Interview with Ernst Nathorst-Böös 2003 - everything has happened as predicted

[strat1980]

I recently came across an old "soundonsound" interview from 2003. It is quite interesting to read the attitude of the props at that time to the topics VST, audio etc.. Sometimes I wonder if it would not have been better if they had held on to the old ideals. Basically, everything has happened as Ernst has predicted at that time.

Ernst 2003:

"First, on audio recording, Niels Larsen: "I think it's out of the question if we just said 'a little bit of audio'. That's the sort of thing that we just don't do. We have a lot of people saying: 'You could just put in a couple of tracks' or 'Why don't you do an ADAT-like device and call it Recorder?' A nice idea, but it's the wrong way to approach an issue like that. If you put an ADAT into the rack, it's like having a little 16-channel Mackie mixer and an ADAT connected to it. At what point do you become more frustrated and begin to say 'I want to do more than that, I want to do editing. Why don't I have editing?' That instantly becomes an issue. Then it becomes 'Oh, I need more mixing facilities...' And then Reason as a concept, as a product to make music, might change too much. That's why audio tracks at this time is really a no-no, because we feel we'd be ruining what we created rather than enhancing it."
MIDI output is next on our list of annoying questions — as Niels observes: "Ah... another one of those questions that are asked a lot. The thing with MIDI Out is that people say 'Oh, it's really easy', but it's not, actually. If you include MIDI Out, you have a host of other things you need to take into account. For example, do you need SysEx handling? We don't have that because we only need to control our own devices. The other thing is all the other tools you'll need if you are going outside to an environment that is uncontrollable and unpredictable. It would be a key strategic change for us, but also it involves a host of complications other than just making an output. For example, you'd probably need to have transpose on every track, certain other playback controls, probably a MIDI mixer as well..."

"Finally, there's the issue of VST plug-ins, which certain users would like, perhaps principally to provide access to different effects. "Of course, a lot of people would love us to do it," says Niels. "But one reason is that we don't want to become a product that is a VST host, and particularly for VST plug-ins that might not be as efficient as Reason. We take pride in making reliable products, and in making them efficient, so that the user can do a lot on just one computer. One single plug-in could bring the whole thing down! And we don't want to do that. What we'd rather do is keep making instruments that can satisfy our users' appetite. We favour ReWire [for accessing VST plug-ins], not because it's our technology, but because it has become what we wanted an interface to be. Now we have Sonar on board [with ReWire support], and Cakewalk have done a great implementation, I have to say. Also Emagic, Ableton Live, Cubase, Nuendo... So it's getting there, bit by bit."

Pushed on the company's plans for Reason in the future, Ernst is circumspect: "The only thing I can say is that we will try to keep the program as focused as it is. A lot of people would like us to go into all territories and do everything that the big companies do. We're not sure that's a good idea, at least not for us. We can't do everything, so better for us to concentrate on what we do well and try to establish links — like, for example, with ReWire — to other products that provide the pieces that we can't. The future will be a natural evolution of what we have today."

https://www.soundonsound.com/people/ernst-nathorst-boos

[PropitiousME]

Good thing they broke that mold. I can't even imagine how irrelevant the software would be to the overwhelming majority today given the technology offerings and overall market that exists now (as opposed to 2003). Heart was in the right place, but refusing to evolve would have put it on life support a long time ago IMO. Different time and place. I don't think the purist crowd would have been able to support the project into current territory, at least not to the point of keeping the lights on and remaining competitive. Just my .02. Thanks for sharing, was an interesting read.

[moofi]

There´s a difference though between going with the flow of necessity to survive and a potential development into greed. Not saying latter is necessarily the case here, just poiting out.

Good thing they broke that mold. I can't even imagine how irrelevant the software would be to the overwhelming majority today given the technology offerings and overall market that exists now (as opposed to 2003). Heart was in the right place, but refusing to evolve would have put it on life support a long time ago IMO. Different time and place. I don't think the purist crowd would have been able to support the project into current territory, at least not to the point of keeping the lights on and remaining competitive. Just my .02. Thanks for sharing, was an interesting read.

[strat1980]

It is fascinating to see that the implementation of the required features has led to exactly the dissatisfaction Ernst predicted.
Relative to today, you can't really blame the props for focusing on the Rack. Apparently, this is actually a throwback. Ernst never wanted to create the best DAW or the best sequencer. The goal was rather that as many DAWs as possible could communicate with Reason. Realized then via Rewire, today via RRP.

[joeyluck]

Yeah makes you wonder if they had just stuck to the rack, focused on just making the rack the best experience it can be, and then offered the rack as a plugin and never pursued the other things, would we be free of all the expectations and haters today?

[Heigen5]

All I want to say is that: there will be a day when track folders is the missing feature that didn't make Reason a professional DAW much enough.

[PropitiousME]

Yeah makes you wonder if they had just stuck to the rack, focused on just making the rack the best experience it can be, and then offered the rack as a plugin and never pursued the other things, would we be free of all the expectations and haters today?

You shouldn't conflate peoples valid criticism around the product as it is offered today with "haters". What a stupid post for a mod... we'd certainly be free of your banal responses to every viewpoint you take personally had it not gone the road most traveled

Ernst was only pointing out the obvious. It's common sense that once you open the "pandora's box" of alternative features you inherently subscribe to the liabilities associated with that development and keeping it relevant to the context it serves. They bought the farm. That's not to say what comes with that territory is a negative per say, just something Ernst clearly didn't envision for the development agenda. I'd wager hindsight reflects RS reaped more capital off expanding the features into DAW territory and extended the life of the product as well as the user base, but yes, with that comes the need to appease everyone's "whims" as it relates to those features. We all know that is impossible; not just for RS.

As a consumer you can only make requests and provide feedback (critical or not) and hope some of your personal needs are met. The decision as to whether the product satisfies those needs is up to you. Everyone has their opinion which they're entitled to, but there is no need to demonize a large demographic of a vocal majority by calling them "haters".

[strat1980]

Yeah makes you wonder if they had just stuck to the rack, focused on just making the rack the best experience it can be, and then offered the rack as a plugin and never pursued the other things, would we be free of all the expectations and haters today?

In a way, they have always focused mainly on the rack. I find, for example, that most of the demands concerning the sequencer have been implemented. Just not in the sequencer itself but via the Drum Sequencer, Scales and Chord and the Poly Step Sequencer. But somehow this was not understood by many.

[electrofux]

Wouldnt have making Reason a VST plugin solved most issues he had back then?
I mean it would have pissed me off but wouldnt that have been a logical step.

[lowtom]

This old approach was what I loved about Propellerheads and Reason.
Maybe if they kept focus on Rack, Reason would be main player in modular software world now where almost everyone went bonkers over Eurorack.

In terms of audio, a looper device, mini version of Ableton Live Session view for audio clips only, would be enough to fit with the Rack concept and 3.0 version which was focused on live performance aspect. Rack Extensions was great idea. I never liked Record.

I'm, to this day, using main sequencer only for basic automation and changing patterns. All my work is done in Rack and Combinator is where it all is saved. VST is nice but I can live without it and audio as well. There where and still are better VST hosts and audio sequencers and editors.

[electrofux]

Yeah the audio track issue back then could have been integrated in the rack concept instead of record. It would have been accepted and could have later transitioned inot the sequencer or not. People left because of this. And they overthought the midi out issue aswell. Sysex, Midi Mixer, transpose? wtf.

[strat1980]

In terms of audio, a looper device, mini version of Ableton Live Session view for audio clips only, would be enough to fit with the Rack concept and 3.0 version which was focused on live performance aspect.

Thats an interesting idea.

[electrofux]

They never took Session view seriously even though propellerheads where allways pattern orientated - another kindof paradox and missed opportunity.

[rootwheel]

Pushed on the company's plans for Reason in the future, Ernst is circumspect: "The only thing I can say is that we will try to keep the program as focused as it is. A lot of people would like us to go into all territories and do everything that the big companies do. We're not sure that's a good idea, at least not for us. We can't do everything, so better for us to concentrate on what we do well and try to establish links — like, for example, with ReWire — to other products that provide the pieces that we can't. The future will be a natural evolution of what we have today."

https://www.soundonsound.com/people/ernst-nathorst-boos

They should have stuck to their guns. They would still be bullet proof. Highly criticised by some yes, but bullet proof artistically nonetheless. Instead they've probably strayed too far from their original stubborn, visionary approach and have listened too much to the outside world; and as a result Reason is in real danger of simply becoming an also-ran in the DAW-wars, or (perhaps worse) disappearing entirely as a DAW and simply becoming a plug-in to compete with Splice etc.

In some ways KORG's Gadget is the closest thing to recreating the Reason experience of old now. It's certainly a bolder singular vision than Reason has had for some time.

I would love for RS to go back to Reason 5 as a starting point, and build from there with a new self-contained music app. Ditch the separate SSL mixer paradigm; just make a pure rack designed to be used without another DAW, and make it an amazing self-contained instrument; even more so than it used to be. No VSTs. No add-on REs. No ReFills. Make it ideal for live triggering, so it's more fun to 'play' than Live. The feeling of a single instrument that if you make a song on it, you can share the song file and anyone else can load it - 100% of the time.

Build it without thinking about how to monetise this, or how to exploit that, or guaranteed revenue streams this, or commercialisation that, or Business Intelligence this, or performance metrics that. Like Propellerhead used to dare to do. Like great software used to be made. Just build it to make a brilliant music product that you believe in and that's a genuine, unique joy to make music with.

A true single app hardware workstation-style replacement, with all the benefits of software. Good enough to make pro music in it, but not like any other DAW going and deliberately so! It isn't just a Pro Tools, Cubase or Live clone nor is it supposed to be. They could simply call it 'Rack'.

Anyway, got carried away there. Guess I'll keep dreaming of a world in which this kind of thing still happens any more. Instead I guess it's going to be a future of Reason+ Soundpacks inside VST3 in Ableton Live so I can 'sound like venture capital'.

[PropitiousME]

There´s a difference though between going with the flow of necessity to survive and a potential development into greed. Not saying latter is necessarily the case here, just poiting out.

Good thing they broke that mold. I can't even imagine how irrelevant the software would be to the overwhelming majority today given the technology offerings and overall market that exists now (as opposed to 2003). Heart was in the right place, but refusing to evolve would have put it on life support a long time ago IMO. Different time and place. I don't think the purist crowd would have been able to support the project into current territory, at least not to the point of keeping the lights on and remaining competitive. Just my .02. Thanks for sharing, was an interesting read.

Totally fair point and I agree. Who knows, they could have very well carved out the niche they had and maintained status quo as the needs of the consumer evolved with today's technologies (even if it remained a smaller effort / revenue stream). It's all speculation end of day. We are where we are for better or worse. Recent decisions are not a good look for them and I think the vocal majority agrees the decisions are primarily reflective of the financial backer(s) ultimately driving the ship. I know I don't find it hard to believe the theory that VC has a big hand in all this as I imagine their investment from 2017 has been plodding along to maturity. VC won't care about the future product beyond what effects their goal(s) as it relates to ROI and the time allotted for that.

Regardless, it would seem unwise to ignore current sentiment (it's not just RT crowd being critical: https://vi-control.net/community/thread ... on.114518/). I expect we'll hear more from this massive backlash in coming days or weeks.

[integerpoet]

One thing that seems to be missing from all the 20/20 hindsight here is that the people behind Reason had hopes and dreams and aspirations and goals and priorities for their own lives, and back then those may not have included world domination or even maximizing the size of their audience. Maybe they were earning an acceptable living and enjoying their work. They certainly had no moral obligation to please the population of any web forum, and it's unwise to assume they were single-mindedly rapacious would-be captains of industry whose effectiveness can be evaluated by comparison to that of Fortune 1000 executives. There is a middle ground between art and commerce, and if ever there were a category of business suited to that middle ground then it seems to me music software would be one of the best examples one could hope for.

[Heater]

Yeah makes you wonder if they had just stuck to the rack, focused on just making the rack the best experience it can be, and then offered the rack as a plugin and never pursued the other things, would we be free of all the expectations and haters today?

We wouldn't be paying $200 for upgrades. That's for sure.

[Creativemind]

Wouldnt have making Reason a VST plugin solved most issues he had back then?
I mean it would have pissed me off but wouldnt that have been a logical step.

That was what I was thinking. Did you mean before Record or Record was morphed with Reason?

[electrofux]

Wouldnt have making Reason a VST plugin solved most issues he had back then?
I mean it would have pissed me off but wouldnt that have been a logical step.

That was what I was thinking. Did you mean before Record or Record was morphed with Reason?

It would have made even more sense before they added audio. By the time they did that they must have made the decision to become a DAW. But that has allways been half hearted.

[AttenuationHz]

64 bit was a big game changer for music. ReWire stayed on 32bit which made it obsolete when stacked into 64 bit programs and cracks started appearing in how well ReWire was working in those applications, I suppose if it wasn't for VST's being already 64bit capable or rather it is was probably easier to include VST's rather than rewrite ReWire.

[joeyluck]

Yeah makes you wonder if they had just stuck to the rack, focused on just making the rack the best experience it can be, and then offered the rack as a plugin and never pursued the other things, would we be free of all the expectations and haters today?

You shouldn't conflate peoples valid criticism around the product as it is offered today with "haters". What a stupid post for a mod... we'd certainly be free of your banal responses to every viewpoint you take personally had it not gone the road most traveled

Ernst was only pointing out the obvious. It's common sense that once you open the "pandora's box" of alternative features you inherently subscribe to the liabilities associated with that development and keeping it relevant to the context it serves. They bought the farm. That's not to say what comes with that territory is a negative per say, just something Ernst clearly didn't envision for the development agenda. I'd wager hindsight reflects RS reaped more capital off expanding the features into DAW territory and extended the life of the product as well as the user base, but yes, with that comes the need to appease everyone's "whims" as it relates to those features. We all know that is impossible; not just for RS.

As a consumer you can only make requests and provide feedback (critical or not) and hope some of your personal needs are met. The decision as to whether the product satisfies those needs is up to you. Everyone has their opinion which they're entitled to, but there is no need to demonize a large demographic of a vocal majority by calling them "haters".

I am not classifying everybody with criticisms as haters. You are making that assumption. I am thinking of only those who are very dramatic and who say some pretty awful things. Any yes, often you'll find everybody is either a fanboy or a hater and there is no in between apparently. You seem to take issue with anybody who likes R12 and the direction RS is taking.

I think Reason desperately needs to have MPE support. In my very strong opinion, a DAW today can be without it. Especially one with such a strong focus on the instrument side of things. Even without the DAW, the RRP should also be MPE compatible. I also think Reason should have video support. I make the point over and over that so many people today are composing for picture and not just writing music for albums, etc. For some reason people think that video support means hollywood, big budget films. But similarly to how people used to always categorize Reason as a DAW for electronic music and hip-hop only (maybe some still do), I feel RS kind of keeps out many users that compose for media by not simply having basic video sync support. Point being is I have my criticisms, but you won't see me acting like it's the end of the world.

Anyways, my point here is that it is interesting to think about. Just like VCV Rack today, or anything similar. Those are just instruments and/or plugins and because they aren't DAWs, people celebrate what is great about them and nobody is asking for track freeze, track folders, MPE support, etc. for VCV Rack.

[Mistro17]

In a way, they have always focused mainly on the rack. I find, for example, that most of the demands concerning the sequencer have been implemented. Just not in the sequencer itself but via the Drum Sequencer, Scales and Chord and the Poly Step Sequencer. But somehow this was not understood by many.

This is a really good point I never thought about

[electrofux]

Yeah makes you wonder if they had just stuck to the rack, focused on just making the rack the best experience it can be, and then offered the rack as a plugin and never pursued the other things, would we be free of all the expectations and haters today?

I find, for example, that most of the demands concerning the sequencer have been implemented. Just not in the sequencer itself but via the Drum Sequencer, Scales and Chord and the Poly Step Sequencer. But somehow this was not understood by many.

Alot of people would disagree i think. And even if true. You still need a sequencer to make a song with reason. Having some sequencer features outsourced into REs does not mean they are not needed in the sequencer itself.

[joeyluck]

In a way, they have always focused mainly on the rack. I find, for example, that most of the demands concerning the sequencer have been implemented. Just not in the sequencer itself but via the Drum Sequencer, Scales and Chord and the Poly Step Sequencer. But somehow this was not understood by many.

This is a really good point I never thought about

Totally. Not to mention R11!

R11 was one of the biggest updates to the sequencer, yet people spread disinformation about Reason ditching the sequencer when R11 was released. R11 was the most attention the sequencer has gotten since pitch edit IMO. Crossfades, automation curves, improved individual track zoom, multi-note pencil, absolute snap, visual feedback on piano roll keyboard, octave shift shortcut, etc. And those were all things introduced in 11.0! It's like being in the twilight zone. We should maybe have a Twitter style disclaimer here to slap on posts.

[QVprod]

Sounds like the RPP is basically the further realization of his vision. The main thing that held Rewire back, which is why many people left, was the whole run two entirely separate apps and save files thing. How convenient the routing was depended on what DAW you were rewriting into which I think only Ableton and Logic were decent for. That was the focus because that’s what they did best. Make good devices.

The criticisms typically surround Reason not being great at the other things. Just as Ernst mentioned here.