Rack Extensions and Collaboration Templates

Have any feature requests? No promise they'll get to Reason Studios, but you can still discuss them here.
owlymane
Posts: 197
Joined: 27 Feb 2019

24 Aug 2019

It would just be great to be able to collaborate with other Reason users. It's too bad we still can't do it properly ...

A project file with all the Self-Contained samples, instruments and Rack Extensions. The REs can't be used outside the project unless you already have them.
Last edited by owlymane on 25 Aug 2019, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
diminished
Competition Winner
Posts: 1880
Joined: 15 Dec 2018

24 Aug 2019

And after you finished the song, you delete all instruments and start all over again. Voilà, free RE.
Of course there wasn't just one RE in the project, but all of your collaborators.

Yeah not gonna happen.
:reason: Most recent track: resentment (synthwave) || Others: on my YouTube channel •ᴗ•

User avatar
diminished
Competition Winner
Posts: 1880
Joined: 15 Dec 2018

24 Aug 2019

Also be careful what you wish for. A system that would allow for such "fluid" licensing is basically a subscription model.
:reason: Most recent track: resentment (synthwave) || Others: on my YouTube channel •ᴗ•

User avatar
eusti
Moderator
Posts: 2793
Joined: 15 Jan 2015

24 Aug 2019

owlymane wrote:
24 Aug 2019
The REs can't be used outside the project unless you already have them.
Ok. How is that different from VSTs?

D.

owlymane
Posts: 197
Joined: 27 Feb 2019

24 Aug 2019

eusti wrote:
24 Aug 2019
owlymane wrote:
24 Aug 2019
The REs can't be used outside the project unless you already have them.
Ok. How is that different from VSTs?

D.
What exactly do you mean? I meant self-containing Rack Extensions in a sort of collaborative project so that people can work on 1 project distantly.
diminished wrote:
24 Aug 2019
And after you finished the song, you delete all instruments and start all over again. Voilà, free RE.
Of course there wasn't just one RE in the project, but all of your collaborators.

Yeah not gonna happen.
M

Maybe it can only be accessed online and not offline for more control and regulation. The project can't be opened unless both members accept.

User avatar
NekujaK
Posts: 631
Joined: 09 Oct 2016
Location: USA

24 Aug 2019

Do it the old-fashioned way - bounce to audio. :D
wreaking havoc with :reason: since 2.5
:arrow: https://soundcloud.com/nekujak-donnay/sets

User avatar
boingy
Posts: 791
Joined: 01 Feb 2019

24 Aug 2019

NekujaK wrote:
24 Aug 2019
Do it the old-fashioned way - bounce to audio. :D
Never mind "old-fashioned". It's always prudent to send audio stems in any collaboration. MIDI tracks and DAW projects should be included only as a secondary thing.

And, as above, I don't see how embedded REs could be protected against licence abusers.

User avatar
joeyluck
Moderator
Posts: 11029
Joined: 15 Jan 2015

24 Aug 2019

Bounce in place actually works great for this. You can send a project to someone, without removing your REs... Bounce in place automatically mutes the instrument, and then there's placeholders for the missing REs, but the audio right below each.

Then after they add or make changes, you can get the project back and still continue working with your REs that are still in the project.

owlymane
Posts: 197
Joined: 27 Feb 2019

24 Aug 2019

Yeah...old-fashioned way...Propeller Heads always prefer their old-fashioned shell...

FL Studio users send their projects because it's just more convenient and they can work more precisely. And they learn more about each other's methods and techniques.

I don't know how, but there needs to be a way between Reason users to collaborate easier than the unprecise and shallow Bounce to Audio.

owlymane
Posts: 197
Joined: 27 Feb 2019

24 Aug 2019

joeyluck wrote:
24 Aug 2019
Bounce in place actually works great for this. You can send a project to someone, without removing your REs... Bounce in place automatically mutes the instrument, and then there's placeholders for the missing REs, but the audio right below each.

Then after they add or make changes, you can get the project back and still continue working with your REs that are still in the project.
Yeah I mean that's pretty cool. It's just not flawless imo

User avatar
boingy
Posts: 791
Joined: 01 Feb 2019

24 Aug 2019

owlymane wrote:
24 Aug 2019
Yeah...old-fashioned way...Propeller Heads always prefer their old-fashioned shell...

FL Studio users send their projects because it's just more convenient and they can work more precisely. And they learn more about each other's methods and techniques.

I don't know how, but there needs to be a way between Reason users to collaborate easier than the unprecise and shallow Bounce to Audio.
What happens if both FL Studio users don't have the same VSTs? Same problem as REs. Both collaborators need the same plugins and the same DAW version for it to work the way you want.

owlymane
Posts: 197
Joined: 27 Feb 2019

24 Aug 2019

boingy wrote:
24 Aug 2019
owlymane wrote:
24 Aug 2019
Yeah...old-fashioned way...Propeller Heads always prefer their old-fashioned shell...

FL Studio users send their projects because it's just more convenient and they can work more precisely. And they learn more about each other's methods and techniques.

I don't know how, but there needs to be a way between Reason users to collaborate easier than the unprecise and shallow Bounce to Audio.
What happens if both FL Studio users don't have the same VSTs? Same problem as REs. Both collaborators need the same plugins and the same DAW version for it to work the way you want.
Yeah for sure but since REs are Reason User exclusives I thought it would be nice to think of a way of collaborating on the same project. Just because why not?! Let's team up!

User avatar
NekujaK
Posts: 631
Joined: 09 Oct 2016
Location: USA

24 Aug 2019

boingy wrote:
24 Aug 2019
owlymane wrote:
24 Aug 2019
Yeah...old-fashioned way...Propeller Heads always prefer their old-fashioned shell...

FL Studio users send their projects because it's just more convenient and they can work more precisely. And they learn more about each other's methods and techniques.

I don't know how, but there needs to be a way between Reason users to collaborate easier than the unprecise and shallow Bounce to Audio.
What happens if both FL Studio users don't have the same VSTs? Same problem as REs. Both collaborators need the same plugins and the same DAW version for it to work the way you want.
Exactly this. Reason users can collaborate just as easily as FL (or any other DAW) users if you use the native devices. REs and VSTs are third-party (mostly) paid add-ons, and there should be no expectation of freely sharing them with users who don't own them.
wreaking havoc with :reason: since 2.5
:arrow: https://soundcloud.com/nekujak-donnay/sets

owlymane
Posts: 197
Joined: 27 Feb 2019

24 Aug 2019

Lame. But yeah..good point.

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

24 Aug 2019

owlymane wrote:
24 Aug 2019
Maybe it can only be accessed online and not offline for more control and regulation. The project can't be opened unless both members accept.
This has come up a few times before. The idea is that any RE you don't own/rent would be "locked", and would appear as it does when it's missing (cardboard panel, etc.).

So you could't copy it, disconnect/reconnect it, or otherwise interact with it - but it would continue to function as it did when it was created by the original owner.

So yes, you'd have to be online and you'd not be able to make any changes whatsoever.

I'm not sure how this would work from a technical standpoint, or if I'm missing anything, but I've requested this (as have others) pretty much from day one, and all but expected it to be the way it worked when REs were first announced.
Selig Audio, LLC

owlymane
Posts: 197
Joined: 27 Feb 2019

24 Aug 2019

selig wrote:
24 Aug 2019
owlymane wrote:
24 Aug 2019
Maybe it can only be accessed online and not offline for more control and regulation. The project can't be opened unless both members accept.
This has come up a few times before. The idea is that any RE you don't own/rent would be "locked", and would appear as it does when it's missing (cardboard panel, etc.).

So you could't copy it, disconnect/reconnect it, or otherwise interact with it - but it would continue to function as it did when it was created by the original owner.

So yes, you'd have to be online and you'd not be able to make any changes whatsoever.

I'm not sure how this would work from a technical standpoint, or if I'm missing anything, but I've requested this (as have others) pretty much from day one, and all but expected it to be the way it worked when REs were first announced.
That's interesting. The idea behind it being "locked" to the point where the other member can't tweak its settings is limiting. But at least it would be a step forward to a more concrete form of project sharing, and definitely better than the current state..

owlymane
Posts: 197
Joined: 27 Feb 2019

24 Aug 2019

Just a thought. REs need to have a competitive advantage besides being it exclusive to Reason. I understand the license agreement but it would be beneficial to give this freedom to people who own the license to share, in some way, the REs with other people so that it can potentially gain new customers.

Maybe, for example, if say we both work on a project and have different REs. In order to activate the REs an email is sent to both of us to type our passwords for RE activation on the template (everytime we close and open the project again)

I really don't know how much coding and time this needs, but in anyway I believe Props should start having the spirit of collaboration. Because it's beneficial in every way.

User avatar
eusti
Moderator
Posts: 2793
Joined: 15 Jan 2015

24 Aug 2019

owlymane wrote:
24 Aug 2019
Just a thought. REs need to have a competitive advantage besides being it exclusive to Reason. I understand the license agreement but it would be beneficial to give this freedom to people who own the license to share, in some way, the REs with other people so that it can potentially gain new customers.

Maybe, for example, if say we both work on a project and have different REs. In order to activate the REs an email is sent to both of us to type our passwords for RE activation on the template (everytime we close and open the project again)

I really don't know how much coding and time this needs, but in anyway I believe Props should start having the spirit of collaboration. Because it's beneficial in every way.
Maybe they consider the rent option as their preferred way of allowing people to use REs they don't own... Not sure...

D.

User avatar
WillyOD
Posts: 281
Joined: 20 Jan 2015
Location: Left of stardust
Contact:

24 Aug 2019

Love what selig just said. This would make my life so much easier. And I'm collaborating with just one person. Adding shared RE functionally would probably double my collabs ;)

Time for Props to step up?
I used to make music but now I just cry on these forums. @diippii.com

User avatar
joeyluck
Moderator
Posts: 11029
Joined: 15 Jan 2015

24 Aug 2019

selig wrote:
24 Aug 2019
owlymane wrote:
24 Aug 2019
Maybe it can only be accessed online and not offline for more control and regulation. The project can't be opened unless both members accept.
This has come up a few times before. The idea is that any RE you don't own/rent would be "locked", and would appear as it does when it's missing (cardboard panel, etc.).

So you could't copy it, disconnect/reconnect it, or otherwise interact with it - but it would continue to function as it did when it was created by the original owner.

So yes, you'd have to be online and you'd not be able to make any changes whatsoever.

I'm not sure how this would work from a technical standpoint, or if I'm missing anything, but I've requested this (as have others) pretty much from day one, and all but expected it to be the way it worked when REs were first announced.
But wouldn't a collaborator appreciate more having a bounced-in-place track, which does them just as good as a locked device (that they would have to install, just to have the same thing they would have with a bounced track).

I would suggest the subscription model for any collaborator who doesn't want to buy something, but wants to control it. And if they don't want to control it, leave the device in place and bounce in place.

User avatar
Heigen5
Posts: 1505
Joined: 25 Sep 2018
Location: Finland / Suomi

25 Aug 2019

I suggested this many years ago as well: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=7491462
This would have one big benefit: A lot smaller .reason files compared to bouncing.

User avatar
guitfnky
Posts: 4408
Joined: 19 Jan 2015

25 Aug 2019

it would be a hugely welcome thing to be able to seamlessly share projects like that. like Selig said, many of us have called for that sort of functionality, and while the bounce in place workaround is fine, it’s not seamless.

Reason should be able to see that the user who opens the file doesn’t have a license, and when that happens, present the option to sync the RE for them, and it would then function as Selig described. that way the sender doesn’t have to necessarily remember to bounce every single track that has an RE on it (see why the bounce in place wouldn’t be ideal, now?).

and the “it’s the same way VSTs work” argument is sort of a straw man—we’re not talking about VSTs.
I write good music for good people

https://slowrobot.bandcamp.com/

User avatar
Creativemind
Posts: 4875
Joined: 17 Jan 2015
Location: Stoke-On-Trent, England, UK

25 Aug 2019

NekujaK wrote:
24 Aug 2019
Do it the old-fashioned way - bounce to audio. :D
Was just gonna suggest this. Bounce any Re / VST tracks down.

Had to do it myself when one of my vst's wouldn't authorize on my desktop computer as opposed to my laptop. Couldn't tell any difference soundwise but obviously you can't adjust any parameters on the vst / Re.
:reason:

Reason Studio's 11.3 / Cockos Reaper 6.82 / Cakewalk By Bandlab / Orion 8.6
http://soundcloud.com/creativemind75/iv ... soul-mix-3

User avatar
Creativemind
Posts: 4875
Joined: 17 Jan 2015
Location: Stoke-On-Trent, England, UK

25 Aug 2019

:re:
owlymane wrote:
24 Aug 2019
boingy wrote:
24 Aug 2019


What happens if both FL Studio users don't have the same VSTs? Same problem as REs. Both collaborators need the same plugins and the same DAW version for it to work the way you want.
Yeah for sure but since REs are Reason User exclusives I thought it would be nice to think of a way of collaborating on the same project. Just because why not?! Let's team up!
You can do this.

Both collaborators have the same Re or the other person who hasn't got that Re could trial it for the month while you collaborate. Considering they haven't already trialled it of course which would be a bummer.

The locking idea sounds great but if the other person can't change anything or (think this is what was being suggested) see the Re panel at all, apart from seeing which midi notes one used is no different than bouncing it down.

I suppose subscription would be a good idea.
Last edited by Creativemind on 25 Aug 2019, edited 1 time in total.
:reason:

Reason Studio's 11.3 / Cockos Reaper 6.82 / Cakewalk By Bandlab / Orion 8.6
http://soundcloud.com/creativemind75/iv ... soul-mix-3

User avatar
WillyOD
Posts: 281
Joined: 20 Jan 2015
Location: Left of stardust
Contact:

25 Aug 2019

It would be different from bouncing down because then we wouldn't have to bounce down.

I mean do we want more features or workarounds for Reason? I know bounce down is how it's been always done, but hey, let's face it it, sometimes it's ok to try out new things, who knows they just might work out...

(When I'm talking about collabs in this thread I mean passing around my .reason project file...)
I used to make music but now I just cry on these forums. @diippii.com

Post Reply
  • Information
  • Who is online

    Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests