What makes Reason so inspiring?

This forum is for discussing Reason. Questions, answers, ideas, and opinions... all apply.
User avatar
candybag
Posts: 46
Joined: 26 Feb 2018
Location: Sweden
Contact:

02 Sep 2018

NekujaK wrote:
31 Aug 2018
Everything fits together like you expect it to. And like it or not, most of that has to do with Reason's skeuomorphic approach, which I for one, adore.

I've used many other DAWs, and they all feel like computer applications, no different than using MS Word or Photoshop - features are summoned from menus and buttons, and appear in isolated windows unrelated to anything else around them. When I'm using Reason, I feel like I'm in an "environment" specifically designed for music creation. Everything is connected to everything else, and fits together logically and intuitively. It's a thing of beauty.
Nailed it, couldn't have said it better myself!
Yamaha HS7 - HD600 - Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 - Akai MPK261 - AT2050 - Auralex Project 2™ Roominator Kit
9900K - 16 GB - 3xXB270HU - GTX 1080 ti

User avatar
Ahornberg
Posts: 1904
Joined: 15 Jan 2016
Location: Vienna, Austria
Contact:

03 Sep 2018

candybag wrote:
02 Sep 2018
NekujaK wrote:
31 Aug 2018
Everything fits together like you expect it to. And like it or not, most of that has to do with Reason's skeuomorphic approach, which I for one, adore.

I've used many other DAWs, and they all feel like computer applications, no different than using MS Word or Photoshop - features are summoned from menus and buttons, and appear in isolated windows unrelated to anything else around them. When I'm using Reason, I feel like I'm in an "environment" specifically designed for music creation. Everything is connected to everything else, and fits together logically and intuitively. It's a thing of beauty.
Nailed it, couldn't have said it better myself!
The skeuomorphic approach is what makes me come back to Reason after using another DAW (other DAWs have features I miss in Reason that I sometimes need, so this is why I use other DAWs from time to time). I recently worked in Ableton Live and it felt like working in MS Excel. It's like touching a cheap plastic keyboard instead of a wooden-maid piano. Reason gives me the look and feel of using high quality instruments and effects. And I can distinguish one synth/fx/utility from another simply by the different colours and shapes used in the GUI. And I love the animated cables (in contrast, Softube's Modular looks so nicely skeuomorphic but these ugly "cables" prevent me from using it more often).

User avatar
Jagwah
Posts: 2549
Joined: 16 Jan 2015

03 Sep 2018

For all the complaining we do we really should stop and appreciate Reason more often in ways like this, I will use this occasion to vent some positivity.

I love Reason and I'd never trade it for anything else. I spent a few years in the beginning using it obsessively and from that I have become very familiar with the environment and I'm very grateful for this. I've recently had a break and I am beyond excited to be returning.

Get your racks out! Reason in your jocks! Reason 7 FTW! :D

:reason: <3

Great thread antic604!

User avatar
rgdaniel
Posts: 592
Joined: 07 Sep 2017
Location: Canada

03 Sep 2018

Reason was there for me after Gibson played catch-and-kill with my beloved Opcode Studio Vision... those wiggling cables put the smile back on my face...

User avatar
selig
RE Developer
Posts: 11685
Joined: 15 Jan 2015
Location: The NorthWoods, CT, USA

03 Sep 2018

Here's a different twist on this question:
For younger users, what makes Reason so un-inspiring? I've heard so many stories of Reason users showing Reason to their kids and having them pretty much go "meh" and run to Logic and Live and love it.

My theory is that for anyone who's used hardware, Reason can make total sense (but not for everyone, naturally). Many here have suggested it is that relationship that draws them in.

But what about for someone who has no hardware experience to relate to - does Reason actually slow you down by forcing the hardware paradigm on the user?

I often wonder if Skeuomorphism's strongest attribute is in being a bridge between hardware and software worlds, and is only necessary for the first few generations of users to make the move from physical to virtual control of information.

Seems we are already witnessing the first generation of kids who never DIDN'T have a computer screen in their face all their life. How will interfaces adapt to a world of users that have to purpose for a physical reference, who may even be put off by the unnecessary relationship to this antiquated world?

I keep wondering how the DAW of the future will look, and I am more convinced it will evolve away from the literal approach mimicking the physical world (as a rule for the base UI, not as a strict rule for all plugins etc.).

But then the question becomes, what will make the DAW of the future "inspiring", since I believe that is a key question future designers should/will be asking.
:)
Selig Audio, LLC

scratchnsnifff
Posts: 1423
Joined: 21 Sep 2016

03 Sep 2018

I like cables :puf_smile:
Mayor of plucktown :evil:

antic604

03 Sep 2018

selig wrote:
03 Sep 2018
But what about for someone who has no hardware experience to relate to - does Reason actually slow you down by forcing the hardware paradigm on the user?
I actually hinted on this in the OP, because although I'm not young (42 soon) I never really worked on hardware.

My experience of Reason coming from Live & Bitwig from typically utilitarian point of view is that it indeed takes more time to patch things and it gets frustratingly more so with complex patches / projects, especially if halfway through you decide you want to change something. If in Bitwig I want to do some multiband processing I'll just drag in Multiband FX 3, set the cross-overs and drag the effects into 3 slots. In Reason I need splitters and mergers, likely a Combinator and all of this will be presented as a vertical stack of devices, that doesn't correspond visually with my parallel processing signal flow. God forbid I'd like to automate some of those effects or crossover points, then I'll get x-number of separate tracks in sequencer, that have the tendency to show up in random places and are not inheriting the color from "main" track. Sure, it's relatively "easy" to visually follow the signal flow which is not a given in Live or especially Bitwig (where you can nest devices in themselves), but the actual re-patching of a big & complex rack is really tough. Like for example dragging a cable from 1st column to the 5th, where each column has 20 devices, it takes so much time that by the time I get there I sometimes forget what signal was it - L, R, gate or CV? Or you sometimes re-arrange tracks in Sequencer or Mixer and it ends up messing up your Rack (or vice versa). Or you change name of something in one place and it doesn't affect it in another. Also, the fact that I couldn't punch in exact value for the knob or slider was driving me mad for the first few weeks, until I started appreciating doing it be ear - in the end I won't here a difference between 250Hz and 247Hz or -6dB and -5.94dB, so why bother. But I really struggled with it.

On the other hand - as I said - for small to medium scale projects the looks of the Rack and patching is incredibly rewarding, because I feel more connected to the patch, I have to think about it and plan it ahead. And I also can make my rack varied and colorful - I'll go out of my way to use different instruments & effects for different tracks, so that I can easily know where I am in the Rack. To the point that when I'm shopping for REs and considering two alternatives, I'll pick the one that I expect will look better or will stand out more in the Rack (obviously, to certain extent - quality of it is on the 1st place :) )

And there are some things that are faster than in other DAWs (that I'm familiar with), like for example getting a rough mix: volume balance, LPF/HPF filtering, compression and EQ are a breeze with the Mixer and very intuitive once you're familiar with it.

But I can also recognise how the stuff I like can be a turn off for someone else - Live or Bitwig look uniform, ascetic, minimalistic, which goes in line with current hippie trends. Like reading an e-book - I don't need it to pretend to be a real, physical book to appreciate it. Or like with buying music - only few years ago I loved unwraping the CD, the smell, the artistry of the inlay, etc. but nowadays the cover in the file that I buy or stream is enough. So I get it that Reason might look and feel dated.

User avatar
EnochLight
Moderator
Posts: 8405
Joined: 17 Jan 2015
Location: Imladris

03 Sep 2018

NekujaK wrote:
31 Aug 2018
I've used many other DAWs, and they all feel like computer applications, no different than using MS Word or Photoshop - features are summoned from menus and buttons, and appear in isolated windows unrelated to anything else around them. When I'm using Reason, I feel like I'm in an "environment" specifically designed for music creation. Everything is connected to everything else, and fits together logically and intuitively. It's a thing of beauty.
I feel inspired just reading this! :puf_smile:
Win 10 | Ableton Live 11 Suite |  Reason 12 | i7 3770k @ 3.5 Ghz | 16 GB RAM | RME Babyface Pro | Akai MPC Live 2 & Akai Force | Roland System 8, MX1, TB3 | Dreadbox Typhon | Korg Minilogue XD

User avatar
selig
RE Developer
Posts: 11685
Joined: 15 Jan 2015
Location: The NorthWoods, CT, USA

03 Sep 2018

antic604 wrote:
03 Sep 2018
selig wrote:
03 Sep 2018
But what about for someone who has no hardware experience to relate to - does Reason actually slow you down by forcing the hardware paradigm on the user?
I actually hinted on this in the OP, because although I'm not young (42 soon) I never really worked on hardware.
I'm talking about the generation born in the last 10-20 years. Doesn't matter if you actually worked on hardware or not - when you were a teenager, music wasn't not computer based. You could use computers, but you still needed hardware. So even if you didn't work on hardware, you were exposed to a world where there were no "devices" you carried with you, or a world where computers potentially dominated your life. It's not just about music production…
antic604 wrote:
03 Sep 2018

But I can also recognise how the stuff I like can be a turn off for someone else - Live or Bitwig look uniform, ascetic, minimalistic, which goes in line with current hippie trends. Like reading an e-book - I don't need it to pretend to be a real, physical book to appreciate it. Or like with buying music - only few years ago I loved unwraping the CD, the smell, the artistry of the inlay, etc. but nowadays the cover in the file that I buy or stream is enough. So I get it that Reason might look and feel dated.
And it's also not just about how it looks and feels - it's about how folks relate and interact. If a touch screen is your "world", how do knobs and buttons and sliders even fit in? Pretty soon everything in our world will be more based on this paradigm, from cars to homes to schools and to the workplace. Technology is even invading the outdoors world!

In other words, in a world with no knobs/faders etc., how does an interface with knobs and faders even begin to make sense (other than a vintage look or nostalgia)? What will be creatively "inspiring" in 20 years?
Selig Audio, LLC

User avatar
EnochLight
Moderator
Posts: 8405
Joined: 17 Jan 2015
Location: Imladris

03 Sep 2018

selig wrote:
03 Sep 2018
In other words, in a world with no knobs/faders etc., how does an interface with knobs and faders even begin to make sense (other than a vintage look or nostalgia)? What will be creatively "inspiring" in 20 years?
I could be wrong, but I think this sort of paradigm has already been addressed in current software. Humans still react to visual data the same: a pie chart is a pie chart. A linear graph is a linear graph. It's very likely that software 20 years from now will still use visual representations of sliders and knobs because it's universally understood and easy to interpret data. Even minimalist DAW like Live and Bitwig still rely on such representations for their meters, faders, and knobs. I don't think being completely skeuomorphic is required, and hasn't been for some time.

It's fairly evident that Reason's "rack" approach will remain a vestige of a bygone era, but Propellerhead does seem to bridge the virtual world in the rack, mixer, and sequencer fairly well, IMHO. On an aside, someone posted elsewhere in another thread an awesome "documentary" on Prop's approach to software GUI/UX. Can't remember who posted it or where it is - I'll try and find it. It's a good watch!

*EDIT: found it!

Also, here's the article mentioned in the video below at the 8:34 mark:

https://theoutline.com/post/2157/why-ar ... i=2ye6eiyt



On another aside, Scott "skeuomorphism" Forstall himself had some choice words on where things have gone with iOS since his firing. One thing that still makes sense today? .. When a 2 year old can pick up an iPad and get around, you know you're still on the right track:

https://9to5mac.com/2017/06/21/scott-fo ... gn-debate/
Win 10 | Ableton Live 11 Suite |  Reason 12 | i7 3770k @ 3.5 Ghz | 16 GB RAM | RME Babyface Pro | Akai MPC Live 2 & Akai Force | Roland System 8, MX1, TB3 | Dreadbox Typhon | Korg Minilogue XD

User avatar
selig
RE Developer
Posts: 11685
Joined: 15 Jan 2015
Location: The NorthWoods, CT, USA

03 Sep 2018

EnochLight wrote:
03 Sep 2018
selig wrote:
03 Sep 2018
In other words, in a world with no knobs/faders etc., how does an interface with knobs and faders even begin to make sense (other than a vintage look or nostalgia)? What will be creatively "inspiring" in 20 years?
I could be wrong, but I think this sort of paradigm has already been addressed in current software. Humans still react to visual data the same: a pie chart is a pie chart. A linear graph is a linear graph. It's very likely that software 20 years from now will still use visual representations of sliders and knobs because it's universally understood and easy to interpret data. Even minimalist DAW like Live and Bitwig still rely on such representations for their meters, faders, and knobs. I don't think being completely skeuomorphic is required, and hasn't been for some time.

It's fairly evident that Reason's "rack" approach will remain a vestige of a bygone era, but Propellerhead does seem to bridge the virtual world in the rack, mixer, and sequencer fairly well, IMHO. On an aside, someone posted elsewhere in another thread an awesome "documentary" on Prop's approach to software GUI/UX. Can't remember who posted it or where it is - I'll try and find it. It's a good watch!

*EDIT: found it!

Also, here's the article mentioned in the video below at the 8:34 mark:

https://theoutline.com/post/2157/why-ar ... i=2ye6eiyt



On another aside, Scott "skeuomorphism" Forstall himself had some choice words on where things have gone with iOS since his firing. One thing that still makes sense today? .. When a 2 year old can pick up an iPad and get around, you know you're still on the right track:

https://9to5mac.com/2017/06/21/scott-fo ... gn-debate/
Great points, and of course I totally agree that circles, squares and rectangles still work well (and better than text blocks) for a GUI (emphasis on the "G"). I was more talking about the hardware paradigm than the basics of control design.

But even beyond that there are gestures and invisible interfaces that are applicable for certain interfaces, though for historical reasons I don't see music software moving far beyond the circles/squares from the hardware world for EVERY interface concept. At least not all at once. Think of how far the EQ interface has evolved, from one or two knobs and a few switches to a 2D "x/y" touch screen interface, which is about as far from knobs and sliders as almost anything out there.

Agree that an ideal UI is something a child can understand, which is why I started the conversation talking about how many teens don't seem to "get" Reason, and prefer other DAW software instead. And my theory is that they don't have a hardware background on any level to related it to, which means they FIRST have to grasp that concept, THEN they can learn how to operate Reason.

If looking to "speak" to the next generation, maybe better to cut to the chase, with the end-goal of creating inspiring software.
Selig Audio, LLC

123repeater
Posts: 67
Joined: 20 May 2016

03 Sep 2018

To me reason looks like a playground. The other DAWS didnt when I was meandering around in the early days before going all in on REASON.

I feel like if they never updated anything again I would have plenty of firepower to accomplish anything I can fathom. Generally the things they add end up finding their way into my arsenal too though.

Like fancy guitars vs regular guitars its a hell of a lot more about what you do with them than what they do for you. At this point I could make great music with Garageband but for me Reason is the glove that fits best. If i were starting from scratch id use ABLETON cause of the live aspects I hope reason eventually adds.

User avatar
Reasonable man
Posts: 589
Joined: 14 Jul 2016

04 Sep 2018

Talking of Gui's ...this is the dude who made malstrom. Quare yoke.


antic604

04 Sep 2018

123repeater wrote:
03 Sep 2018
To me reason looks like a playground.
This ^^^

calebbrennan
Posts: 315
Joined: 16 Aug 2016

05 Sep 2018

Reason is inspiring because of it's limits.

And the fact that it does not crash and is solid and stable.

The programming is always solid

Caveat: I don't use VST
(the addition of Vst's are a whole other hornets nest that Prop heads were extremely reluctant to take on
From what I read here If you want to use your Kontact or similar,......... rewire to another DAW ,
take that with a grain of salt, as I don't use them.

It's Reason's rock solid stability and simplicity that makes it my choice

FrankJaeger
Posts: 302
Joined: 17 Jan 2015

08 Sep 2018

I like that Reason just gets out of your way when making music. Maybe it's because I'm so used to using it, but it almost never seems to block you from just making music. You set everything up once when you first open the app and then it's smooth sailing from there. Want an audio track? Right click and choose create audio track and it's done... Start recording! No pop-up windows asking for settings that you've input a thousand times already (I'm looking at you Logic).

I also like that there's always more to learn. Some new cable routing trick or the like. I only found out late last year that Reason had a comp edit mode for audio. Once I learned how to record takes and use it (very small learning curve as it's super intuitive), I couldn't understand how I'd gotten along without it that whole time.You get a near perfect vocal performance for your song with that feature.

The GUI to me is aesthetically pleasing and inspirational. I love how everything is in a rack and not some pop-up window. The VSTs do have pop-up windows, but that can't be helped I guess. Either way it's a minor gripe.

When I was a really really shitty producer (now I'm just a really shitty one), I tried switching over to Logic X and found myself frustrated by the way Logic handled everything. Not because Logic sucks, but because it didn't do it like Reason did it. I had the same problem with Ableton Live 8. I've also tried Pro Tools (that's some really ugly, fun sucking software right there) and found it to be less than appealing to say the leat. Bottom line is Reason is the GOAT!!!!
Midniite Music
My Gear: 2021 Macbook Pro M1/UA Volt 176 Interface/JBL Series 3, 8" Monitors/Akai MPK mini mk3/

groggy1
Posts: 466
Joined: 10 Jun 2015

08 Sep 2018

candybag wrote:
02 Sep 2018
NekujaK wrote:
31 Aug 2018
Everything fits together like you expect it to. And like it or not, most of that has to do with Reason's skeuomorphic approach, which I for one, adore.

I've used many other DAWs, and they all feel like computer applications, no different than using MS Word or Photoshop - features are summoned from menus and buttons, and appear in isolated windows unrelated to anything else around them. When I'm using Reason, I feel like I'm in an "environment" specifically designed for music creation. Everything is connected to everything else, and fits together logically and intuitively. It's a thing of beauty.
Nailed it, couldn't have said it better myself!
I totally agree with this. I came from Sonar, and everything was about menus. FINDING anything was really crazy hard for me.


I think there's two more points I'd add to why Reason is inspiring:
1) Every feature just works. Best example of this is Players - when they were released, I think we can all agree they were VERY well thought out.

I'll give you an example of a feature that DIDN'T work in another DAW: Sonar's automation was SO complicated. You could "arm" tracks for read or write automation. There was the whole "ACT" feature that let you map controllers to different synths based on what was in-focus. ...So there was a lot of FEATURES there, but it's a mess wrapping your head around it, and it was just never perfect. So the summary is, "Reason releases features when they're near-perfect and make sense".


2) Echoing the sentiment others made about Reason being a "playground"... Half the time, I love exploring synths, effects, sound-creation... Just EXPLORING. It's so fun trying new things for sounds, and Reason ENCOURAGES this. I can do pretty much anything I can dream of, and it all makes sense.

I think anyone who's addicted to VSTs probably has this feeling of wanting to "explore". (why the heck else would you get more than 2 reverbs :)). So I've always wondered why there isn't MORE demand for Reason, since there are so many people that love VSTs (and exploring), but don't use Reason. My guess is that everyone is just used to the DAW they are using, and not everyone knows what a fun playground Reason is. :)

jlgrimes
Posts: 661
Joined: 06 Jun 2017

11 Sep 2018

selig wrote:
03 Sep 2018
Here's a different twist on this question:
For younger users, what makes Reason so un-inspiring? I've heard so many stories of Reason users showing Reason to their kids and having them pretty much go "meh" and run to Logic and Live and love it.

My theory is that for anyone who's used hardware, Reason can make total sense (but not for everyone, naturally). Many here have suggested it is that relationship that draws them in.

But what about for someone who has no hardware experience to relate to - does Reason actually slow you down by forcing the hardware paradigm on the user?

I often wonder if Skeuomorphism's strongest attribute is in being a bridge between hardware and software worlds, and is only necessary for the first few generations of users to make the move from physical to virtual control of information.

Seems we are already witnessing the first generation of kids who never DIDN'T have a computer screen in their face all their life. How will interfaces adapt to a world of users that have to purpose for a physical reference, who may even be put off by the unnecessary relationship to this antiquated world?

I keep wondering how the DAW of the future will look, and I am more convinced it will evolve away from the literal approach mimicking the physical world (as a rule for the base UI, not as a strict rule for all plugins etc.).

But then the question becomes, what will make the DAW of the future "inspiring", since I believe that is a key question future designers should/will be asking.
:)

I think you have a point.

Coming from hardware sequencing, Reason made perfect sense as about every tool you would have in a 90s midi studio was greatly represented and actually convenient as while I loved hardware having to save and recall songs with 4 synths, samplers was a nightmare.

I think though when Reason added audio, it made the GUI alot more confusing than a traditional DAW.

Most young producers seem highly confused with Reason.

Reason is very device oriented and it would take a newbie a while to get familiar with all of the devices.

Ableton is also device oriented but it is alot more simple than Reason to understand as it flows linearly, where in Reason it is free flowing.

The routing while highly flexible can also be slow and tedious compared to more drag & drop workflows of something like Ableton or Studio One.

In Ableton sidechaining is somewhat simple to do where in Reason you might need Spiders or something.

Post Reply
  • Information
  • Who is online

    Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 43 guests