Do u use “blocks” in Reason?

[EnochLight]

Nobody uses Reason sequencer for a project start to finish.

This is patently false. I'm not saying you're being disingenuous - but maybe you just don't realize that many users do work in Reason standalone from start to finish because you yourself can't? I mean, that's fine. But I'm not sure why you think others don't/can't. I realize you say you're a Reason novice, but trust me - there are plenty of users who do this all day long.

[EdwardKiy]

Nobody uses Reason sequencer for a project start to finish.

This is patently false. I'm not saying you're being disingenuous - but maybe you just don't realize that many users do work in Reason standalone from start to finish because you yourself can't? I mean, that's fine. But I'm not sure why you think others don't/can't. I realize you say you're a Reason novice, but trust me - there are plenty of users who do this all day long.

You can do it if you have never been exposed to an alternative. I was absolutely doing it until my mate took what I've been doing in reason for 20 minutes and done it in Live in 2 clicks and rubbed my face in it. You use Studio one. Why would that be?

Here's an illustration.

reason sequencer.png (396.97 KiB) Viewed 2155 times

[EnochLight]

You can do it if you have never been exposed to an alternative. I was absolutely doing it until my mate took what I've been doing in reason for 20 minutes and done it in Live in 2 clicks and rubbed my face in it. You use Studio one. Why would that be?

Here's an illustration.

I don't use Studio One. I own it, but pretty much just keep it around for testing purposes these days. I only used it when Reason didn't support VST's, and even then I used it begrudgingly, because Reason's sequencer + rack paradigm is a ton easier to work in for my tastes. And regarding alternatives, there has been alternatives since before Reason was a proper DAW, yet plenty of users still enjoyed working inside of Reason start-to-finish when given the choice.

Your mate rubbed your face in a session that was easier in Live than it was in Reason - I get that. So apparently for your needs, it's no longer possible for you to work start-to-finish in Reason alone. That's perfectly fine. But making a blanket statement saying no one can, and no one does (except for paid marketing shills) is a pretty weak argument IMHO. That's like... tin foil hat level stuff.

[xboix]

Nobody uses Reason sequencer for a project start to finish.

I'm a very harsh critic of the sequencer part of Reason, simply because it lacks many, many basic things that other DAWs did right from day one (MIDI Chase anyone?).

But it's clearly silly to claim that no-one does whole projects in it. Actually, it's more than silly, it's hysterical mate. Take a deep breath and calm down.

[guitfnky]

I have 6 DAWs pinned to my taskbar right now (7, if you count Reason 10 and 11 separately). I own them all, and they all have the depth that Reason lacks in the sequencer. I don’t use them, despite having paid for them. why? because Reason’s sequencer, with all its shortcomings is still by far the most intuitive of the bunch. I’m not interested in exporting from one DAW into another just so I can use a different sequencer. to me, that process is more of a headache than just working around the limitations in Reason. almost everything I’ve finished in the last ten years has been done solely with the Reason sequencer.

of course they should eliminate those shortcomings. suggesting that the software doesn’t need to evolve because we’ve got our “heads in our asses” is, well, asinine.

but suggesting that those shortcomings are so limiting that no one would use Reason’s sequencer without also using some other tool is also going overboard.

[mcatalao]

Nobody uses Reason sequencer for a project start to finish. Definitely not the developers. The "featured artists", the mods, all the youtubers and literally everyone I saw on this forum. Why? Because it's not "minor inconveniences" here and there - the sequencer is missing a fucking leg. Block mode is (maybe) just one of its problems. I reserve my judgement for now, as I have no experience using it, but I wouldn't be too surprised, since most of the sequencer features are lacking in terms of workflow, to say the least.

People expressing their opinion here paid for the product, and this thread is exactly where it belongs. Make a post on the florists forum where you can tell people what the roses smell like.

That's interesting you say that because i use Reason solely all the way, and have never had a client questioning it.

And of course i am not an A-List whatever (producer, composer, musician, etc) but there are others here doing it.
I'm sure Adam Fielding, who i posted the feature, used reason alone for a bunch of his stuff.
Same for Giles AKA Selig, i know for a fact that he has been mixing for clients completely itb and in reason.

A lot of stuff is being done in Reason, despite all it's limits and quirks. But for big label productions, most times, different production processes are being worked by different people that will eventually work with different DAW's. A lot of projects where I've been working, come to me as cubase or Reaper projects, that i (or the client) export and then are mixed here in Reason.

Reason is a competent tool for any production part of the whole process (except for maybe the mastering part where it lacks some CD Authoring tools... But in 2020, are those tools really important???).

[EdwardKiy]

But making a blanket statement saying no one can, and no one does (except for paid marketing shills) is a pretty weak argument IMHO. That's like... tin foil hat level stuff.

But it's clearly silly to claim that no-one does whole projects in it. Actually, it's more than silly, it's hysterical mate. Take a deep breath and calm down.

because Reason’s sequencer, with all its shortcomings is still by far the most intuitive of the bunch. I’m not interested in exporting from one DAW into another just so I can use a different sequencer. to me, that process is more of a headache than just working around the limitations in Reason. almost everything I’ve finished in the last ten years has been done solely with the Reason sequencer.

of course they should eliminate those shortcomings. suggesting that the software doesn’t need to evolve because we’ve got our “heads in our asses” is, well, asinine.

but suggesting that those shortcomings are so limiting that no one would use Reason’s sequencer without also using some other tool is also going overboard.

Holy sh guys, this is called satirical hyperbolization. I AM USING REASON START TO FINISH despite having used Live

satire.JPG (62.22 KiB) Viewed 2113 times

I don't want to invest years of my life into a DAW that will become obsolete. Do you? I'm going to troll the living shit out of the developers until they display either focus or abandonment. Also that slip by Mattias

If there is a Reason 12, yes absolutely.

... I'll give it another year and then cut my losses. This forum has 5 years worth of threads asking for sequencer updates, all but completely ignored. I don't see the point in being nice and pleasant about it. Clearly that doesn't work. But you do you.

[EdwardKiy]

And of course i am not an A-List whatever (producer, composer, musician, etc) but there are others here doing it.
I'm sure Adam Fielding, who i posted the feature, used reason alone for a bunch of his stuff.

funny you should mention Adam Fielding in this context. Here's his quote from yesterday. I'm posting all of the quote pertaining to the DAW use, so it's not "ripped out of context". Notice how much effort he's put into phrasing so as not to, god forbid, upset the community.

The bulk of the album was made using Reason, though as a consequence of it being produced before VST support was a thing I ended up using Studio One to sequence certain elements (which were then bounced and brought into Reason). Funny how things have changed! That said, I ended up bringing a lot of that stuff over from Studio One once VST support became available in Reason to give myself a bit more control over proceedings.

Same for Giles AKA Selig, i know for a fact that he has been mixing for clients completely itb and in reason.

A lot of stuff is being done in Reason, despite all it's limits and quirks. But for big label productions, most times, different production processes are being worked by different people that will eventually work with different DAW's. A lot of projects where I've been working, come to me as cubase or Reaper projects, that i (or the client) export and then are mixed here in Reason.

Reason is a competent tool for any production part of the whole process (except for maybe the mastering part where it lacks some CD Authoring tools... But in 2020, are those tools really important???).

don't be like that "unimagined capabilities" guy.

I'm talking about the sequencer. the sequencer. the sequencer. the sequencer. the sequencer.

[joeyluck]

I like Reason's sequencer more than any other.

There are aspects and features of other sequencers I like, but as a whole, I do not prefer any other sequencer over Reason's.

What I need most is MPE support.

But the real question and topic of this thread is Blocks, which I don't use. Lets try to stay on topic

[adfielding]

funny you should mention Adam Fielding in this context. Here's his quote from yesterday. I'm posting all of the quote pertaining to the DAW use, so it's not "ripped out of context". Notice how much effort he's put into phrasing so as not to, god forbid, upset the community.

I'm not really sure what's going on here, and I'm certainly not phrasing my words to avoid "upsetting the community", so: just to clarify - yes - nowadays I tend to use Reason start-to-finish for the vast majority of my work. The only reason I was using Studio One on a project back in 2016 (which is what that quote is referring to) was so that I could sequence & bounce stuff using VSTs to bring into Reason. Now that I can use VSTs directly in Reason, that's what I do. My apologies for any confusion caused there.

If other folks prefer using other DAWs & other sequencers for whatever reason, that's great, go for it. But I stopped doing that a while ago, and I much prefer working entirely in Reason if I can.

[EdwardKiy]

I'm not really sure what's going on here, and I'm certainly not phrasing my words to avoid "upsetting the community", so: just to clarify - yes - nowadays I tend to use Reason start-to-finish for the vast majority of my work. The only reason I was using Studio One on a project back in 2016 (which is what that quote is referring to) was so that I could sequence & bounce stuff using VSTs to bring into Reason. Now that I can use VSTs directly in Reason, that's what I do. My apologies for any confusion caused there.

It's all on me, you have absolutely nothing to apologize for. I'm just seeing things. Found it a bit peculiar you used 3 sentences to say you've done it in Reason with Studio One as a vst host, is all.

But since I've already dragged you into this (apologies), may I ask why you tend not to use Reason for that other part, the minority of your work?

I tend to use Reason start-to-finish for the vast majority of my work

and what makes you fail to use it entirely all the time? which are the delegated bits?

I much prefer working entirely in Reason if I can

[guitfnky]

But making a blanket statement saying no one can, and no one does (except for paid marketing shills) is a pretty weak argument IMHO. That's like... tin foil hat level stuff.

But it's clearly silly to claim that no-one does whole projects in it. Actually, it's more than silly, it's hysterical mate. Take a deep breath and calm down.

because Reason’s sequencer, with all its shortcomings is still by far the most intuitive of the bunch. I’m not interested in exporting from one DAW into another just so I can use a different sequencer. to me, that process is more of a headache than just working around the limitations in Reason. almost everything I’ve finished in the last ten years has been done solely with the Reason sequencer.

of course they should eliminate those shortcomings. suggesting that the software doesn’t need to evolve because we’ve got our “heads in our asses” is, well, asinine.

but suggesting that those shortcomings are so limiting that no one would use Reason’s sequencer without also using some other tool is also going overboard.

Holy sh guys, this is called satirical hyperbolization. I AM USING REASON START TO FINISH despite having used Live

satire.JPG

I don't want to invest years of my life into a DAW that will become obsolete. Do you? I'm going to troll the living shit out of the developers until they display either focus or abandonment. Also that slip by Mattias

If there is a Reason 12, yes absolutely.

... I'll give it another year and then cut my losses. This forum has 5 years worth of threads asking for sequencer updates, all but completely ignored. I don't see the point in being nice and pleasant about it. Clearly that doesn't work. But you do you.

what specifically are the dealbreakers for you that would warrant “cutting your losses”, and abandoning use of Reason altogether (at least as a DAW)? I’ve seen your comments here around how much you enjoy Reason, so I’m trying to square the two seemingly different views.

for me, there are only two scenarios where this could happen. RS takes the software in a heavily VST-centered direction (or folds entirely, for some reason—I’m counting these as comparable scenarios), or some other company puts out a more compelling alternative that’s just as inspiring and fun to use as Reason.

[mcatalao]

... I'll give it another year and then cut my losses. This forum has 5 years worth of threads asking for sequencer updates, all but completely ignored. I don't see the point in being nice and pleasant about it. Clearly that doesn't work. But you do you.

Not completely true. R11 had new functionality added to the sequencer :
Taken From Reason 11 Release notes:
Curve automation lines between two automation points
Crossfade between two overlapping audio clips
Improved zoom, including individual track height, improved Zoom to Selection (Z) and increased zoom height
Mute MIDI notes using the Mute Tool or pressing M
New Pencil Tool mode to draw notes at current snap value
Absolute Snap, a new snap setting where events always snap to the grid
Improved key visualization in Edit Mode, showing both the notes played via MIDI and the notes selected
Shortcut for moving notes up or down an octave,
cmd+shift+up/down (Mac) or ctrl+shift+up/down (Win)
Draw an automation point on the existing automation line by holding Shift

11 small'ish nitpick things but still... Automation Curves is a great addition, CrossFades are quite important for my audio mingling, the midi stuff is not that big but there were people asking it and the visualisation is now better. Is it enough for an upgrade? Maybe not. But stuff is coming. Now you have Mp3, people were asking it too, thought imho there were 100 different things they could/shoud to before it!

We are not disagreeing that the sequencer and the mixer should evolve. Where we digress (and btw, it's great that Adam chimed in on your comment to his quote ) is when you say that the Sequencer doesn't allow people to do a project start to finish. And ironically even the thing that Adam said was not a sequencer issue per se, but the lack of VST support. Also the only thing that could make me do anything outside of Reason nowadays is something i haven't touched in a long time, the word builder from East West needs to output midi - plus auto punch in would a nice to have because i record myself playing flute and other instruments.

[EdwardKiy]

for me, there are only two scenarios where this could happen. RS takes the software in a heavily VST-centered direction (or folds entirely, for some reason—I’m counting these as comparable scenarios)

that's the one.

[Skimrok]

@ EdwardKiy
can I ask what took you 20 mins and in studio one was 2 clicks? sorry I'm going off topic gang but I'm actually intrigued because my friend was a Reason user but is totally S1 now , for me I only know Reason and very basic at that

thanks in advance

[adfielding]

But since I've already dragged you into this (apologies), may I ask why you tend not to use Reason for that other part, the minority of your work?

Sure thing - there are a few main instances where I either can't or won't use Reason on its own.

Right now I'm working on a project with two other musicians, and we're using Cubase as our shared environment. That means I'm using Cubase to collaborate, though I'm still using the Reason Rack Plugin & bounced parts from Reason in there. As for why we're using Cubase - it just happens to be the most convenient option for us. One of us is already using Cubase as their main DAW, and I'm familiar enough with it to not be too much of a compromise. I'd prefer it if we were all using Reason, but that would involve two thirds of the project learning to use a completely new environment, which would be a bit of a tall order!

Another instance where I won't use Reason will be if I'm working on hardware-centric stuff, either on my own or as part of a collaborative thing. I like to get out-of-the-box from time to time, and that means going DAW-less. Even so - I ended up recording stems for the last major hardware session I was involved in, which I then mixed in Reason using a rough reference mix as a bit of a guide.

Also, I still use Studio One's project view when finalising an album for release - not always, but sometimes. I use it for additional post-mix tweaks and fades - nothing complex, but it's great for helping to add a little bit of consistency across an album or whatever. It's a great environment for top-down tweaks at that stage.

[EdwardKiy]

can I ask what took you 20 mins and in studio one was 2 clicks? sorry I'm going off topic gang but I'm actually intrigued because my friend was a Reason user but is totally S1 now , for me I only know Reason and very basic at that

thanks in advance

that would be Live, not Studio One, but I've just mentioned that in my other reply. Eh, that's somehow the one below.

[EdwardKiy]

Not completely true. R11 had new functionality added to the sequencer :
Taken From Reason 11 Release notes:
Curve automation lines between two automation points
Crossfade between two overlapping audio clips
Improved zoom, including individual track height, improved Zoom to Selection (Z) and increased zoom height
Mute MIDI notes using the Mute Tool or pressing M
New Pencil Tool mode to draw notes at current snap value
Absolute Snap, a new snap setting where events always snap to the grid
Improved key visualization in Edit Mode, showing both the notes played via MIDI and the notes selected
Shortcut for moving notes up or down an octave,
cmd+shift+up/down (Mac) or ctrl+shift+up/down (Win)
Draw an automation point on the existing automation line by holding Shift

11 small'ish nitpick things but still... Automation Curves is a great addition, CrossFades are quite important for my audio mingling, the midi stuff is not that big but there were people asking it and the visualisation is now better. Is it enough for an upgrade? Maybe not. But stuff is coming. Now you have Mp3, people were asking it too, thought imho there were 100 different things they could/shoud to before it!

We are not disagreeing that the sequencer and the mixer should evolve. Where we digress (and btw, it's great that Adam chimed in on your comment to his quote ) is when you say that the Sequencer doesn't allow people to do a project start to finish. And ironically even the thing that Adam said was not a sequencer issue per se, but the lack of VST support. Also the only thing that could make me do anything outside of Reason nowadays is something i haven't touched in a long time, the word builder from East West needs to output midi - plus auto punch in would a nice to have because i record myself playing flute and other instruments.

Joey gave me a fair warning to keep on topic, so I'll make a case for block use later on, although my experience with it is very limited.

I started with 11 Suite, that's my first-ever version. All of the things you mentioned are massive time-savers, I just can't imagine not having had them. The midi mute and octave shift I use a lot. In a very twisted way, I respected RS for not having mp3. I just assumed it was an ideological thing not to have it (don't ask).

Whatever, there are basic things that don't work well. You would think the snap function is so basic but I find it poorly executed. example: if you're working on a drum line in 64ths or even 16ths, moving clips around and snapping them to adjacents takes too much time. You have to get out of midi view, mouse over to grid resolution and change it to a relevant one (1/8 at least), snap your clip in place, then change it BACK to the one you need for drum editing (with the mouse), which makes the whole process redundant - it's faster to get out into the lane view without changing your drum clip grid resolution, zoom in on the exact spot you want to latch the clip to, then zoom out and back in to another clip where you want to work on the drums again. It's horrible either way. Why am I fighting against the sequencer? Why can't the sequencer logic be that at least in snap mode I just want to latch my clip on to the adjacent one, bypassing the fact my grid resolution is 1\32 or 16 and only making me zoom in when I specifically want my clips to overlap or have an invisible itsy bitsy space between them? Why?

And the zooming itself, a simple case of navigation. I had a whole rant about how bad it is in this thread: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=7516216 I compared the whole zooming thing as operating a castle draw-bridge. I still stand by the comparison. In 2020 Reason doesn't have mouse gesture support. Solution: buying a special magic mouse
etc etc etc

What absolutely killed me (this is possibly the Block-related part): I had to chop up a drum sample, mangle it and then put in 3 places of a 3-something-minute track, effectively moving parts of the track to the sides, keeping pre-bar automation heads and tails locked to relevant clips. So I thought "Aha, the Block mode!", but then I realized I had to tab to a whole new window (waste of time), which was EMPTY, so I had to populate it (waste of time) and it didn't keep the automation heads and tails (not today, Block mode), so I just went back to the song mode and did it manually. The whole thing (excluding the Block mode attempts!) took me almost 20 minutes to do with all the zooming and moving and snapping and making it clean. And then I watched my friend do it in Live - with a bunch of keystrokes in under 2 minutes - BLAM-BLAM-DONE. Sure, doing that may be his bread and butter, but he used a hotkey to drop a sample that would move the rest of the track to the side right there in the sequencer. No special tab, no population, everything moved correctly including the automations he'd done.

[Skimrok]

can I ask what took you 20 mins and in studio one was 2 clicks? sorry I'm going off topic gang but I'm actually intrigued because my friend was a Reason user but is totally S1 now , for me I only know Reason and very basic at that

thanks in advance

that would be Live, not Studio One, but I've just mentioned that in my other reply. Eh, that's somehow the one below.

good grief i have s1 in my head and seeing things live live live , sorry buddy

[EdwardKiy]

Sure thing - there are a few main instances where I either can't or won't use Reason on its own.

Thank you for taking the time to explain!

[ColdSkoolBeatz]

I used to use Blocks all the time as in taking arrangements of certain lengths, cut and paste into specific segments, etc. However, I stopped using Blocks this way because it just became a minor hassle when I wanted to make changes to the arrangements. You'd either need to go back into the Block arrangement of that specific segment. Or Convert Block Clips to Song Clips.

Another issue arises in cutting those segments when audio clips are involved. Sometimes you can hear clicks and pops between Blocks during playback. Of course you can add a fade, but again, that is just counter intuitive.

In 2020, I use Blocks as a visual tool to organize the Songs arrangement. (Intro, Hook, Verse 1, Hook, Verse, 2, Hook, Outro, etc). So technically I've always used Blocks, just not in the way it was fully intended.

[joeyluck]

Joey gave me a fair warning to keep on topic, so I'll make a case for block use later on, although my experience with it is very limited.

No warning, just a suggestion

Whatever, there are basic things that don't work well. You would think the snap function is so basic but I find it poorly executed. example: if you're working on a drum line in 64ths or even 16ths, moving clips around and snapping them to adjacents takes too much time. You have to get out of midi view, mouse over to grid resolution and change it to a relevant one (1/8 at least), snap your clip in place, then change it BACK to the one you need for drum editing (with the mouse), which makes the whole process redundant - it's faster to get out into the lane view without changing your drum clip grid resolution, zoom in on the exact spot you want to latch the clip to, then zoom out and back in to another clip where you want to work on the drums again. It's horrible either way. Why am I fighting against the sequencer? Why can't the sequencer logic be that at least in snap mode I just want to latch my clip on to the adjacent one, bypassing the fact my grid resolution is 1\32 or 16 and only making me zoom in when I specifically want my clips to overlap or have an invisible itsy bitsy space between them? Why?

And the zooming itself, a simple case of navigation. I had a whole rant about how bad it is in this thread: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=7516216 I compared the whole zooming thing as operating a castle draw-bridge. I still stand by the comparison. In 2020 Reason doesn't have mouse gesture support. Solution: buying a special magic mouse
etc etc etc

Are you describing the adaptive Snap to Grid mode? Because when that is enabled, notes snap to the resolution in which you are zoomed, and new notes take the length of the grid's resolution. Then you just zoom in and out to change the resolution. "Grid" is the first option in that dropdown. Sorry for the confusion. Is that the method you are using?

[EnochLight]

Holy sh guys, this is called satirical hyperbolization. I AM USING REASON START TO FINISH despite having used Live

What you did... was NOT satirical hyperbolization. Sorry. Your intended "message" was entirely lost in your posts. If you were trying to use satire to prove Reason's sequencer needs more features (trust me: I AGREE WITH YOU!), then that was completely lost in your posts.

I don't want to invest years of my life into a DAW that will become obsolete. Do you? I'm going to troll the living shit out of the developers until they display either focus or abandonment. Also that slip by Mattias

Troll all you want - but you are reading way too much into what Mattias said. But you skipped everything he said afterwards, so... that shouldn't be surprising.

... I'll give it another year and then cut my losses. This forum has 5 years worth of threads asking for sequencer updates, all but completely ignored. I don't see the point in being nice and pleasant about it. Clearly that doesn't work. But you do you.

This forum is not an official support forum, nor related to Reason Studios at all (despite the fact that a Reason Studios employee or two will occasionally chime in). It's a forum created by 1 Reason fan (and moderated for free by a handful of users by their good grace) who wanted to keep some semblance of the Propellerhead User Forum alive after it was shut down. If you want to troll Reason Studios through their channels (their company website, their Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and YouTube pages) then I wish you luck. But I'm not sure what you expect to accomplish here about it. We're all just fellow users bouncing shit off of each other and talking shop.

But, you do you, as they say...

[mcatalao]

Joey gave me a fair warning to keep on topic, so I'll make a case for block use later on, although my experience with it is very limited.

I started with 11 Suite, that's my first-ever version. All of the things you mentioned are massive time-savers, I just can't imagine not having had them. The midi mute and octave shift I use a lot. In a very twisted way, I respected RS for not having mp3. I just assumed it was an ideological thing not to have it (don't ask).

Whatever, there are basic things that don't work well. You would think the snap function is so basic but I find it poorly executed. example: if you're working on a drum line in 64ths or even 16ths, moving clips around and snapping them to adjacents takes too much time. You have to get out of midi view, mouse over to grid resolution and change it to a relevant one (1/8 at least), snap your clip in place, then change it BACK to the one you need for drum editing (with the mouse), which makes the whole process redundant - it's faster to get out into the lane view without changing your drum clip grid resolution, zoom in on the exact spot you want to latch the clip to, then zoom out and back in to another clip where you want to work on the drums again. It's horrible either way. Why am I fighting against the sequencer? Why can't the sequencer logic be that at least in snap mode I just want to latch my clip on to the adjacent one, bypassing the fact my grid resolution is 1\32 or 16 and only making me zoom in when I specifically want my clips to overlap or have an invisible itsy bitsy space between them? Why?

And the zooming itself, a simple case of navigation. I had a whole rant about how bad it is in this thread: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=7516216 I compared the whole zooming thing as operating a castle draw-bridge. I still stand by the comparison. In 2020 Reason doesn't have mouse gesture support. Solution: buying a special magic mouse
etc etc etc

What absolutely killed me (this is possibly the Block-related part): I had to chop up a drum sample, mangle it and then put in 3 places of a 3-something-minute track, effectively moving parts of the track to the sides, keeping pre-bar automation heads and tails locked to relevant clips. So I thought "Aha, the Block mode!", but then I realized I had to tab to a whole new window (waste of time), which was EMPTY, so I had to populate it (waste of time) and it didn't keep the automation heads and tails (not today, Block mode), so I just went back to the song mode and did it manually. The whole thing (excluding the Block mode attempts!) took me almost 20 minutes to do with all the zooming and moving and snapping and making it clean. And then I watched my friend do it in Live - with a bunch of keystrokes in under 2 minutes - BLAM-BLAM-DONE. Sure, doing that may be his bread and butter, but he used a hotkey to drop a sample that would move the rest of the track to the side right there in the sequencer. No special tab, no population, everything moved correctly including the automations he'd done.

Man... so much stuff that you could have solved just for using the stuff that's already there in the sequencer...

1 - You can move clips in the midi editor window, each clip is on top of the midi editor window. If you want you can zoom in on the clip to have more control on the side zoom buttons or with the mouse (ctrl + scroll). And you also can change the snap to grid (and change the behaviour) in any editor window so i really don't get why are you jumping so much from the editor to the clip and so on. I do agree a snap adjacent would be interesting but how would it work if the size of the clip wasn't right? Anyway it's not THAT difficult and not THAT time consuming. IMHO.

2 - I'm not commenting about the zoom much more than it works for me, specially because using the z and shift+z and so on allow me to work with the zoom really fast and almost without using the mouse. The mouse wheel is also helpful but the z and shift+z with context of the clips, work like a charm. And Z also sends you into the editors and works ok inside the editors. Again, personal opinion. It works well for me and probably because i use this software for so many years. Plus, if you select multiple clips, the z function will always respond to the selected context. If you select 3 notes in your midi editor, z will zoom to that context.

3 - Ok for your drum chopping thing... answering in parts:
- The block opens empty because you never put anything there. It's not useless, you just didn't use it before, it is not useless per se. However, you can copy anything from the sequencer to a block. No need for a "convert clips to new block" function, because go figure, the application is coherent and copy - paste works across the whole sections where a given type of data is compatible.
- I wouldn't know how to solve pre roll automation in the context of a block clip. But if a block clip starts and ends at some point, shouldn't pre and post automation be taken care outside the block as it's out of it's limits???
- You can add additional bars to a section of the sequencer (it even works on the blocks section). Just put your locators on a bar, click between the locators, and select "insert Bars between locators". The whole song will translate the bars you put and it will work for 1 or n bars.

I don't know if you're seeing what i'm saying here... but imho, i'm starting to guess that your friend took 2 minutes to do something you did in 20 because maybe (just maybe) he read the manual of his software...

[guitfnky]

What absolutely killed me (this is possibly the Block-related part): I had to chop up a drum sample, mangle it and then put in 3 places of a 3-something-minute track, effectively moving parts of the track to the sides, keeping pre-bar automation heads and tails locked to relevant clips. So I thought "Aha, the Block mode!", but then I realized I had to tab to a whole new window (waste of time), which was EMPTY, so I had to populate it (waste of time) and it didn't keep the automation heads and tails (not today, Block mode), so I just went back to the song mode and did it manually. The whole thing (excluding the Block mode attempts!) took me almost 20 minutes to do with all the zooming and moving and snapping and making it clean. And then I watched my friend do it in Live - with a bunch of keystrokes in under 2 minutes - BLAM-BLAM-DONE. Sure, doing that may be his bread and butter, but he used a hotkey to drop a sample that would move the rest of the track to the side right there in the sequencer. No special tab, no population, everything moved correctly including the automations he'd done.

this sounds like maybe a lack of familiarity with the tools available more than anything. use the insert bars between locators option (right click in the sequencer). it splits everything at your left loop marker and pushes it out to where the right loop marker is. timing isn't likely to be a big issue unless you've got snap turned off, or you're trying to insert something that's not in time with the rest of the track. it does split the automation lanes too, but that's a 30 second fix, tops, if it's even needed. that's not to say Reason couldn't benefit from actual ripple-editing features, but it shouldn't have taken 20 minutes to do what you describe.

Blocks wouldn't be the best way to do what you're talking about anyway. it might have been useful if you wanted to layer something additional during an existing part, but you're talking about adding a new part entirely. that's not what Blocks is designed to do.

and...of course Blocks would be empty when you open them up. what the heck would you expect to be in there? this, maybe?