Why are the reason users a minority?

[AnotherMathias]

True for both Reason 4 and Machine:

Records midi ✓
Has instruments/presets /sounds for use in creating music. ✓
Has a sequencer to arrange a song ✓

Are these not DAW features? The lack of audio recording in earlier versions of Reason was only an issue to those who needed it. Many didn't and many still don't.

If those are your only criteria, the Ensoniq ESQ-1 had that covered in 1985. Hardly a DAW though, right?

There’s obviously no official definition of a DAW, but these days it seems to me that the general understanding is that it requires: complete professional caliber production capabilities, including audio tracks, instruments, mixing and effects, and some kind of open system plugin support.

If any of these functions are missing, it can certainly still be a valid music creation software, but typically in those cases it’s either more specialized (like EZ Drummer standalone), or less “serious” (like Gadget).

This is not to say that a more playful, less serious software is a bad thing. It might even be a positive - a full pro recording feature set can be a bit cumbersome and tedious for us who aren’t planning to produce any gold records anytime soon.

[lowtom]

I remember when DAW (Digital Audio Workstation) was a term used for your whole computer centric audio processing setup not a single piece of software.

[KGB]

I see a lot of Reason apologists on here and rightfully so. I am one myself most of the time. However, my opinion is that the reason why Reason is the way it is and WHERE it is today in terms of popularity in society is simple: Ernst.

I commend Ernst for his work and effort on Reason because it's a beautiful and intuitive program. Very complex yet very simple. With that being said, I've tried to use every DAW out there at different points out of frustration and went a few months with Protools and ReWire and a wrapper for the sole purpose of using VST...it was a miserable experience. Way too convoluted. I just can't come to use anything else but Reason it's just perfect for me.

On the other hand, I'm surprised that Reason was able to survive without VST for so long and imo Ernsts' stubbornness is the reason why Reason isn't as popular. Why? Because most musicians NEED VSTs. Period. It's a technological advancement that can't be dismissed. And users went to other DAWS because Ernst didn't want to open up the Reason software to VST. There are and were too many tools being created as VSTs and many dedicated Reason users were jumping ship (I've been around since 2.0 and have seen this 1st hand too many times). Propellerhead was able to support it and had the code written into Reason but never pushed it to production. I can't grasp why Ernst didn't give the green light when VST is the standard. Maybe he watched too many Steve Jobs documentaries idk.

Businesses are run from the top down. This was a Ernst operation and he called the shots. He figuratively went down with his ship since he wouldn't budge on the VST issue, and was somehow forced out or saw no light at the end of the tunnel and had to sell his ownership. It seemed like as soon as he was bought out or around the time, VST magically was implemented and Reason had some life again. Now it's regaining steam, maybe one day it will become a top 5 DAW again..I just don't know how.

[EnochLight]

I see a lot of Reason apologists on here and rightfully so. I am one myself most of the time. However, my opinion is that the reason why Reason is the way it is and WHERE it is today in terms of popularity in society is simple: Ernst.

I commend Ernst for his work and effort on Reason because it's a beautiful and intuitive program. Very complex yet very simple. With that being said, I've tried to use every DAW out there at different points out of frustration and went a few months with Protools and ReWire and a wrapper for the sole purpose of using VST...it was a miserable experience. Way too convoluted. I just can't come to use anything else but Reason it's just perfect for me.

On the other hand, I'm surprised that Reason was able to survive without VST for so long and imo Ernsts' stubbornness is the reason why Reason isn't as popular. Why? Because most musicians NEED VSTs. Period. It's a technological advancement that can't be dismissed. And users went to other DAWS because Ernst didn't want to open up the Reason software to VST. There are and were too many tools being created as VSTs and many dedicated Reason users were jumping ship (I've been around since 2.0 and have seen this 1st hand too many times). Propellerhead was able to support it and had the code written into Reason but never pushed it to production. I can't grasp why Ernst didn't give the green light when VST is the standard. Maybe he watched too many Steve Jobs documentaries idk.

Businesses are run from the top down. This was a Ernst operation and he called the shots. He figuratively went down with his ship since he wouldn't budge on the VST issue, and was somehow forced out or saw no light at the end of the tunnel and had to sell his ownership. It seemed like as soon as he was bought out or around the time, VST magically was implemented and Reason had some life again. Now it's regaining steam, maybe one day it will become a top 5 DAW again..I just don't know how.

This has been discussed at length in the past. 9.5 (that brought VST support) was planned a long time before Ernst left and Verdane became majority shareholders. One could also easily argue that without Rack Extensions and the RE SDK, Reason would not be nearly as valuable a tool as it is today. In fact, the RE SDK makes developing Reason and Reason devices far more easier than it was in the past, so Ernst was very correct with introducing that technology into Reason. But I realize this isn't a popular view. It's far easier to just label us all Reason apologists. I think I need to make that a t-shirt.

[Popey]

The strange thing I find with reason is that all of the people I know who work in music own it and do use it. They do not use it as their main daw and strangely none of them have 11 and the rack plugin yet and are all rewiring in (a number of them rewire ableton too apparently). Now I do not know loads of producers (12) but found it interesting they all owned it and it makes me wonder if it is less of a minority as the lack of you tube content makes us believe. Is the above a common scenario and perhaps what led them to make the rack plugin?. Be interested to hear if others have noticed similar to the above.

[EdwardKiy]

The strange thing I find with reason is that all of the people I know who work in music own it and do use it. They do not use it as their main daw and strangely none of them have 11 and the rack plugin yet and are all rewiring in (a number of them rewire ableton too apparently). Now I do not know loads of producers (12) but found it interesting they all owned it and it makes me wonder if it is less of a minority as the lack of you tube content makes us believe. Is the above a common scenario and perhaps what led them to make the rack plugin?. Be interested to hear if others have noticed similar to the above.

I have a childhood asshole friend producer (love him dearly) who kept saying all kinds of shit about Reason, how it is the past and how things like Live are the future and then I found an installed copy of Reason on his laptop. Naturally, I called his mom and told her that her son was gay and into group orgies with golden showers, ejaculate swapping and all that, but now he's ready to come out with just a little support from her.

Anywho, I think Reason is just fine. If the sequencer is fixed, in my book it becomes king of Tier 2 DAWs (it's THIS close), leaving Live, Studio One and FL in the dust, because they are JUST sequencers. Reason then becomes a runner-up to industry-backed (Tier 1) DAWs - Pro Tools, Logic and Cubase, which are bought by studios, schools and universities worldwide. Makes sense for a studio to have an instrument rack with a universal catalogue, than buying a million VSTs in the hopes that some visitors might use them. From what I gathered, Pro Tools users have had enough of their robbery of a payment system and it being "industry standard" for the sole reason of it being the "industry standard", so a spot in Tier 1 might open up even for a full-sized DAW.

I genuinely like the ideas and decisions RS have implemented in what I've learned from their history. I just wish they've done more of those. They took and keep taking risks that are simply not possible in the modern corporate world. You can feel there's a lot of personality in Reason, in the DAW and all it's extensions. It's the feeling you get when picking up your guitar or sitting down at your battered piano. Strangely, it feels crafted and built, rather than coded. This is what a DAW should feel like, regardless of your age.

I'm neither old nor "washed up", so I hope RS don't listen to this gloom and instead buckle up, rape and pillage their adversaries and send their ashes to the wind where they belong. They should also start playing dirtier.

Example:

(post-sequencer fix) advertisement

"A DAW that is both a top-class sequencer and an instrumental powerhouse, unlike those other pretenders that are only sequencers that send you into the blackhole of VST purchases, most without guarantees or support of any kind. Not to point any fingers...actually why not? - we meant FL, Live, Studio One and Reaper." and then end it with some sort of a "fu" message to the rivals: "The time has come to leave the past and embrace the future! Ask for the Reason Rack at your local studio." or some such.

[jwd606]

Anywho, I think Reason is just fine. If the sequencer is fixed, in my book it becomes king of Tier 2 DAWs (it's THIS close), leaving Live, Studio One and FL in the dust, because they are JUST sequencers. Reason then becomes a runner-up to industry-backed (Tier 1) DAWs - Pro Tools, Logic and Cubase, which are bought by studios, schools and universities worldwide.

Got no idea what you're on about. DAW = Ableton, these days. It's not far off universal acceptance as what you use to make music on a computer. Then there's FL and Logic, with the rest floundering around trying to find some relevance.

[madmacman]

(post-sequencer fix) advertisement

"A DAW that is both a top-class sequencer and an instrumental powerhouse, unlike those other pretenders that are only sequencers that send you into the blackhole of VST purchases, most without guarantees or support of any kind. Not to point any fingers...actually why not? - we meant FL, Live, Studio One and Reaper." and then end it with some sort of a "fu" message to the rivals: "The time has come to leave the past and embrace the future! Ask for the Reason Rack at your local studio." or some such.

I think you forgot a third group: I left Reason and turned to Studio One because I have a lot of hardware synths at home. I have turned away from complete "in-the-box" again, when I realized it is no fun for me. I prefer to jam with my hardware before I find something interesting which I want to record.

But maybe I'm just an old man and "hardware" is a thing of the past...

[miyaru]

I think the most importend thing is how to get the job done. And for that one needs tools. Could be groove boxes, hardware synths and stuff or some kind of software. Maybe something hybrid......

To keep it simpel for yourself: don't bother who is using it - as long as it gets the job done for you it is OK. Every DAW or system whatsoever got it strong and weak points. Find the one with usefull stuff and as least weak points as possible.

I have Live 10 Suite and Reason 11 Suite, and use them together when needed or one on their own. With the buying of my audio interface I got a license of Pro Tools, but I'm not a big fan of that but keep it installed in case I get the spirit of using PT.....LOL.

[avasopht]

Ableton Push is the real competition right now.

It still has a few rough edges, but Akai and Native Instruments have cottoned on.

They both offer a plain controller as well as a stand alone device.

We still want that tactile response and freedom from the mouse.

Reason is the only DAW with the technology, standardisation, and ecosystem right now to create a fully integrated DAW controller and stand alone device that can cover the full production process and have access to kick as plugins.

Native Instruments do have Guitar Rig, but I'm not sure what exactly Maschine standalone supports.

But everyone I've shown my push to is immediately dazzled.

[miyaru]

Yeah Push and Push2 are really amazing; I have Push2. Using software such as PusheR2 for Push2 makes musicmaking in Reason even more fun and productive.......

See also: https://retouchcontrol.com/pusher/

[EdwardKiy]

I think you forgot a third group: I left Reason and turned to Studio One because I have a lot of hardware synths at home. I have turned away from complete "in-the-box" again, when I realized it is no fun for me. I prefer to jam with my hardware before I find something interesting which I want to record.

But maybe I'm just an old man and "hardware" is a thing of the past...

A perfectly legitimate way of making music and has nothing to do with age.
But you turned to another DAW for a better sequencer, which was my point.

[AnotherMathias]

Got no idea what you're on about. DAW = Ableton, these days. It's not far off universal acceptance as what you use to make music on a computer. Then there's FL and Logic, with the rest floundering around trying to find some relevance.

Surely that all depends on what world you are living in?

Orchestral movie score. Jazz trio. Prog metal. Country pop. Afro Cuban. I don’t think Ableton will be the default DAW for any of those.

People use DAWs for recording all music these days, not just electronic music.

[EdwardKiy]

Got no idea what you're on about. DAW = Ableton, these days. It's not far off universal acceptance as what you use to make music on a computer. Then there's FL and Logic, with the rest floundering around trying to find some relevance.

I use Live as a sequencer. But I have yet to see a single studio or classroom where they'd have Live installed, so whatever you heard about Live on youtube, it's market share remains miniscule and not too far off from Reason, not by a large factor, especially if you consider Live is freely pirated. They must sell hardware to make up for it and this marketing model is a terrible compromise ideologically. RS ditched this route years ago, for which they have my respect. Quite possibly this is also the reason why the original developers fled Ableton to make Bitwig.

[madmacman]

But you turned to another DAW for a better sequencer, which was my point.

Yes and no. Yes: of course I enjoy the tons of extra feature stuff I can do in the arrangement window and editors with S1 (and I prefer them over the "Players" concept of Reason. E.g.: the Reason Drum Player vs. S1 tightly integrated drum editor)

But there was also another aspect: control center for external gear. Which is also (in some way) possible with Reason but not as elegant as in DAW's dedicated more to external hardware.

[EdwardKiy]

Yes and no. Yes: of course I enjoy the tons of extra feature stuff I can do in the arrangement window and editors with S1 (and I prefer them over the "Players" concept of Reason. E.g.: the Reason Drum Player vs. S1 tightly integrated drum editor)

But there was also another aspect: control center for external gear. Which is also (in some way) possible with Reason but not as elegant as in DAW's dedicated more to external hardware.

fair point, never had the hardware trouble.

[selig]

I think they've decided what their market is, and they don't 'need' to appeal to young producers, just old ones - like I said, shame.

It was not very long ago some of the older users were complaining the marketing was aimed only at the young producers and they felt the Props decided they didn't need to appeal to the old ones. What a shame either way if true, which is why that probably means they are actually doing it "right".

[selig]

I remember when DAW (Digital Audio Workstation) was a term used for your whole computer centric audio processing setup not a single piece of software.

Yes, and before that we used to call them "recording studios", IIRC…

[selig]

Records midi ✓
Has instruments/presets /sounds for use in creating music. ✓
Has a sequencer to arrange a song ✓

Are these not DAW features? The lack of audio recording in earlier versions of Reason was only an issue to those who needed it. Many didn't and many still don't.

You take the audio away from DAW and you are left with DW, no?!?
Wouldn't it be more accurate to say Reason was a DW before audio was added?

Silliness aside, while I feel it necessary to use the correct accepted terms when discussing general concepts, such as using "decibels", "gain staging" and "stems" correctly, it's more the marketers who really care about what a DAW actually is and is not. For most users, they just look for the best tool for the job at a price point they can afford, and you can call it whatever you want as long as it works!

[avasopht]

You take the audio away from DAW and you are left with DW, no?!?
Wouldn't it be more accurate to say Reason was a DW before audio was added?

That's pretty apt.

After all we called the likes of Korg Triton and Yamaha Motif keyboard workstations.

[AnotherMathias]

Silliness aside, while I feel it necessary to use the correct accepted terms when discussing general concepts, such as using "decibels", "gain staging" and "stems" correctly, it's more the marketers who really care about what a DAW actually is and is not. For most users, they just look for the best tool for the job at a price point they can afford, and you can call it whatever you want as long as it works!

Agreed.
The only times it matters is when you are interested in comparing things like marketplace positioning, and when you’re trying to decide which new features to demand!

[demt]

Praps there scared of getting what they want?! Reason user scince 2.5

[chaosroyale]

Without solid figures on the market share of DAWs, none of our opinions should be taken very seriously!!

One poster says that every pro musician they know has a copy of Reason even if they use a different DAW, but not R11. Does that mean they still use it? Or they abandoned it years ago? Is Reason especially popular in that country? etc..

On the other hand, in my location and with the kind of people I work with (game music, soundtracks, alternative music) I am sorry to say that I know precisely ONE person (apart from me) who actually has Reason. On occasions when a colleague asks me what I used in a project, if I answer "Reason" I honestly get surprised looks and comments. "You did this in Reason?!!" They view Reason as not "professional". In a different country or industry it might be completely different.

Likewise as Selig's comments imply, without clear data on the results of Reason's marketing, our individual opinions on it don't mean a lot. One person might see it as "aimed at young people" and another might see the same video as old-fashioned.

[groggy1]

Every time I see this thread, the Green Day song starts playing in my head!

[QVprod]

True for both Reason 4 and Machine:

Records midi ✓
Has instruments/presets /sounds for use in creating music. ✓
Has a sequencer to arrange a song ✓

Are these not DAW features? The lack of audio recording in earlier versions of Reason was only an issue to those who needed it. Many didn't and many still don't.

If those are your only criteria, the Ensoniq ESQ-1 had that covered in 1985. Hardly a DAW though, right?

There’s obviously no official definition of a DAW, but these days it seems to me that the general understanding is that it requires: complete professional caliber production capabilities, including audio tracks, instruments, mixing and effects, and some kind of open system plugin support.

If any of these functions are missing, it can certainly still be a valid music creation software, but typically in those cases it’s either more specialized (like EZ Drummer standalone), or less “serious” (like Gadget).

This is not to say that a more playful, less serious software is a bad thing. It might even be a positive - a full pro recording feature set can be a bit cumbersome and tedious for us who aren’t planning to produce any gold records anytime soon.

Records midi ✓
Has instruments/presets /sounds for use in creating music. ✓
Has a sequencer to arrange a song ✓

Are these not DAW features? The lack of audio recording in earlier versions of Reason was only an issue to those who needed it. Many didn't and many still don't.

You take the audio away from DAW and you are left with DW, no?!?
Wouldn't it be more accurate to say Reason was a DW before audio was added?

Silliness aside, while I feel it necessary to use the correct accepted terms when discussing general concepts, such as using "decibels", "gain staging" and "stems" correctly, it's more the marketers who really care about what a DAW actually is and is not. For most users, they just look for the best tool for the job at a price point they can afford, and you can call it whatever you want as long as it works!

There’s a misunderstanding here. My argument is not that Reason was a DAW before audio, nor am I calling Machine a DAW. Just that it was in competition with DAWs. Hence my breakdown of functionality.

Selig, just as you pointed out

For most users, they just look for the best tool for the job at a price point they can afford,