Reason 12 is coming!

This forum is for discussing Reason. Questions, answers, ideas, and opinions... all apply.
User avatar
Billy+
Posts: 2107
Joined: 09 Dec 2016

Post 10 Jun 2021

orthodox wrote:
10 Jun 2021
Billy+ wrote:
10 Jun 2021


Well challism started a new thread and included it in the post.

Challism included it here:-



That's all the conformation I need
"That's just like, your opinion, man" (c)

I mean, it might be an expected side effect of buffer performance optimization in the latest version and RS won't recognize it as an issue.
DC will always introduce a latency in some signal flows, it can't be cured, so you have to record without DC in order to avoid it.
Um ok,

I really don't want another thread being derailed because I've posted:-

but again I don't have any issues but I'm not running that version.....
ˁ˚ᴥ˚ˀ Time for a good long sleep ˁ˚ᴥ˚ˀ

User avatar
orthodox
RE Developer
Posts: 1536
Joined: 22 Jan 2015

Post 10 Jun 2021

challism wrote:
10 Jun 2021
How will the signal flow be affected if the USA makes Washington, DC a state?
The signal flow won't change, but the latency will reach a state level.
Active Reason+ subscriber with (hopefully) early R12 access
Reason 11 Suite gathering dust on the shelf

User avatar
challism
Moderator
Posts: 2703
Joined: 17 Jan 2015

Post 10 Jun 2021

orthodox wrote:
10 Jun 2021
challism wrote:
10 Jun 2021
How will the signal flow be affected if the USA makes Washington, DC a state?
The signal flow won't change, but the latency will reach a state level.
ha ha ha

It will also greatly impact the flag business. Can you imagine having to replace all those flags by adding 1 more star?
I wonder how many flags there are at gov't/quasi-gov't buildings across the USA?

Anyway, if this latency is an issue or a bug, I'm sure RS will address and fix it. If not, 11.3.4 seems to have solved my issues.
Billy+ wrote:
10 Jun 2021
Um ok,

I really don't want another thread being derailed because I've posted:-
ha ha ha, neither do we! ;)
But we love ya Billy.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Players are to MIDI what synthesizers are to waveforms.

ReasonTalk Rules and Guidelines

User avatar
littlejam
Posts: 316
Joined: 15 Jan 2015

Post 10 Jun 2021

hello,

so 11.3.9 fixes the memory leak issue
however, above 11.3.4 has the latency issue
curious if r12 will sort all this out?

cheers,

j
littlejamaicastudios
i7 2.8ghz / 24GB ddr3 / Quadro 4000 x 2 / ProFire 610
reason 10 / reaper / acidpro /akai mpk mini / korg padkontrol / axiom 25 / radium 49
'i get by with a lot of help from my friends'

User avatar
challism
Moderator
Posts: 2703
Joined: 17 Jan 2015

Post 10 Jun 2021

littlejam wrote:
10 Jun 2021
hello,

so 11.3.9 fixes the memory leak issue
however, above 11.3.4 has the latency issue
curious if r12 will sort all this out?

cheers,

j
I'm not sure when the memory leak issue was created. It could have very well been caused with all the updates between 11.3.4 and 11.3.9.
11.3.5, for instance, apparently had a lot of under the hood changes, which may have caused the memory leak issue. I remember first becoming aware of the issue because the DSP wheel would never stop turning. But that doesn't seem to be happening in 11.3.4, at least as far as I can tell. I'm currently running 11.3.4.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Players are to MIDI what synthesizers are to waveforms.

ReasonTalk Rules and Guidelines

User avatar
plaamook
Posts: 1542
Joined: 22 Jan 2015
Location: Abajo del mar...

Post Yesterday

challism wrote:
10 Jun 2021
It will also greatly impact the flag business. Can you imagine having to replace all those flags by adding 1 more star?
I wonder how many flags there are at gov't/quasi-gov't buildings across the USA?
Time to start the iron on star business
At times I have seen what man thought he saw.

User avatar
chimp_spanner
Posts: 2598
Joined: 06 Mar 2015

Post Yesterday

orthodox wrote:
10 Jun 2021
Billy+ wrote:
10 Jun 2021


Well challism started a new thread and included it in the post.

Challism included it here:-



That's all the conformation I need
"That's just like, your opinion, man" (c)

I mean, it might be an expected side effect of buffer performance optimization in the latest version and RS won't recognize it as an issue.
DC will always introduce a latency in some signal flows, it can't be cured, so you have to record without DC in order to avoid it.
This is kind of annoying though. I can’t think of many instances where you’d want to bake the delay amount into the recording, especially if you’re recording an acoustic instrument or direct monitoring. Turning DC off isn’t always a viable option because then it will throw elements you’re performing to out of time, and you’d basically have to perform to a dry click. Or manually bypass effects every time you wanna track. OR just separate the tracking and mixing process entirely, but that’s easier said than done.

FWIW Live has a similar issue, maybe even worse. The buffer size itself is printed into the recording, regardless of whether any plug-in is causing delay. So you have to use two tracks (one monitoring but not recording, and one recording but not monitoring) to get correct audio placement.

Pretty sure Cubase has had this sussed out for a long old time!

User avatar
orthodox
RE Developer
Posts: 1536
Joined: 22 Jan 2015

Post Yesterday

chimp_spanner wrote:
Yesterday
This is kind of annoying though. I can’t think of many instances where you’d want to bake the delay amount into the recording, especially if you’re recording an acoustic instrument or direct monitoring. Turning DC off isn’t always a viable option because then it will throw elements you’re performing to out of time, and you’d basically have to perform to a dry click. Or manually bypass effects every time you wanna track. OR just separate the tracking and mixing process entirely, but that’s easier said than done.
There is a workaround, you can freeze/bounce those elements.
Active Reason+ subscriber with (hopefully) early R12 access
Reason 11 Suite gathering dust on the shelf

User avatar
chimp_spanner
Posts: 2598
Joined: 06 Mar 2015

Post Yesterday

orthodox wrote:
Yesterday
chimp_spanner wrote:
Yesterday
This is kind of annoying though. I can’t think of many instances where you’d want to bake the delay amount into the recording, especially if you’re recording an acoustic instrument or direct monitoring. Turning DC off isn’t always a viable option because then it will throw elements you’re performing to out of time, and you’d basically have to perform to a dry click. Or manually bypass effects every time you wanna track. OR just separate the tracking and mixing process entirely, but that’s easier said than done.
There is a workaround, you can freeze/bounce those elements.
I mean, I guess this is where *actual* freeze would be nice! ;) I do get what you mean. But it's just like if I've got a whole track going, I'm quite far into it and I'm like "ah I really wanna add another harmony/redo this riff/whatever" it's a total workflow killer to first figure out what I gotta bounce and bypass to get everything in time. I just feel like it should be easier. Also the weird thing is that unlike Live, I've encountered the problem even with software monitoring off. So even though I have an external guitar processor and an interface with direct monitoring, I'm still affected by latency if I wanna track with the full mix. I dunno. I'll have to experiment but I am inclined to just start doing my audio recording in Cubase. I'd love to use Live but like I said that has a similar issue, and using two tracks and moving audio between them...again. Workflow killer. For me anyway!

MaMue
Posts: 27
Joined: 14 Jan 2021

Post Yesterday

There are so many workflow killers, but they just do not care, its really sad. Today I had to click on every mixer channel and click "create automation", before I could start recording the automation of the solo/mute button triggered by a Korg nanokontrol.
There is just so much that could be optimized, who the f**k needs soundpacks or new devices? That basic stuff is often so far behind....

But I am really tired after all these years and I think I need to quit.

User avatar
adfielding
Posts: 875
Joined: 19 May 2015

Post Yesterday

Interestingly, I think the idea of workarounds actually explains my personal concern with the current direction of Reason to a certain degree. Despite being not-so-great for workflow, I've generally accepted that workarounds have been necessary to use Reason the way I've wanted to in the past - though certain features (mainly audio recording & VST support) have gone a massive way in stomping out the most egregious workarounds, it feels like new ones keep popping up.

However, the biggest for me is the idea of hosting Reason inside another DAW to compensate for the current limitations of the standalone environment. It's great that the option is there (and I think I'd be a fool to suggest otherwise), but it does feel like a very tidy way to side-step any issues people have with using Reason standalone. "Now you can use Reason in your favourite DAW" is a great selling point if your favourite DAW is anything other than Reason. If, like me, Reason IS your favourite DAW - well, sticking it in a completely different environment is quite the workaround! Still, it's absolutely in keeping with my own trend in accepting workarounds as a cost of using Reason the way I want to - so there's that, I guess.

User avatar
orthodox
RE Developer
Posts: 1536
Joined: 22 Jan 2015

Post Yesterday

chimp_spanner wrote:
Yesterday
orthodox wrote:
Yesterday


There is a workaround, you can freeze/bounce those elements.
I mean, I guess this is where *actual* freeze would be nice! ;) I do get what you mean. But it's just like if I've got a whole track going, I'm quite far into it and I'm like "ah I really wanna add another harmony/redo this riff/whatever" it's a total workflow killer to first figure out what I gotta bounce and bypass to get everything in time. I just feel like it should be easier. Also the weird thing is that unlike Live, I've encountered the problem even with software monitoring off. So even though I have an external guitar processor and an interface with direct monitoring, I'm still affected by latency if I wanna track with the full mix. I dunno. I'll have to experiment but I am inclined to just start doing my audio recording in Cubase. I'd love to use Live but like I said that has a similar issue, and using two tracks and moving audio between them...again. Workflow killer. For me anyway!
To me, that's an insoluble problem. The play and recording heads are the same, so I always have to shift the recorded clips back by a slight bit afterwards. As regards to live monitoring, just don't use any effects. I wonder how they do it, but people learn to play on stage with 300-500 ms latency, or just to a delay line.
Active Reason+ subscriber with (hopefully) early R12 access
Reason 11 Suite gathering dust on the shelf

User avatar
Jackjackdaw
Posts: 878
Joined: 12 Jan 2019

Post Yesterday

MaMue wrote:
Yesterday
There are so many workflow killers, but they just do not care, its really sad. Today I had to click on every mixer channel and click "create automation", before I could start recording the automation of the solo/mute button triggered by a Korg nanokontrol.
There is just so much that could be optimized, who the f**k needs soundpacks or new devices? That basic stuff is often so far behind....

But I am really tired after all these years and I think I need to quit.
And then you try to arm tracks from the Nano Kontrol... Oh wait , you can't.

User avatar
Jackjackdaw
Posts: 878
Joined: 12 Jan 2019

Post Yesterday

chimp_spanner wrote:
Yesterday
orthodox wrote:
Yesterday


There is a workaround, you can freeze/bounce those elements.
I mean, I guess this is where *actual* freeze would be nice! ;) I do get what you mean. But it's just like if I've got a whole track going, I'm quite far into it and I'm like "ah I really wanna add another harmony/redo this riff/whatever" it's a total workflow killer to first figure out what I gotta bounce and bypass to get everything in time. I just feel like it should be easier. Also the weird thing is that unlike Live, I've encountered the problem even with software monitoring off. So even though I have an external guitar processor and an interface with direct monitoring, I'm still affected by latency if I wanna track with the full mix. I dunno. I'll have to experiment but I am inclined to just start doing my audio recording in Cubase. I'd love to use Live but like I said that has a similar issue, and using two tracks and moving audio between them...again. Workflow killer. For me anyway!
Cubase has really good delay compensation, so good that they prioritise it over gapless audio so playback stops if you add tracks or VSTs etc. So loads of people complain about that! Lol

User avatar
chimp_spanner
Posts: 2598
Joined: 06 Mar 2015

Post Yesterday

orthodox wrote:
Yesterday
chimp_spanner wrote:
Yesterday


I mean, I guess this is where *actual* freeze would be nice! ;) I do get what you mean. But it's just like if I've got a whole track going, I'm quite far into it and I'm like "ah I really wanna add another harmony/redo this riff/whatever" it's a total workflow killer to first figure out what I gotta bounce and bypass to get everything in time. I just feel like it should be easier. Also the weird thing is that unlike Live, I've encountered the problem even with software monitoring off. So even though I have an external guitar processor and an interface with direct monitoring, I'm still affected by latency if I wanna track with the full mix. I dunno. I'll have to experiment but I am inclined to just start doing my audio recording in Cubase. I'd love to use Live but like I said that has a similar issue, and using two tracks and moving audio between them...again. Workflow killer. For me anyway!
To me, that's an insoluble problem. The play and recording heads are the same, so I always have to shift the recorded clips back by a slight bit afterwards. As regards to live monitoring, just don't use any effects. I wonder how they do it, but people learn to play on stage with 300-500 ms latency, or just to a delay line.
To clarify, I get latency in my recordings if I record arm but *don't* software monitor (I'm using a POD HD Pro X with the direct monitor switch enabled on my interface). So it's just straight up audio going in, and I still get whatever the delay happens to be in the project, in the audio file itself. No effects on the track.

If you mean "don't use any effects" like, anywhere...that's not feasible. I need a good drum mix to play guitar to, and the effects I use on the drums will necessarily add a little delay. I still need to test exactly what configuration exactly causes this but I had a project the other day where I literally could not record new guitars in to fix a section, and there were so many tracks bouncing (or tracking down the offending plugin) was literally impossible. So I ended up duplicating an earlier part and doing some audio warping to make it work. Shouldn't have to make that level of compromise though. When I'm home and with my guitars again I'll narrow it down for sure!

User avatar
chimp_spanner
Posts: 2598
Joined: 06 Mar 2015

Post Yesterday

adfielding wrote:
Yesterday
Interestingly, I think the idea of workarounds actually explains my personal concern with the current direction of Reason to a certain degree. Despite being not-so-great for workflow, I've generally accepted that workarounds have been necessary to use Reason the way I've wanted to in the past - though certain features (mainly audio recording & VST support) have gone a massive way in stomping out the most egregious workarounds, it feels like new ones keep popping up.

However, the biggest for me is the idea of hosting Reason inside another DAW to compensate for the current limitations of the standalone environment. It's great that the option is there (and I think I'd be a fool to suggest otherwise), but it does feel like a very tidy way to side-step any issues people have with using Reason standalone. "Now you can use Reason in your favourite DAW" is a great selling point if your favourite DAW is anything other than Reason. If, like me, Reason IS your favourite DAW - well, sticking it in a completely different environment is quite the workaround! Still, it's absolutely in keeping with my own trend in accepting workarounds as a cost of using Reason the way I want to - so there's that, I guess.
Yeah I feel you man. It's a shame because I do still think it's actually a really solid DAW. I've done so much work in it over the last several years. The modulation possible between different devices on different tracks is far beyond what you can do with RRP. The automation is still my favourite of any DAW. Player integration is so much better than recording MIDI in real time in another DAW. I've made this point SO many times but for me personally, there are a small handful of improvements that would make sequencing in Reason so much easier.

I say "me personally" - they are things that I don't think anyone should be without. Folders, note chase, punch in/out, track freeze, multi-channel MIDI, custom keyboard commands, markers, slice detection threshold, a seek control for long sample playback in the browser. Real basic QOL stuff IMO. I can work (and have worked) without these things. But I'm running out of reasons as to why I should have to.

I'm genuinely really excited for Combi II and the new sampler. I'm *potentially* excited for HD down the road. But I am starting to get a bit of a sinking feeling that I should probably migrate over to another DAW. I have Live 11 Suite and Cubase 11 Pro here. I really don't enjoy working in either of them as much as Reason, overall. But they both have all of the things I'm waiting for so why tie my own hands right?

Sucks to be considering it - I'm such a big dirty Reason fan boy haha. And I've turned a fair few people onto the software. But for anyone looking for a main DAW to call home I'd really have to wait and see what 12.x brings before I consider suggesting it.
Last edited by chimp_spanner on 11 Jun 2021, edited 1 time in total.

cocoazenith
Posts: 59
Joined: 31 May 2015

Post Yesterday

Will I be able to trial Reason 12 after it is released? Or the only way to test it is by paying one month's worth subscription?

User avatar
orthodox
RE Developer
Posts: 1536
Joined: 22 Jan 2015

Post Yesterday

cocoazenith wrote:
Yesterday
Will I be able to trial Reason 12 after it is released? Or the only way to test it is by paying one month's worth subscription?
Everybody is able to run it as Demo.
Active Reason+ subscriber with (hopefully) early R12 access
Reason 11 Suite gathering dust on the shelf

cocoazenith
Posts: 59
Joined: 31 May 2015

Post Yesterday

orthodox wrote:
Yesterday
cocoazenith wrote:
Yesterday
Will I be able to trial Reason 12 after it is released? Or the only way to test it is by paying one month's worth subscription?
Everybody is able to run it as Demo.
Oh, ok, so no Open Project. I guess I can live with that...

User avatar
Billy+
Posts: 2107
Joined: 09 Dec 2016

Post Yesterday

adfielding wrote:
Yesterday
Interestingly, I think the idea of workarounds actually explains my personal concern with the current direction of Reason to a certain degree. Despite being not-so-great for workflow, I've generally accepted that workarounds have been necessary to use Reason the way I've wanted to in the past - though certain features (mainly audio recording & VST support) have gone a massive way in stomping out the most egregious workarounds, it feels like new ones keep popping up.

However, the biggest for me is the idea of hosting Reason inside another DAW to compensate for the current limitations of the standalone environment. It's great that the option is there (and I think I'd be a fool to suggest otherwise), but it does feel like a very tidy way to side-step any issues people have with using Reason standalone. "Now you can use Reason in your favourite DAW" is a great selling point if your favourite DAW is anything other than Reason. If, like me, Reason IS your favourite DAW - well, sticking it in a completely different environment is quite the workaround! Still, it's absolutely in keeping with my own trend in accepting workarounds as a cost of using Reason the way I want to - so there's that, I guess.
You make a very good point there Adam.

Reason is my favourite DAW and is my preferred environment even though it's missing some key features and although I can use RRP in another environment that other environment doesn't work particularly well in conjunction with RRP.

Unfortunately I can't seem to find a way to make it work as expected and feel that I would just end up playing piggy in the middle with two support departments trying to get it resolved.

Both environments work just not together and the only issue I have with my alternative environment is when using RRP..
ˁ˚ᴥ˚ˀ Time for a good long sleep ˁ˚ᴥ˚ˀ

User avatar
guitfnky
Posts: 3465
Joined: 19 Jan 2015

Post Yesterday

even setting aside the sequencer and mixer views, just having integrated plugins within the Rack (both REs and VSTs) working seamlessly together is a huge selling point for Reason standalone. you just can’t route things the same way when using the RRP in another DAW. I think the biggest hurdle for me was the sort of “culture shock” of going back to a more traditional routing flow in another DAW. I’ve been more or less forced to regress to think of Reason as a series of individual VST plugins that I pull in from time to time. gone are the weird hybrid behemoth routings I might do in Reason.

I can still do some cool routing stuff in Live, but it’s using those proprietary tools, not Reason’s. it makes Reason less interesting to use, and I don’t really reach for RRP as often as I thought I would.

the short version is that RRP turns Reason into just another VST plugin. it’s a very flexible one, but there are already lots of those.

User avatar
chimp_spanner
Posts: 2598
Joined: 06 Mar 2015

Post Yesterday

guitfnky wrote:
Yesterday
even setting aside the sequencer and mixer views, just having integrated plugins within the Rack (both REs and VSTs) working seamlessly together is a huge selling point for Reason standalone. you just can’t route things the same way when using the RRP in another DAW. I think the biggest hurdle for me was the sort of “culture shock” of going back to a more traditional routing flow in another DAW. I’ve been more or less forced to regress to think of Reason as a series of individual VST plugins that I pull in from time to time. gone are the weird hybrid behemoth routings I might do in Reason.

I can still do some cool routing stuff in Live, but it’s using those proprietary tools, not Reason’s. it makes Reason less interesting to use, and I don’t really reach for RRP as often as I thought I would.

the short version is that RRP turns Reason into just another VST plugin. it’s a very flexible one, but there are already lots of those.
I guess so yeah. I mean RRP is great. I use it probably more than any of my standalone VSTs (with the exception of things like Serum or Vital) because I know the instruments so well, and even within a single rack you can still do stuff you'd struggle to do with a "normal" synth plugin. So ya know, I do like RRP and everything. Just never really envisaged that it would become the main (and perhaps sole) focus. So just gotta adapt accordingly I guess!

User avatar
guitfnky
Posts: 3465
Joined: 19 Jan 2015

Post Yesterday

chimp_spanner wrote:
Yesterday
guitfnky wrote:
Yesterday
even setting aside the sequencer and mixer views, just having integrated plugins within the Rack (both REs and VSTs) working seamlessly together is a huge selling point for Reason standalone. you just can’t route things the same way when using the RRP in another DAW. I think the biggest hurdle for me was the sort of “culture shock” of going back to a more traditional routing flow in another DAW. I’ve been more or less forced to regress to think of Reason as a series of individual VST plugins that I pull in from time to time. gone are the weird hybrid behemoth routings I might do in Reason.

I can still do some cool routing stuff in Live, but it’s using those proprietary tools, not Reason’s. it makes Reason less interesting to use, and I don’t really reach for RRP as often as I thought I would.

the short version is that RRP turns Reason into just another VST plugin. it’s a very flexible one, but there are already lots of those.
I guess so yeah. I mean RRP is great. I use it probably more than any of my standalone VSTs (with the exception of things like Serum or Vital) because I know the instruments so well, and even within a single rack you can still do stuff you'd struggle to do with a "normal" synth plugin. So ya know, I do like RRP and everything. Just never really envisaged that it would become the main (and perhaps sole) focus. So just gotta adapt accordingly I guess!
totally—some will get more mileage out of RRP than I do, for sure. when Reason got VST support, I dove in and got very used to making stuff where both plugin types would be reliant on one another from a routing standpoint, and when I started using RRP it was either one or the other, really.

User avatar
MrFigg
Posts: 6506
Joined: 20 Apr 2018

Post Yesterday

Billy+ wrote:
10 Jun 2021


Give it a try and see if you experience it.

Challism included it here:-
viewtopic.php?f=4&t=7523451
challism wrote:
09 Jun 2021
Some of these links can be difficult to find, so I decided to put them all together in one list

Reason Studios
Authorizer: https://help.reasonstudios.com/hc/en-us ... r-Download
Code Meter: https://www.reasonstudios.com/download-codemeter
Companion: https://www.reasonstudios.com/plus/subscriber
Previous versions of Reason: https://www.reasonstudios.com/en/reason/updates
Previous version of Suite: 11.3.4 https://www.reasonstudios.com/download/reason-suite1134 (without the latency issue)
Refill Packer: https://help.reasonstudios.com/hc/en-us ... ill-Packer
Search ReasonStudio.com: https://www.reasonstudios.com/search

Related
ASIO4ALL: https://www.asio4all.org/
LoopMIDI: https://www.tobias-erichsen.de/software/loopmidi.html
MIDIOX: http://www.midiox.com/
Snappy Driver Installer: https://sdi-tool.org/download/
Virtual Audio Cables: https://vb-audio.com/Cable/
Virtual Audio Mixer: https://vb-audio.com/Voicemeeter/index.htm
And a couple of users have confirmed it, I'm still running an older build so don't experience it....
Right!!! Back to this. What exactly am I supposed to be experiencing? No latency here. I put the metronome on 110bpm. Buffer size on 64. Started recording. Played a guitar note on each beat. Did the same thing with delay comp both on and off. No latency problems at all. Have I missed a step? R11.3.9d22.

Edit: Just watched the video again. That guy has the buffer size at 2048 sample. Of course he's going to have latency. Right? What exactly is the problem I'm not understanding here?
丰2ॐ

User avatar
Jackjackdaw
Posts: 878
Joined: 12 Jan 2019

Post Yesterday

MrFigg wrote:
Yesterday
Billy+ wrote:
10 Jun 2021


Give it a try and see if you experience it.

Challism included it here:-
viewtopic.php?f=4&t=7523451



And a couple of users have confirmed it, I'm still running an older build so don't experience it....
Right!!! Back to this. What exactly am I supposed to be experiencing? No latency here. I put the metronome on 110bpm. Buffer size on 64. Started recording. Played a guitar note on each beat. Did the same thing with delay comp both on and off. No latency problems at all. Have I missed a step? R11.3.9d22
You need to add an effect that introduces latency. A limiter with look ahead or a heavy CPU reverb or something. That's when DC kicks in

  • Information
  • Who is online

    Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot] and 0 guests