the OP I think theres a bigger idea at work. Reason is not, by any stretch a great "DAW". It's a really inspiring virtual modular environment that shines with it's core identity but struggles to be what it's patently not.

I have and use three "DAW's". Reason, Logic and Bitwig. They all excel at some things and flounder in others. Why not use more than one? Use it for what it does best and combine the result? It's like having a dedicated mono synth, sequencer, poly and effects rack back in the day. Each device did it's thing well and the whole was greater than the sum of it's parts.

Reason: Amazing modular synth laboratory for exploration and sound creation. Rewire it in to...
Logic: Mix, arrange and shape a track easily.
Bitwig: Play live, loop and jam easily and spontaneously.

My only wish is for Reason to embrace vector scalable graphics and allow those of us cursed with sub par eyesight the ability to actually see the damn thing. Still.. it's worth the eyestrain for what it does do right.
Reason 12 // Bitwig 4 // Live 11 // Logic Pro X // Fabfilter // Soundtoys // Arturia // Vintage Hardware

madmacman
Posts: 786
Joined: 18 Jan 2015

23 Apr 2018

Krell wrote:
23 Apr 2018
Reason: Amazing modular synth laboratory for exploration and sound creation. Rewire it in to...
Logic: Mix, arrange and shape a track easily.
Bitwig: Play live, loop and jam easily and spontaneously.
I must admit: Reason's SSL mixer is one of the stronger parts for mixing purposes. And I enjoy it every time I use Reason. The mixers of other DAW's (I know Cubase and Logic) are a bit too "technical" (for the lack of a better word).

User avatar
Raveshaper
Posts: 1089
Joined: 16 Jan 2015

23 Apr 2018

Geltic Höhn wrote:
20 Apr 2018
And.... look at the behavior of Dr OctoRex, with handling Pattern Clips. 'Edit Automation' created a secondary lane in the sequencer (which for the way I use Rex, is totally redundant) AND between the now two lanes, there's no dividing line horizontally. That's just bad GUI design.

003.png
Let me just say that I am definitely on board with everything you have said in this thread, with minor personal exceptions that differ from my own choices. Those discrepancies include brand loyalty and continuing down the path you're on due to resources already invested. I am choosing to pursue success by admitting that using this tool simply is not working for me, so I will opt to "fail" at it and move on to something that works better. You spoke of efficiency, and to me personally this is the single most efficient choice when using Reason these days: don't use it. Drop it and pick something else that will grow with you and keep you challenged or surprised. Who wants to be consistently disappointed?

I respect your own personal choices as I'm sure you would respect mine. I would simply ask the following: how much has the time you have put into fighting these issues up to now been worth to you, and are you ready to pay that price over again moving forward? Bonus points: what's the upside gain of putting that time into learning something that will outrun your demands instead of beating a dead horse? Caveat: there is no one perfect program.

That out of the way, here's how I look at it.

Reason came out right at the end of the MIDI Tracker Era. Back then we had MIDI programs that looked like a DOS terminal scrolling through pages of hexadecimal. There was no piano roll and the sequencer was conceptually rotated 90 degrees clockwise so that it ran vertically with each bar of music as just a page of notes and velocities that were represented by abstract two character bytes. This stuff was all the rage in the 90s and was the foundation of a lot of early electronica. Back then, in the context of when Reason first launched, the very idea of having these big beautiful graphic displays of realistic looking devices was revolutionary in a way. Sure, VST was around back then already too, but Reason itself as a stand alone app was really the first place you could get that kind of experience built-in even though it was more akin to the trackers of the 90's than a DAW.

There were no clips in the sequencer, there was no audio input, there was no MIDI output, there were no third party plugins, the rack was a single and endlessly scrolling vertical stack of devices that mirrored the scrolling pages of its MIDI tracker forefathers. Much like them, Reason was just a sequencer you could use to trigger sounds, but with pretty pictures that made it feel more real. You can even find a magazine article where the Product Manager said Reason was neither intended to be nor ever would be a DAW. For the sake of understanding the intent in the first place, Reason was a daring design idea at a time when the predecessors of its core functionality had bytes of hex scrolling vertically as the whole of their UI. But beyond its looks, Reason was also meant as a sandbox for people who just wanted to make music at home that probably no one else would ever hear. A hobbyist play pen. Just so we're clear on the origins.

This mentality appears to run deep enough in the product and the team behind it that it's almost as though the developers are themselves only hobbyists in their respective trades as well. By that I mean that these little things you speak of all point to a lack of programming fundamentals. Intuitive things that anyone with experience would not fail to consider and instinctively implement, such as dynamically fading text brighter or darker according to the background color selected, or doing the same for grid lines. Likewise for the inconsistent display of changed names. All of these things seem like nitpicks, but they betray a much deeper problem in the software as a whole. All of these problems indicate badly written internal architecture.

Just a small example of what I mean is that if you have an object in code and it has a property called "name", everywhere that the property is referenced and made visible, the text should reflect the same value stored in "name". But object names do not behave this way in Reason. At one point the device, mix channel, and sequencer track could all have separate names that all pointed to the same thing; perhaps that's still true. Right-clicking to quickly attach cables uses an outmoded context menu that simply displays an exhaustive list of every device in your project rather than providing a hovering window with a search bar to find things lightning fast. It takes nearly as long to scroll through the list as it does to drag the cables over a long distance. Parameter values are one thing when displayed in the tooltip with the mouse hovering over the knob or button, and they are something entirely different inside of the Combinator programmer or automation lanes where you have to waste enormous amounts of time doing detective work in edit mode on the sequencer trying to find the numerical values that equal the decibel amounts or frequencies you need when programming a Combinator patch. Imagine if all of those values of decibel and frequency were standardized so that they were identical wherever you saw them. Think of how much time that would save you just with that one single change. How many projects more would you get done in that saved time? Who can say.

As a side note I want to specifically point out, parameter values are still in ranges of 0 to 127 not just because that is what MIDI uses, but because all data used to be represented by values in that range inside the old MIDI trackers.

These all seem annoying at first, but when you look at them as a programmer you quickly grow to understand what they are: quick additions to "just get something working and ship it" or worse "no one knows how to fix it so leave it that way" rather than well thought out and professionally crafted features. Your entire list of complaints is full of these lapses in fundamental application architecture. The cherry on top that seals its fate in my eyes is that nearly every major new addition to the software in the past two versions seems to have broken previously preferred behaviors that must then be reverted in point updates a few months later, nullifying the investment in the upgrade due to faulty behavior or changes nobody wanted that had to be removed. The dreaded patch audition Undo fiasco from version 8 rings a bell. With the right perspective, these things go from annoying to angering once you consider that it took nearly 20 years to get resizing notes and clips from the left side because the internal code was still, at its heart, just a MIDI tracker.

Brief history lesson for those new to the game: until version 8, I think, you had to drag clips and notes to the right and then shorten their right side to resize them "from the left". It was the only way. Really. Remember, this was a few years after 2010.

The basic point I am getting at here is you're right to be frustrated. But don't take it out on version 10. That does the version a disservice. It isn't the version that is bothersome, at least not to me because I refuse to buy it. What bothers me is that I have trouble paying money for something that is sold by people who appear to not know how to make what it is they're selling. That's the heart of it. What doesn't make sense in the app, what doesn't feel right, what frustrates you and me in every project where these things inevitably all add up and impact us with a death by a thousand cuts is that these things should not be written or designed the way they have been. These problems show that when it comes down to it, they know how to deliver pretty pictures that are good at seeming real but they don't know how to deliver a real and robust product underneath it. Each "new" thing they code breaks the install with increasing severity to the point that this time many couldn't even run version 10 when they got it. The anger, at least for me, comes down to being asked to purchase what feels like a working demonstration rather than a final product.

My advice is that if you take your music seriously and want to be professional with it, you can only benefit from dropping what isn't working and running with something that can only broaden your horizons. Don't like crashes? Other apps have crash protection while Reason has none. Don't like VST's? Several renowned producers make amazing material using only the stock stuff provided in their hosts of choice -- but having the option is always better than the limitation.

People are loyal to Reason a lot of the time because of how it forces them to identify as an individual and puzzle things out. That's fine. I myself worked on a project that patched new abilities into the program for 4 years. I know what it's like to fall asleep to that lullaby of being rugged and unique and very alone in a pile of wires and inconsistent device names with illegible colors on them. What that project taught me was that after all my work, I had to face the fact that Reason simply could not become what I wished I could accomplish through my ingenuity. If anything I now have x-ray vision into just how shockingly limited the program is down at its bones. I am proud of what I did, but I could have poured that 4 years into learning other things and actually producing music rather than fighting like hell to outsmart a highly limited and counterproductive program.

Another key thing to remember is that people thrive together, not in bubbles. Business, art, and much of life is all done socially. The real deals are done through handshakes, conversations, eye contact. The hardcore lone wolf cult world view of the Reason bubble will not prepare you for actually being in the world of music. Connecting and collaborating with others will do wonders. So to halt that ramble, either waste your time being loyal and alone or learn better tools and grow in your craft with others. That's as small as it gets.

My final thought: In Reason, you can surprise yourself with what you can figure out, given enough time. But if you only use Reason, you will never figure out just how much you can accomplish once you see what making music through modern computing can do. Things you can't imagine but instantly can't live without.
:reason: :ignition: :re: :refillpacker: Enhanced by DataBridge v5

madmacman
Posts: 786
Joined: 18 Jan 2015

23 Apr 2018

Raveshaper wrote:
23 Apr 2018
...
:shock:

sounds like the final swansong

User avatar
chimp_spanner
Posts: 2908
Joined: 06 Mar 2015

23 Apr 2018

I mean I appreciate how well it's articulated ;) And your experience and your needs are perfectly valid and important to you. Personally, I use Reason to pay the rent. If I felt it was THAT utterly unworkable and broken, I wouldn't use it. I have Cubase Pro 9.5. I could go back to that any time I want. And don't get me wrong, it's an amazing piece of software. It has many features I wish Reason had.

But on the flipside, Reason has features I wish Cubase had. Global undo. Automation that doesn't make me want to kill myself (even without bezier curves which, again, Cubase only got within the last few months). Total freedom and flexibility in routing between devices. Self contained audio files in the project. Easy controller assignment to anything on screen. Oddly enough I don't see people asking for those things on the Cubase forums. Maybe they're not as important to most people as they are to me, in which case I'm happy to accept that Reason is its own, niche thing, before it's a DAW. And I'm kinda cool with that.

Now *obviously* I'd love to see Reason with a full blown audio editor. Folders. Vector graphics and zoom. I'm not gonna argue that it doesn't need those things to be better. But without them, it's still good. But of course if the lack of a feature is really preventing anyone from working then absolutely try something else. Either as a substitute or in conjunction with Reason.

So yeah I mean, just use what works. For me Reason does, shortcomings and all. I still live in hope that we'll see some real gamechangers in future updates but for anyone waiting for Reason to become another Ableton in a .x update, that's just not realistic. Not without PH either changing Reason beyond recognition or just writing a new piece of software.

antic604

23 Apr 2018

Raveshaper wrote:
23 Apr 2018
My final thought: In Reason, you can surprise yourself with what you can figure out, given enough time. But if you only use Reason, you will never figure out just how much you can accomplish once you see what making music through modern computing can do. Things you can't imagine but instantly can't live without.
That very well put! And actually, it's not only something valid for Reason - one of my main issues when I bought Ableton Live was that in order to scroll the arrangement or zoom in/out, I needed to grab the line where bars are displayed and drag it left/right or up/down respectively. For me it was a painful workflow issue, having expected to do this with either a mouse wheel or with a trackpad gestures (+some modifier keys). Actually, just like it works in Reason.

When I complained about this, people would say that it's always been like that, it's a superior method and many other DAWs implemented the same solution as well.

To my surprise, proper use of trackpad gestures and mouse-wheel was one of the headline features in Live 10 introduced earlier this year.

So yes - the developers should really pay attention to what users of other DAWs are saying (and themselves they should use other DAWs too!) so that they know what's out there.

User avatar
Raveshaper
Posts: 1089
Joined: 16 Jan 2015

24 Apr 2018

antic604 wrote:
23 Apr 2018
To my surprise, proper use of trackpad gestures and mouse-wheel was one of the headline features in Live 10 introduced earlier this year.

So yes - the developers should really pay attention to what users of other DAWs are saying (and themselves they should use other DAWs too!) so that they know what's out there.
Right. I want to like Reason. I do. But it is basically a kit car. It looks like a fancy car, then you get in and fire it up and behold: the chirping sputter of a Volkswagen engine under a mostly well painted fiberglass shell. It cannot do what the marketing promises.

This heartbreak over the state of the program first started as I neared the end of my 4 year project. I built something similar to pitch edit, as well as a means of truly performing every aspect of the program live. I wanted to show what Reason could really do and it was a passion project that kept me going through some pretty dark times. I was excited to be pushing the frontier in new directions. I filled pages with math and graphs, charts and schematics. And then, when it was done, I had succeeded in showing what Reason could really do. It was just far less than I had ever thought.

Just look at a feature walkthrough for Studio One V3 or Cubase 9.5+, even Live 10 and you'll see what I mean. Light years ahead.

It really is a swan song for me. I just don't have years to spare wasting time waiting for a product to get its act together. I poured my soul into my attempt to revolutionize the way this program is used. It kills me that I failed not because of lack of effort but crippling limitations I couldn't do anything about.

I want that to sink in: I am just one man working alone scribbling things on paper and meticulously coding for 4 years in the lion's share of my spare time. I built a pitch edit tool. I built curved automation. I built networked connections that interlinked front panel controls. I even unlocked previously inaccessible features like VU meters and LEDs. Open communication between devices and looped back data. Unprecedented integrating with Midi controllers. One person did all that. Why can't the team at HQ get even a fraction of that done or have the foresight to see the potential? We're still begging in a vacuum for the basics to be done right.

So yes, I am moving on basically. I build things now and then, I collab with just_ian, but I find myself not wanting to run Reason simply because it feels stale and empty for me.

I have measured the worth of my project by my own harsh standards. I will make a proper walkthrough and demo hopefully this year. Maybe someone will find it as exciting as I did. But I guarantee that for all of its potential, it adds even more of a spotlight to the already frustrating aspects of the program.

The main rationale for staying with Reason for so long was I couldn't afford something else and I didn't actually believe that I could make "real" music. Someone else out there somewhere could, but not me. Both of those things have changed, and so have I.
:reason: :ignition: :re: :refillpacker: Enhanced by DataBridge v5

User avatar
chimp_spanner
Posts: 2908
Joined: 06 Mar 2015

24 Apr 2018

Hey we all gotta go through changes. The most important thing is that you’re at a place where you can create. Nothing else is more important. Still I hope you keep an eye on things from afar. Maybe one day it’ll change enough to be appealing again :) what kind of music do you make btw?

EdGrip
Posts: 2343
Joined: 03 Jun 2016

24 Apr 2018

I tried Studio One - it's dreamy for audio editing but otherwise I found it not a very fun place to be. I imagine Cubase to be similar.
Raveshaper has inspired me to demo Live 10 - the only other DAW I ever fancied. Maybe Live Intro can be a bit on the side one day.

User avatar
pjeudy
Posts: 1559
Joined: 17 Jan 2015

24 Apr 2018

Raveshaper wrote:
24 Apr 2018
antic604 wrote:
23 Apr 2018
Right. I want to like Reason. I do. But it is basically a kit car. It looks like a fancy car, then you get in and fire it up and behold: the chirping sputter of a Volkswagen engine under a mostly well painted fiberglass shell. It cannot do what the marketing promises.

This heartbreak over the state of the program first started as I neared the end of my 4 year project. I built something similar to pitch edit, as well as a means of truly performing every aspect of the program live. I wanted to show what Reason could really do and it was a passion project that kept me going through some pretty dark times. I was excited to be pushing the frontier in new directions. I filled pages with math and graphs, charts and schematics. And then, when it was done, I had succeeded in showing what Reason could really do. It was just far less than I had ever thought.

Just look at a feature walkthrough for Studio One V3 or Cubase 9.5+, even Live 10 and you'll see what I mean. Light years ahead.

It really is a swan song for me. I just don't have years to spare wasting time waiting for a product to get its act together. I poured my soul into my attempt to revolutionize the way this program is used. It kills me that I failed not because of lack of effort but crippling limitations I couldn't do anything about.

I want that to sink in: I am just one man working alone scribbling things on paper and meticulously coding for 4 years in the lion's share of my spare time. I built a pitch edit tool. I built curved automation. I built networked connections that interlinked front panel controls. I even unlocked previously inaccessible features like VU meters and LEDs. Open communication between devices and looped back data. Unprecedented integrating with Midi controllers. One person did all that. Why can't the team at HQ get even a fraction of that done or have the foresight to see the potential? We're still begging in a vacuum for the basics to be done right.

So yes, I am moving on basically. I build things now and then, I collab with just_ian, but I find myself not wanting to run Reason simply because it feels stale and empty for me.

I have measured the worth of my project by my own harsh standards. I will make a proper walkthrough and demo hopefully this year. Maybe someone will find it as exciting as I did. But I guarantee that for all of its potential, it adds even more of a spotlight to the already frustrating aspects of the program.

The main rationale for staying with Reason for so long was I couldn't afford something else and I didn't actually believe that I could make "real" music. Someone else out there somewhere could, but not me. Both of those things have changed, and so have I.
Right On!
I have used REASON for 7-8 years. And I realized that it's Propellerhead who pushed me away from REASON not the other way around. Reason never grew with me...sure it offered RE's and a few updates here and there ...but what's funny is that by the time Propellerhead implemented a long desired feature I was already months if not years past wanting that feature and Have realized in my growth that there is another useful feature that I felt that I could use.

I understand that implementing features in all DAWs take time (of course it does) but Props seemed to take even longer and when they do deliver said feature it feels like Dam..that thing took this long?! which inturn gave me the impression that at this rate of implementation, it will take eons for the REASON to push you technically as far as DAW/workflow tools is concerned.

For example I have been using Studio One everyday going on a year plus now...and still just recently I was floored by a simple no big deal feature it had. The reason I found this simple feature is because I was telling my self "man it would be useful if I could do this or that with the browser" then I attempted to do what I was thinking of and BANG ..it worked just like I wanted...I was amazed by that. Often after using Studio One I close the software saying "wow those developers @presonus almost thought of everything"

It usually feels like there are many ways of working that is waiting to be discovered using S1. My experience with REASON wasn't like that. The only discovery time I felt with REASON is when it comes to routing devices in a combinator. And of course REASON does it best. But once I'm done discovering a cool Audio/CV routing design.... the rest of the DAW felt outdated.
Reason has it's crowd and I used to be neck deep in that crowd since PUF. The software has grown definitely (but not enough)...and many many people love it and that's cool and we will all have opinion and our own experiences with REASON.

But just in case Some one in the Propellerheads bubble is reading these boards/threads my 2 cents is that :
I didn't leave REASON, REASON pushed my away buy taking too long too flex it's DAW muscle in a digital computer age, where as a user who is growing and learning. I felt that REASON didn't implement workflow features that pushed or matured the software enough. Sure change did come to REASON but said changes took sooo long (years) that by then, Propellerhead REASON had given me plenty of Reason to flirt with another DAW which I had never ever contemplated before in my 7 years day in and day out use of REASON.

Oh, also @Propellerhead.....the MIDI editor section in REASON in my opinion is the worst of any TOP 3 DAW you can choose. There is nothing Modern, smart or innovative with REASON's Editors AT ALL. And it's been like that FOR YEARS!
Yea it was cool at the beginning and yes I'm aware of the "few" additions to R9 -R10..still X years later it's the most embarrassing part of the DAW in my opinion as far as what should be and is possible technologically with a MIDI/Audio editor in 2018 and 2019 just around the corner.
My opinion is that Propellerhead REASON needs a complete rewrite!
P.S: people should stop saying "No it won't happen" when referring to a complete rewrite of REASON. I have 3 letters for ya....VST
Mon Dec 11, 2017 1:53 pm

User avatar
Raveshaper
Posts: 1089
Joined: 16 Jan 2015

24 Apr 2018

pjeudy wrote:
24 Apr 2018
Right On!
I have used REASON for 7-8 years. And I realized that it's Propellerhead who pushed me away from REASON not the other way around. Reason never grew with me...sure it offered RE's and a few updates here and there ...but what's funny is that by the time Propellerhead implemented a long desired feature I was already months if not years past wanting that feature and Have realized in my growth that there is another useful feature that I felt that I could use.

I understand that implementing features in all DAWs take time (of course it does) but Props seemed to take even longer and when they do deliver said feature it feels like Dam..that thing took this long?! which inturn gave me the impression that at this rate of implementation, it will take eons for the REASON to push you technically as far as DAW/workflow tools is concerned.

For example I have been using Studio One everyday going on a year plus now...and still just recently I was floored by a simple no big deal feature it had. The reason I found this simple feature is because I was telling my self "man it would be useful if I could do this or that with the browser" then I attempted to do what I was thinking of and BANG ..it worked just like I wanted...I was amazed by that. Often after using Studio One I close the software saying "wow those developers @presonus almost thought of everything"

It usually feels like there are many ways of working that is waiting to be discovered using S1. My experience with REASON wasn't like that. The only discovery time I felt with REASON is when it comes to routing devices in a combinator. And of course REASON does it best. But once I'm done discovering a cool Audio/CV routing design.... the rest of the DAW felt outdated.
Reason has it's crowd and I used to be neck deep in that crowd since PUF. The software has grown definitely (but not enough)...and many many people love it and that's cool and we will all have opinion and our own experiences with REASON.

But just in case Some one in the Propellerheads bubble is reading these boards/threads my 2 cents is that :
I didn't leave REASON, REASON pushed my away buy taking too long too flex it's DAW muscle in a digital computer age, where as a user who is growing and learning. I felt that REASON didn't implement workflow features that pushed or matured the software enough. Sure change did come to REASON but said changes took sooo long (years) that by then, Propellerhead REASON had given me plenty of Reason to flirt with another DAW which I had never ever contemplated before in my 7 years day in and day out use of REASON.

Oh, also @Propellerhead.....the MIDI editor section in REASON in my opinion is the worst of any TOP 3 DAW you can choose. There is nothing Modern, smart or innovative with REASON's Editors AT ALL. And it's been like that FOR YEARS!
Yea it was cool at the beginning and yes I'm aware of the "few" additions to R9 -R10..still X years later it's the most embarrassing part of the DAW in my opinion as far as what should be and is possible technologically with a MIDI/Audio editor in 2018 and 2019 just around the corner.
Other DAW Users: RTFM
Reason Users: I read the manual and it's still fubar!

I'll be joining you on the other side of the fence soon Pjeudy. Can't wait.
:reason: :ignition: :re: :refillpacker: Enhanced by DataBridge v5

User avatar
QVprod
Moderator
Posts: 3488
Joined: 15 Jan 2015
Contact:

24 Apr 2018

Raveshaper wrote:
24 Apr 2018


Just look at a feature walkthrough for Studio One V3 or Cubase 9.5+, even Live 10 and you'll see what I mean. Light years ahead.

It really is a swan song for me. I just don't have years to spare wasting time waiting for a product to get its act together. I poured my soul into my attempt to revolutionize the way this program is used. It kills me that I failed not because of lack of effort but crippling limitations I couldn't do anything about.
pjeudy wrote:
24 Apr 2018
But just in case Some one in the Propellerheads bubble is reading these boards/threads my 2 cents is that :
I didn't leave REASON, REASON pushed my away buy taking too long too flex it's DAW muscle in a digital computer age, where as a user who is growing and learning. I felt that REASON didn't implement workflow features that pushed or matured the software enough. Sure change did come to REASON but said changes took sooo long (years) that by then, Propellerhead REASON had given me plenty of Reason to flirt with another DAW which I had never ever contemplated before in my 7 years day in and day out use of REASON.
The common theme to me here seems to be expecting one thing to cover all needs. Truth is that's rare. There's this really weird implied thought from the PUF and even here sometimes that a user needs to be tied to only one DAW. They're tools, use them as you see fit. Most commercial releases go though at least 2 DAWs, one for the production, and another for the mixdown and/or additional recordings. I found myself getting frustrated at Reason at one point a few years back, so I bought Studio One because it excels at everything Reason doesn't excel at. Especially audio recording, editing, and mixing. The end result? I'm no longer frustrated. Nothing inspires me to work the way Reason does, but I have Studio One for the more technical things I need to accomplish. They complement each other in that regard. Truth of the matter is, all DAWs have certain things about them that take a long time to change or evolve. Studio One still doesn't allow you to link plugins on different channels the same way Pro Tools does. Pro Tools was the last DAW to get an offline bounce option. Everything has its faults, but by all means if you find a DAW that inspires you just as much or more than Reason and does everything you need it to, use it.

madmacman
Posts: 786
Joined: 18 Jan 2015

24 Apr 2018

QVprod wrote:
24 Apr 2018
The common theme to me here seems to be expecting one thing to cover all needs. Truth is that's rare. There's this really weird implied thought from the PUF and even here sometimes that a user needs to be tied to only one DAW. They're tools, use them as you see fit. Most commercial releases go though at least 2 DAWs, one for the production, and another for the mixdown and/or additional recordings.
I heard this argument several times from you, but I never could imagine how it works. I suppose it's a p.i.t.a. to export each snippet (or clip), bounce it to audio if necessary, and then place it at the right position in the target DAW.

As a hobbyist I must say: if "moving" a project to its next stage into another DAW takes me a whole day, then it's not a workable solution. And what if I need some corrections to tracks or clips?

Maybe it's related to the style of music one does. I do mainly electronic style (sort of EDM), so I'm always in the process between devices, the sequencer tracks and the mixer. I need the "best" of the DAW all at once and don't make music in a sequential way composing --> arranging --> recording --> mixing.

And I feel I've reached a point where Reason's audio & midi editing comes to its limits compared to other DAW's. That's why my doubts grow.

User avatar
QVprod
Moderator
Posts: 3488
Joined: 15 Jan 2015
Contact:

25 Apr 2018

madmacman wrote:
24 Apr 2018
QVprod wrote:
24 Apr 2018
The common theme to me here seems to be expecting one thing to cover all needs. Truth is that's rare. There's this really weird implied thought from the PUF and even here sometimes that a user needs to be tied to only one DAW. They're tools, use them as you see fit. Most commercial releases go though at least 2 DAWs, one for the production, and another for the mixdown and/or additional recordings.
I heard this argument several times from you, but I never could imagine how it works. I suppose it's a p.i.t.a. to export each snippet (or clip), bounce it to audio if necessary, and then place it at the right position in the target DAW.

As a hobbyist I must say: if "moving" a project to its next stage into another DAW takes me a whole day, then it's not a workable solution. And what if I need some corrections to tracks or clips?

Maybe it's related to the style of music one does. I do mainly electronic style (sort of EDM), so I'm always in the process between devices, the sequencer tracks and the mixer. I need the "best" of the DAW all at once and don't make music in a sequential way composing --> arranging --> recording --> mixing.

And I feel I've reached a point where Reason's audio & midi editing comes to its limits compared to other DAW's. That's why my doubts grow.
It's not complicated at all. The Bounce Mixer channels option in reason will give you stems that you simply drag into another DAW. Everything remains lined up because its each individual track that's exported from start to finish. It doesn't take all day, in fact it's a very quick process. How that would fit into your workflow would depend on what the 'best of a DAW' is to you. I generally do my mixing in Studio One, particularly if I'm adding vocals as I produce for artists as well as for myself. However I finish everything that needs to be done to the song (aside from a final mix) within Reason itself. But the fact that I mix in Studio One doesn't mean that I don't use Reason's mixer at all. In fact there's of course some level of mixing that occurs (often times a majority of the mixing), but when adding vocals, the instruments in the mix will often times need adjustments no matter how complete the instrumental mix is. If a correction is needed on a track after bouncing stems, just correct it and drag in back into the other DAW replacing the audio with the mistake. But how often will corrections be needed if you feel the song is finished?

As far as midi editing, what DAW I start creating in is entirely dependent on what I intend to make. Granted I'm a keyboard player so my midi editing needs are far less than that of someone who pencils midi in on the piano roll, but songs that may need advanced editing like if I know I'm going to program live drums or realistic strings (or primarily live sounding instruments in general), I do just that entire song in Studio One. I don't bounce things back and forth. Essentially, there are songs I do in Reason and songs I do in Studio One, and if I ever needed to Rewire (unlikely as I can do full productions in either DAW independent of the other) it's easy to bounce rewire channels in Studio One as audio.

That said I'm not saying my workflow is perfect for everyone, again as I said, if there's a DAW that does everything you need, use it. In my case, as a creative tool, Reason does the majority of what I need, and I just supplement what it's not good at. Using what works definitely beats being frustrated at something not doing what you want though imho.

madmacman
Posts: 786
Joined: 18 Jan 2015

25 Apr 2018

@QVprod: Thanks for clarification. Highly appreciated! :thumbs_up: :)

Goodbye
Posts: 220
Joined: 21 May 2017

25 Apr 2018

I think the problem here is that there is no trajectory - there is nothing whatsoever being done to improve the now ancient UI and update or resolve it's myriad issues. I don't think anyone really expects it to do everything perfectly, but nothing has been improved at all for years. PH have sat back and done nothing to improve the skin and bones of Reason and what we are now at the point where people are giving up any hope of this happening. I think if PH didn't have such a hold over people who have invested in REs, many more would be jumping ship (myself among them).

I mean they really have done almost nothing (other than VST support and tweaks to the file browser) for literally years.

We can all imagine that a new version is just around the corner, and I really hope it is, but we have to face the truth that maybe it isn't or maybe it's still years away. Or maybe when it arrives it will be another cynical content release.

User avatar
Loque
Moderator
Posts: 11176
Joined: 28 Dec 2015

25 Apr 2018

Goodbye wrote:
25 Apr 2018
I think the problem here is that there is no trajectory - there is nothing whatsoever being done to improve the now ancient UI
The all requested "themes"...? Personally i never needed that. For me its a waste of development resources.
Reason12, Win10

madmacman
Posts: 786
Joined: 18 Jan 2015

25 Apr 2018

Loque wrote:
25 Apr 2018
Goodbye wrote:
25 Apr 2018
I think the problem here is that there is no trajectory - there is nothing whatsoever being done to improve the now ancient UI
The all requested "themes"...? Personally i never needed that. For me its a waste of development resources.
Don't think that this was meant by Goodbye - new themes are only a welcomed side effect for scalable (vector?) UI which adapts to whatever display you use.

BTW: Ableton 10 does really nice (but it took them >5 years since 9). Freely scalable UI

Goodbye
Posts: 220
Joined: 21 May 2017

25 Apr 2018

Didn't mean themes. I'm talking about the UI of the sequencer and the early-2000s resolution graphics.

User avatar
Loque
Moderator
Posts: 11176
Joined: 28 Dec 2015

25 Apr 2018

madmacman wrote:
25 Apr 2018
Loque wrote:
25 Apr 2018


The all requested "themes"...? Personally i never needed that. For me its a waste of development resources.
Don't think that this was meant by Goodbye - new themes are only a welcomed side effect for scalable (vector?) UI which adapts to whatever display you use.

BTW: Ableton 10 does really nice (but it took them >5 years since 9). Freely scalable UI
Themes doesnt have any relation to scalable or vector graphics. Implementing themes in UIs uses lot of development resources, especially if implemented in an existing code. That is obviously the reason why it is not everywhere implemented. But hey, it looks fancy - that is what users want, right?

As i said, i would rather had seen functional improvements than fancy GUI stuff. And as we also had seen, some ppl doent like this colore, want more to adjust here and there. I found myself in the past to waste too much time to adjust the look&feel of a application instead of just using it. The overall benefit of customizing GUIs is something i never realy had seen.

Ofc we are talking about different things, than you build up a application from scratch, especially today where you can have frameworks and stuff, that already support all that fancy things out of the box.

Sometimes all those discussions about GUI makes me wonder what ppl really do with Reason? Looking at it? It is a god damn tool to work with. And i am pretty sure, as soon as PH made it more customizable, more themese, vector graphics, look like every other DAW, fancy little buttons and big menus all over the place which nobody understands or even knows, the same ppl would start crying about: It looks so bad, it is so difficult, the workflow is worse, the colors, the big scaled UI is always in my way, blablabla... Just good we have the internet and we can talk about it again and again and again...
Reason12, Win10

Post Reply
  • Information
  • Who is online

    Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 28 guests