Ochen K?

[WongoTheSane]

I'm not one for speculation, but my gut is usually right based on a killer instinct and 35+ years experience in multiple industries.

We need bigger LMAO icons!!!

[jayhosking]

I'm not one for speculation, but my gut is usually right based on a killer instinct and 35+ years experience in multiple industries.

This is amazing.

[jayhosking]

Oh man, Wongo beat me to it!

[EnochLight]

My advice to Propellerhead to help change the direction they're going:

1. Work on Reason the DAW: GUI, Performance, Options, Back-end.
2. Stop making devices that RE developers can make.
3. Stop immediately with the (pang, klang, human) monetizing crippled packs.
4. Begin immediately utilizing your RE developer base as your content "providers".(instead of said prior crippled packs).
5. Change the subscription model to one that encourages us to purchase REs and increase RE developers profits. I know how, so should Propellerhead.

1. Agree with this 100%.
2. Disagree completely. Why should they? Frankly, their take on a granular sampler/synth is the best thing out there for the platform. I don't want them to hang up the towel just because they technically compete with other devs for their own platform. Devs knew this going into it, frankly.
3. In the sense that Pangea, Klag, and Humana are "crippled" compared to standard/better-scripted Kontakt 5 Player stuff, sure. In their current form, they still bring value to the platform, despite the fact that you may think they don't.
4. This isn't a bad idea, but honestly... I haven't seen any RE devs that have the prerequisite content to provide. Maybe that's why they used Soundiron?
5. One can't argue with that, even though I have no interest in subscribing to RE's. It pains me to say this, but Roland Cloud is a possible way (if you subscribe to Roland Cloud for 1 year, you get to choose 1 plugin to "keep forever" offline).

[normen]

Why should they? Frankly, their take on a granular sampler/synth is the best thing out there for the platform. I don't want them to hang up the towel just because they technically compete with other devs for their own platform. Devs knew this going into it, frankly.

"I don't care if he did legendary hardware and software synths, he shouldn't do DSP code anymore, my 35+ years of excellence have shown that."

[Psuper]

Didn't want it to sound *quite* like that! I'm older and have had a fair share of both achievements and mistakes and I've learned from. Just perspective value.

I agree though, kinda funny how that reads.

[EdGrip]

Why should they? Frankly, their take on a granular sampler/synth is the best thing out there for the platform. I don't want them to hang up the towel just because they technically compete with other devs for their own platform. Devs knew this going into it, frankly.

"I don't care if he did legendary hardware and software synths, he shouldn't do DSP code anymore, my 35+ years of excellence have shown that."

Ha! Yes!

Basically Psuper is arguing that Propellerhead - the "playground rack of virtual devices with a sequencer" company - should cease developing virtual devices and just tinker with the sequencer.
The appeal of Reason to a beginner IS the included native devices. You don't buy Reason for the legendary sequencer. It's like arguing that Ableton should sack off the live performance stuff and concentrate on the arrange view.
Both Europa and Grain, while technically just another wavetable and granular synth, are both uniquely Propellerhead-y in their design, which I think is a Good Thing.
Saying to newcomers "Buy Reason! It's got Thor! It's a bit old and funny-looking and mono, but tough, if you want something better you can buy a Rack Extension!" is no way to win people over.
Sorry for going on, but argh

[Psuper]

"I don't care if he did legendary hardware and software synths, he shouldn't do DSP code anymore, my 35+ years of excellence have shown that."

Ha! Yes!

Basically Psuper is arguing that Propellerhead - the "playground rack of virtual devices with a sequencer" company - should cease developing virtual devices and just tinker with the sequencer.
The appeal of Reason to a beginner IS the included native devices. You don't buy Reason for the legendary sequencer. It's like arguing that Ableton should sack off the live performance stuff and concentrate on the arrange view.
Both Europa and Grain, while technically just another wavetable and granular synth, are both uniquely Propellerhead-y in their design, which I think is a Good Thing.
Saying to newcomers "Buy Reason! It's got Thor! It's a bit old and funny-looking and mono, but tough, if you want something better you can buy a Rack Extension!" is no way to win people over.
Sorry for going on, but argh

Haha! No!

Basically Psuper is arguing that Propellerhead - the "playground rack of virtual devices with a sequencer" company has a platform where both propellerhead and developers can develop any devices they want, and offer them to users as REs. If Propellerhead offered further content "updates" as optional REs and focused on the DAW for updates, how great would that be compared to what's happened? Would it help the consumer? The RE Devs? Reasons Reputation? Maybe even Reasons bottom line? You bet.

However propellerhead is also now on the path of including default crippled 3rd party packs as native devices when they have the RE community of developers to pool from. And those RE devs would do FAR more to further our DAW of choice than any outsiders.

The appeal of Reason to a beginner IS the included native devices, and there's plenty, more than plenty actually, overwhelming maybe even to many, and infinitely expandable with RE capability and VST. However, only Propellerhead can work on their DAW. And they should prioritize it first, second, and third.

Both Europa and Grain are worth the update for some, as usual of any update. However, I'd rather see them as REs since they clearly can be, and should be. Again.. broker record here.. work on the DAW.

It's simple really how this would play out, not all grand and glory but a step back in the right direction for here on out. If you don't see how this will play out, there's nothing more I can say to convince you otherwise. I'm fine with that, time will tell.

[EnochLight]

Serious question: how does 1 content update, using 3rd parties to supply the content, equate to Propellerhead being on any "path"? I mean seriously - it's the 13th version (counting .5 updates; more if you count the .x updates), and this is literally the first time they've ever done this. I don't think they are on any path that is any different than the one they've been on since... forever?

People need to relax - if they didn't try and stir things up a bit, things would get stale. I seriously doubt they're done developing core sequencer/workflow features in updates. But if people are expecting Reason to have all the features akin to other DAW, I'm afraid I have bad news for you.

[Psuper]

Serious question: how does 1 content update, using 3rd parties to supply the content, equate to Propellerhead being on any "path"? I mean seriously - it's the 13th version (counting .5 updates; more if you count the .x updates), and this is literally the first time they've ever done this. I don't think they are on any path that is any different than the one they've been on since... forever?

People need to relax - if they didn't try and stir things up a bit, things would get stale. I seriously doubt they're done developing core sequencer/workflow features in updates. But if people are expecting Reason to have all the features akin to other DAW, I'm afraid I have bad news for you.

You answered the question. It's the 13th version (counting .5 updates; more if you count the .x updates), and this is literally the first time they've ever done this.

This type of decision isn't done off-the-cuff. It may cease or continue depending on what 'agreements were made. It will definitely continue if you let it, so show your support if you want more of this kind of thing. I don't care for it one bit, and have had my say as well.

I have plenty of things I'd like to see. As for expectations, I personally have none -- it's not my place to have them. I just want to see something that makes ME go "Thank you, take my money."

If Reason 10 was released with a handful of most requested features and a few internal bells and whistles not possible with REs, then offered Grain RE and Europa RE, I would have paid $130 for the upgrade, and maybe $60 for grain, prolly more depending on how excited I was. Europa isn't my thing, but I'd prolly buy it anyway, also based on my spending habits. That's me, maybe I'm the only one, but Id bet I'm not. And I think props should bet I'm not. But again, not up to us.

[EnochLight]

You answered the question. It's the 13th version (counting .5 updates; more if you count the .x updates), and this is literally the first time they've ever done this.

So you're suggesting that because they added content on the 13th update, it has changed the entire product line path? Yeah um, I think that's a stretch, friend.

[Psuper]

You answered the question. It's the 13th version (counting .5 updates; more if you count the .x updates), and this is literally the first time they've ever done this.

So you're suggesting that because they added content on the 13th update, it has changed the entire product line path? Yeah um, I think that's a stretch, friend.

Did you read the next line?

This type of decision isn't done off-the-cuff. It may cease or continue depending on what 'agreements were made. It will definitely continue if you let it, so show your support if you want more of this kind of thing. I don't care for it one bit, and have had my say as well.

A path has a beginning. And this path is one where deals are made before stepping onto it.

[EnochLight]

So you're suggesting that because they added content on the 13th update, it has changed the entire product line path? Yeah um, I think that's a stretch, friend.

Did you read the next line?

This type of decision isn't done off-the-cuff. It may cease or continue depending on what 'agreements were made. It will definitely continue if you let it, so show your support if you want more of this kind of thing. I don't care for it one bit, and have had my say as well.

A path has a beginning. And this path is one where deals are made before stepping onto it.

Sorry, you're not making a compelling argument at all. Of course none of the decisions for developing software are made "off-the-cuff" - and a single version release does not indicate a "path". Every single update would indicate a different path depending on how you want to interpret it. If this is what your 30 years of instincts has taught you, then I've got an instinctive feeling that things won't turn out how you think.

They probably won't turn out how I think.

[Psuper]

Did you read the next line?



A path has a beginning. And this path is one where deals are made before stepping onto it.

Sorry, you're not making a compelling argument at all. Of course none of the decisions for developing software are made "off-the-cuff" - and a single version release does not indicate a "path". Every single update would indicate a different path depending on how you want to interpret it. If this is what your 30 years of instincts has taught you, then I've got an instinctive feeling that things won't turn out how you think.

They probably won't turn out how I think.

If it's not compelling to you no worries, we agree and disagree often enough I can tell you're typically genuine

Hey if they aren't on a "path" afterall (or decide to veer off it), and we don't see anymore of 3 (should be 1) instances of 3rd party sampleplayers that all do the same thing and just play crippled packs, I'd be happy. More if they replaced those with RE devs, but satisfied nonetheless. So I hope your right. But that instinct of mine... boy its strong on this one!

[EnochLight]

But that instinct of mine... boy its strong on this one!

Dude, seriously - I'll be happy if they just update the GUI/UX so we can finally use Reason on 4K+ screens properly - and you can edit your signature to something new.

[Psuper]

But that instinct of mine... boy its strong on this one!

Dude, seriously - I'll be happy if they just update the GUI/UX so we can finally use Reason on 4K+ screens properly - and you can edit your signature to something new.

lol

[eXode]

2. Disagree completely. Why should they? Frankly, their take on a granular sampler/synth is the best thing out there for the platform. I don't want them to hang up the towel just because they technically compete with other devs for their own platform. Devs knew this going into it, frankly.

Just a few thoughts.

Yes we knew that props would create competing REs, nothing wrong with that.

But selling single REs in the shop vs including them in a Reason upgrade is quite different from a competition viewpoint, as a RE developer you cannot compete with that, period. But sure, I'm still willing to accept that.

However considering props appraisal of the RE platform we had no real clues about VST plugins or the subscriptions (just look at ReSpire), in fact I'd go so far to say that they were not being completely honest about their perception of the RE platforms succes (or lack thereof). If REs were so sucessful I doubt we would have seen VST support, or subscriptions for that matter. Subs is probably just an attempt at trying to gain interest in the platform after opening up to VST, at developers cost. Too early to draw conclusions? Sure but declining overall sales plus minuscule revenue from subs doesn't make for a good outset.

I understand they are a business, but how about not keeping RE developers in the dark, so that they too can make informed business decisions.

[JiggeryPokery]

Serious question: how does 1 content update, using 3rd parties to supply the content, equate to Propellerhead being on any "path"? I mean seriously - it's the 13th version (counting .5 updates; more if you count the .x updates), and this is literally the first time they've ever done this.

Sorry, Enoch, you make it sound like PH have never added new content. It literally is not the first time 3rd party content has been licensed to add content. (And I reiterate my earlier point that licensing isn't a bad thing, nor is refreshing the content, I imagine most if not all other DAWs do this, but make no mistake: it is a shortcut and a comparatively cheap way of providing content to users). I may have missed some out, but off the top of my head:

Reason 2: The massive Orkester ReFill and lots of extra FSB samples to support the introduction of NNXT.
Reason 5: Kong was added, many new one-shot samples most-likely licensed for it. Dr.Rex upgraded to OctoRex and iirc new loops were added for both OctoRex and NurseRex, but not 100% sure
Record: Memory failure here, but ID8 probably has licensed content not otherwise available in the Reason FSB of the era.
Reason 6: I remember a lot of new patches, but I've got a feeling there was a fairly big loop update, but it might have been a later version as they all blur into one a bit these days .
Reason 8.3: Convolution reverb, licensed convolution samples added.

In terms of dedicated RE devices built explicitly with licensed content in a Reason upgrade, on that score R10 is the first occasion. But afaik all the IDT REs produced by PH have been licensed, e.g. uJam for the A-List, PinkNoise for Layers. Without knowing what the deals are, potentially PH keep more income from their IDTs, perhaps in some cases even all. We only ever get half.

Devs knew this going into it, frankly.

Sure, we absolutely did, and we obviously accepted that restriction. But that doesn't make it easier when they then choose to compete with devs from a materially unfair position. And remember, that position is also salaried. It's near zero risk.

I genuinely didn't intend to make another response here, as I didn't want to get into "have to have the last word fight" so endemic of these types of debates, and it's compounded by there being so much we can't say because of NDA or other points of confidentiality, which makes responding a lot, lot harder, and I'm also aware of the danger of talking down REs, which I don't want to do, because I have and still do appreciate the positives of it. What's notable is that overall there seems to be little disagreement from developers (even one or two I've had notable disagreements with in the past).

However, there's a lack of critical thinking being applied in some quarters, and an assumption that MHG's posts are totally on the level. There's nothing dishonest, let's be clear, he's been careful. But mostly everything is utterly disingenuous, that is "not candid or sincere, typically by pretending that one knows less about something than one really does".

There's nothing wrong, whatsoever, with liking Reason 10. If people upgrade and love it, that's cool. Frankly it still doesn't excuse the lack the finesse MHG has carefully avoided explaining, but lots of people are happy with that, then fine, we can't all love everything. But I read Mattias' "Everything is awesome!" reply above and as a dev, the obvious response to that is the great line from John Vernon in The Outlaw Josey Wales. "Don't piss down my back and tell me it's rainin'".

So the other question you need to ask, and here I must end, is why aren't Kilohearts, the diligent and highly-respected RE devs they are, doing Carve EQ for RE? The answer certainly isn't because Ochen has a product with the same name.

* slowly raises hand *

I actually spoke to those guys about that in one of the Carve threads on FB (or maybe it was Twitter - can't remember). Their response to not porting Carve to RE was this: the GUI/UX is too advanced for the RE SDK to handle, and you can add it to your rack via a VST right now anyway.

OK, well, it was a rhetorical question : nearly all devs with a published or in-progress SDK2.5 high graphic device on this thread knew the answer without having to ask anyone. And that answer rather contradicts the assertion that the RE SDK is "amazing". The shop and platform can be a handy as you like, but that's all for nought if we can't produce competitive devices for it.

Indeed, it clearly throws into stark relief the nonsense that the RE format fits that description, the being that by then adding VST support, that shortcoming is hideously exposed for people to see side-by-side in the Rack. The current SDK cannot run at more the 15fps when pushing the higher levels of draw data it was meant to support. So that's one arena in which it is extraordinarily disingenous of Mattias to say they "eat their own dog food": if any device built by PH used the higher data levels available in SDK2.5, they would have found it severely problematic, and I guarantee someone have been assigned to get it fixed. But they either have not tested it, or having done so discovered how problematic it is, decided not to expose themselves to its shortcomings in published devices, and instead opted to leave third-party devs carrying the can and ire of users with underperforming graphic-rich REs.

Take the new Optic device. With no disrepect intended on the dev involved, who's done the best he can with the tools at his disposal, the refresh rate is simply far too slow making the result mostly worthless. I'm trying to stick to a very vague description here, cos NDA, but most devs will know the detail. And given that LoveOne/Gustav beta-tested SKD2.5 with Proton late last year and has also complained in dev forums about the forced slow redraw, it's inconceivable it wasn't known about at least twelve months ago. And yet it's been ignored. The responsibility for this lies solely with Mattias, the person remember, who is in charge of product management, specifically opted to abandon 2.5 as it was released, and not the fix the redraw, despite numerous devs raising the issue regularly since. And that's why it's a conflict of interest: there absolutely should have been, and should be, a separate person responsible for managing the upkeep of the SDK, and not the person who on a whim can decide to implement a competing format, and at our expense.

[EnochLight]

Just a few thoughts.

Yes we knew that props would create competing REs, nothing wrong with that.

But selling single REs in the shop vs including them in a Reason upgrade is quite different from a competition viewpoint, as a RE developer you cannot compete with that, period. But sure, I'm still willing to accept that.

However considering props appraisal of the RE platform we had no real clues about VST plugins or the subscriptions (just look at ReSpire), in fact I'd go so far to say that they were not being completely honest about their perception of the RE platforms succes (or lack thereof). If REs were so sucessful I doubt we would have seen VST support, or subscriptions for that matter. Subs is probably just an attempt at trying to gain interest in the platform after opening up to VST, at developers cost. Too early to draw conclusions? Sure but declining overall sales plus minuscule revenue from subs doesn't make for a good outset.

I understand they are a business, but how about not keeping RE developers in the dark, so that they too can make informed business decisions.

Fair points!

Serious question: how does 1 content update, using 3rd parties to supply the content, equate to Propellerhead being on any "path"? I mean seriously - it's the 13th version (counting .5 updates; more if you count the .x updates), and this is literally the first time they've ever done this.

Sorry, Enoch, you make it sound like PH have never added new content.... I may have missed some out, but off the top of my head:

Reason 2: The massive Orkester ReFill and lots of extra FSB samples to support the introduction of NNXT.
Reason 5: Kong was added, many new one-shot samples most-likely licensed for it. Dr.Rex upgraded to OctoRex and iirc new loops were added for both OctoRex and NurseRex, but not 100% sure
Record: Memory failure here, but ID8 probably has licensed content not otherwise available in the Reason FSB of the era. [EnochLight notes: this is pure conjecture]
Reason 6: I remember a lot of new patches, but I've got a feeling there was a fairly big loop update, but it might have been a later version as they all blur into one a bit these days .
Reason 8.3: Convolution reverb, licensed convolution samples added.

This really just proves my point from earlier: Props/Reason aren't on a "path" that really can be determined. Psuper seemed to suggest that the R10 release was indicative of such a path. Your post above just proves that said "path" is no different than what they've been doing since Day 1, which appears to be: mix shit up occasionally. Now if that was Psuper's point, then I don't see the problem with mixing shit up.

Let me be clear: I get that you and other devs are miffed that Reason now supports VST. The walled garden is no longer walled off, and anyone can add anything to their rack at this point, which grossly changes the way many users will purchase their wares. And I totally get that you and other devs are miffed that Reason included RE's with a major version update that directly competes with your own products. And I even get that devs are miffed with the new subscription service, as it's very unlikely to be a cash cow for anyone involved. Every quarter when I receive my pittance of royalty payments from Spotify or Apple Music, I am reminded of this.

I just wonder if things could have been handled differently? If Props had updated the SDK to 2.5, or even revolutionized the way Reason handles advanced graphics via the RE SDK so high res/high refresh rate displays could be made, and staved off VST-support for another year... would that have changed things? When VST support was finally added, and a subscription service, would dev's sentiment really have changed at all in this alternate future?

At this point, I don't think it would have. Even with the additional year of cornering the market, the end results would be the same as they are today, IMHO. From a user perspective (try and forget that you're a dev, and instead - just be a Reason user) - I can't help but be glad that we finally have VST support in Reason. I'm ambivalent about the RE subscription service - I won't use it, but I'm sure some will. And now that the RE SDK supports everything native devices can do for the most part, I'm glad that devs can step up if they're so inclined, but even if RE devs bail and RE's, as a third party market, slowly die a fiery death - at least Propellerhead can release new devices on par with native devices. For a user, it's never been a better time to be a Reasoner. But, I digress.

And before anyone starts accusing me of being a cheerful cheer leader of everything Reason, please understand that I have a laundry list of shit that needs to be done and fixed, and I also question some of the decisions that were made. It's just that I've always been a half glass full of awesome.

[Zac]

I'm not going to quote all the above to reply to a tiny part of it.

My view is that introducing vsts was maybe necessary but RE devs should have known way before the introduction to give their businesses time to adapt and diversify.

Subscriptors and subscriptees seems like pimps and sex traders to me. No way out. No choice.

[Goodbye]

Props/Reason aren't on a "path" that really can be determined

I agree that they aren't really sure what path they are on. A lot of their decisions recently betray blind panic rather than any kind of careful masterplan. It's obvious that they are grasping for more users, but the way they are going about it is so confused, and judging by the poor receptions to R10 and the bargain-basement discount on upgrades it hasn't been very successful. On one hand they are opening up the platform to VSTs which would make sense if they were working to improve the non-device parts of Reason - sequencer, graphics etc and improving VST integration - to appeal to people using other DAWs with loads of VSTs. This might still be bad for devs, but if it pulled more users to the platform it might be good as well, though I still think the no-resale nature of REs is going to really limit the number of people who will buy them. However they haven't fixed issues with VST integration and haven't updated the non-device parts of Reason. Instead they have pumped out some romplers, licensed some content and made a couple of admittedly nice REs whilst at the same time adding RE subscriptions, but failing to improve the SDK. This just doesn't make any sense to me. Why release VST integration then fail to improve it? Why update the SDK and then fail to fix issues? The only credible answer (apart from ineptitude, financial issues or blind panic) is that they are putting all energies into either the iOS version or a longer term rewrite (or probably a combination of the two), the fruits of which we will see somewhere down the line. If this is true, they are doing an appalling job of keeping the community updated with their plans.

[MattiasHG]

However, there's a lack of critical thinking being applied in some quarters, and an assumption that MHG's posts are totally on the level. There's nothing dishonest, let's be clear, he's been careful. But mostly everything is utterly disingenuous, that is "not candid or sincere, typically by pretending that one knows less about something than one really does".

There's nothing wrong, whatsoever, with liking Reason 10. If people upgrade and love it, that's cool. Frankly it still doesn't excuse the lack the finesse MHG has carefully avoided explaining, but lots of people are happy with that, then fine, we can't all love everything. But I read Mattias' "Everything is awesome!" reply above and as a dev, the obvious response to that is the great line from John Vernon in The Outlaw Josey Wales. "Don't piss down my back and tell me it's rainin'".

This was not my intention. There was a discussion about the RE format and my quote about that I think the RE format has a lot of great upsides was questioned. I just wanted to explain why I think that.

Re: the lack of finesse, are you referring to the shortcomings you mentioned in the loop content and sampled instruments? Reason 9.5 was a huge task for us and we wanted it to be free for all users, that made it logical to focus Reason 10 on content so we could develop in parallel. Any lack of finesse in the content we've developed together with other companies is, in the end, on me. I oversaw Reason 10 and maybe I should've been more detail oriented but it was also important for us to get a good release out in time. So, I'm sorry about that! Hopefully the content is still enjoyable and useful for many.

Additionally, there might be a difference in how we're thinking about the SDK. Personally I believe one can make highly competitive devices without heavy use of real-time graphics (for example). But even if that's not the RE format's strength, it doesn't make the amazing things I referred to less amazing. Or at least I don't think so, and we can safely agree to disagree. And just to be clear, I'm actually NOT product manager for the RE SDK so it's slightly unfair to single me out as a person out as responsible for this. I do pass on any feedback I see on it though!

To be clear, my responses should in no way be interpreted as "What JiggeryPokery is saying is wrong, disregard that". Your feelings and the impact on your business is not something I can or want to argue with. As Reason Product Manager I'm also ever so slightly removed from the RE side of things, so there's that. In the end though, I (and Propellerhead as a whole of course) sincerely hope that things will look up for those RE devs that express they've been impacted and we WILL keep improving the format and possibilities therein. A healthy RE business is good for everyone.

Hopefully that cleared some things up! I think that this thread, despite it's length and different opinions, is quite constructive so I'm glad it's here.

[JiggeryPokery]

I still claim that yes, the RE format does amazing things no other plug-in format does. I know of no other format where as a developer you build once and that build, without sharing the source code, can be compiled for virtually any platform. PC, Mac, 32-bit, 64-bit and so on. The LLVM technology supports running an RE wherever there might be a host in the future. So yeah, no other audio plug-in format does this and I definitely think it's unique and amazing.

Compared to other plug-in formats, for the dev, there is also a distinct lack of codebase management, compatibility, copy protection and building a file system—that IS a difference. I don't think saying "you can build those in VST though" is fair, the difference is that they're already built and you just hook into them so there's less development from an SDK perspective.

And to what EnochLight said, I really do think all those things (and some more) are differences between Rack Extensions as a format compared to other plug-in formats. I wouldn't dismiss them, they matter for both developers and users. Together I'd say they're pretty damn great

• Unified, cross-browsable patch format with one browser implementation (that the host takes care of)
• Proven, ready-made copy protection that's yet to be cracked
• A greater extent of crash protection built in to the format
• Download and manage your plug-ins, regardless of developers, in one place with one license
• Native undo support
• Fully integrated into a DAW workflow and layout
• Seamless collaboration between users and—the latest version is always available on all platforms and is compatible if you both have it
• Updates to the plug-in can't break your songs
• 30-day trial for all plug-ins
• Future-proof technology — once you've bought an RE, it's yours forever and will work forever

OK, this definitely last post from me in this thread! The last, absolutely the last, cross my heart and hope to be spanked until my bottom goes purple etc. I don't want to be the one person banging on about this stuff, but too much of that post can't go uncommented upon and taken at face value.

I dealt with the "eat our own dog food" aspect of a previous reply in my preceding post: to the best of our knowledge, none of PH's REs use high data strings requiring artificially restricted frame rates to display them, almost certainly because of those GUI limitations and you don't want to expose yourself by releases devices with that issue; so you're chowing down on your meaty chum chunks, sure, but you're not having your kibbles too.

To start with, most things you note above are very useful, but at least two have not been proven.

"Future-proof technology" that "will work forever"?

2046 is calling asking for a citation there. Many Reason tracks from as recently as 2015 will not play the same in the Reason of 2017, just two years later: someone removed two native devices, remember? Lest we forget! There is no reason whatsoever to believe that "will work the same in future" marketing guff: that bridge has been crossed, burned, and the remnants hauled away for a modern art installation about the ephemeral nature of transition, and I'm surprised you had the audacity to bring it up. We now know full well compatibility could change in Reason for a multitude of reasons, whether it's PH-mandated or due to external forces, at any time. The Line6 removal was almost certainly the former; granted we had plenty of notice that time, but I think most OSX users live in fear that every OSX release deprecates something that breaks something else.

I know of no other format where as a developer you build once and that build, without sharing the source code, can be compiled for virtually any platform.

JUCE.

While it's lovely that we can code so easily for both Windows and OSX without needed and test on both, and I don't know the full details and the processes required, VST devs can and do use cross-platform systems like JUCE. Even Pirkle has RackAFX, in the books we all use, for VST/AU. So that's two cross-platform formats without even thinking hard about it, so your comment there shows a bizarre lack of knowledge, at best. Advantage RE in some respects, clearly, but it's demonstrably not unique in terms of Windows and OSX.

And in any case, apart from Windows and OSX, what other platforms is Reason available on? Linux? No, it's not even on Linux.

Thus "virtually any platform" (which most pointedly is not the same as "any or all other platforms in reality"!) is a moot point if you're not utilising that ability, so that makes zero difference to either RE sales or subscriptions today. Until such time you make Reason available on other platforms, and REs all succesfully compile and run on them, you're marketing in hypotheticals.

Compared to other plug-in formats, for the dev, there is also a distinct lack of codebase management, compatibility, copy protection and building a file system—that IS a difference. I don't think saying "you can build those in VST though" is fair, the difference is that they're already built and you just hook into them so there's less development from an SDK perspective.

I know what you're getting at here, but, and at the risk of this being seen as strawman, that's not really a defense against what are effectively up to £10,000 product investments being amortized in a reasonable amount of time by 100 people subscribing to them for 0.50p a month is it? That's the trade-off that makes a huge difference, especially if a VST dev can simultaneously compile for VST, AU and RTAS (not sure about AAX), even if, unlike an an RE LLVM compile, it requires some extra intervention including additional testing at the end; that extra effort is more than compensated by the cross-format returns, because now you're not looking at 6:4 VST, you're looking at 6:4 across VST/AU/RTAS et al (and it may be the case piracy ratio are far lower for other DAWs' plugin formats). You talk about 32- and 64-bit as if it's an important distinction and benefit. It was, in 2012, very important, for sure. But Reason isn't 32-bit anymore, hasn't been since .... 2014? Just like most programs of this ilk aren't 32-bit anymore, so this dual bitness is at best an historical, legacy function and not a current selling point, unless you're talking about those fantastical future formats again that will strangely require moving back to 32-bit memory addressing instead.

And referring to your previous comment, you were defending VST support by stating you tried a load of VSTs and then settled on just four in typical use. But what you've not then done is extrapolate that behaviour across a thousand users. Now that's potentially four thousand equivalent REs that won't be made and/or sold in the PropShop for the benefit of their devs or PH. Unless any of those VSTs are sold in the PropShop, then it is to your benefit and theirs, at RE devs' expense.

And in any event, you get all the REs free anyway! So they're disposable items for you, with no sense of acquired value to you. So I totally understand now how we've got to a point where product management has become very disassociated by what's going on in (at least parts of) the RE development channel.

Decision-making for a major product like Reason should not be dictated based on the personal or anecdotal usage of its own product manager. You may think I'm being facetious there, and knowing me as well as I do, I probably am a bit, I apologise, but at the same time, there is some truth in it: what is clear is that any research you did was from the opening position you've freely admitted that you wanted VST support added to Reason. You've stated that was your aim, therefore it must have been regardless of any alternative option not to do so. Thus any research you did carry out is certain to be biased because you likely placed less value on contrary opinions, and more weight on those supporting your own usage case.

But back to the SDK: sure, regarding the RE development, I doubt anyone is going to disagree with the usefulness and practicality of those features you list for the RE SDK: the SDK is pretty easy and fun to develop for, that's why so many of us have done so, and got a hell of a lot of enjoyment out of it. We do all appreciate the bits that work really well; some devs didn't like the 3D bit, others, like me, loved it. I, for one, have earned a small but acceptable living out of it. As someone with severe depression who's been unable to work full time I'm grateful for that, it's perhaps even been a life-saver, that's why I'm both passionate yet critical, because your decisions matter to me and others who've invested in supporting the platform you now seem to have abandoned, all while pretending you haven't. The most fundamental aspects of the SDK and platform were well implemented and back in 2012 we all appreciated it was v1, and it would take a bit a time to grow.

However, five years on from the start of that journey, calling it "amazing" right now seems more for the sake of avoiding any negative feedback about the bits that are problematic in competing with VST, like 15 FPS GUI data handling, and in most other respects, I'm sorry, but you're mistaking convenience for brilliance. No matter how convenient (or brilliant or amazing) the functionality of the shop platform, or RE SDK is, such notions are irrelevant if no bugger buys product built with it.

And, yes I know I'm risking talking REs down again, but I have a sneaking suspicion, and I get a sense other devs are having it too, that we're near saturation point. This BF week may prove a strong indicator of which way the wind is blowing. Most devs will surely have a "figure" that's appropriate to them that indicates a positive or negative position. I've noticed a couple of devs have discounted 70/80%. That's not merely a discount, that's a firesale, that's getting their feet wet grasping at the last few shekels at the bottom of the well.

I wonder if most users who've seen the REs they want have probably bought them by now, and/or are also looking towards VST to fill any gaps. New Reason users will still largely be all toddler-on-Xmas-morn playing with the native devices, especially now you've added Europa and Grain, and RadPiano, and Pulsar and Synchronous, and those SoundIron things and more drum samples and more loops. It's a lot to pump into the ecosystem at the same time. Acquiring new third party RE or ReFill content beyond that as well? No, they'll do what noobs have done and will continue to do for time immemorial: grab as much free shit from off random websites first in an all-you-can-download buffet of equal brilliance and crap. Those new users may not be enough in the short-to-medium term to make up the shortfall in older users who are all spent out. The depth of the Reason user-base is not there.

And lastly, we need to talk about Pirates (and trials).

[*] Proven, ready-made copy protection that's yet to be cracked

This one is also worth discussing because it's one I raised back in February when I was asked about VST support. There's no getting away with the fact a lot of people use, or have used, pirated software.

However, the reality in terms of financial returns are rather complex resulting in a issue that's vastly more grey than black and white.

If VST producer has a synth, and he sells 5000 units across five VST-hosting DAWs, for £1 each. He's made £5000.

Now, 5000 people also pirated it. Has he lost another £5000? Well, arguably no, because they were never going to pay for it at any cost anyway. But what actually then happens, is 1000 of those people love it so much, that when he releases an update that they can't get a crack for, they now pay $1 as well. So he's earned £6000 from the original 10,000 users, more than half of which are paying customers. Maybe 6:4 paying customers to pirates is actually a good enough ratio?

By contrast, that dedicated Rack Extension producer can only sell to one DAW: Reason. So he can only make £1000 from the 1000 available users who will buy his product. But no, because he's in the PropShop, that income is reduced, so he earns as little as £500 from 1000 users. No-one pirated it, course. But on the other hand, there are no additional users to convert to paying customers down the line either. So even if a VST was only available to one DAW and 1000 users, at the same 6:4 ratio, he still earns more! It's back to what I was talking about earlier: the convenience of the PropShop hosting arguably does as much harm as good.

Now OK, these figures are pulled out my arse for the sake of a clear example: obviously the ratio isn't as good if the reality is 4:6 in favour of pirates. But if it was the case, there'd be far, far fewer products in other plugin formats, so I'm going guess that's not true, and the ratio is typically at worse 6:4, or well above any RoI threshold to profit.

And the "Codemeter" hasn't been cracked argument also seems to be a fallacy. No-one is asking the obvious question: why isn't it more common?

If it's uncrackable, and by all accounts that's still the case, then surely more software developers would be falling over themselves to use it and it would be everywhere, from VST plugins to Steam. But VST devs stick to the likes of iLok, or use just simple license codes and complex online download-installers. All of which are typically hacked, making all of them completely worthless as DRM devices, and just an extra hassle for paying users.

Maybe the reason they stick to weaker systems is that they make it hard just enough to crack that it enough people who might otherwise pirate it just buy it outright instead. And by extension, the cracked versions have the curiously positive benefit of acting as unrestricted trials, that can convert some non-paying users into paying ones. Maybe Wibu don't want too many people actually using it, as more market penetration might encourage ways to try and circumvent it.

[*] 30-day trial for all plug-ins

REs have a level playing field when it comes to trials, they are all 30 days unrestricted use, which on the one hand is excellent. Whereas a VST trial might be any or all of [extremely] time limited, adding white noise every 30 seconds, and being functionally neutered to the point of untrialable stupidity. On those grounds VST trials are obviously inferior overall due to the wild west nature. So that's a clear win for the RE platform.

But the pirated versions for VSTs, with such trial restrictions removed, now exceed the ability of Reason's trial function by dint of being both time unlimited, and—here's the really important bit—across multiple product updates. You see, as soon as someone decided, very early on, to not allow developers to reset trial for v1.0.x bug fixes, or more crucially, those 1.x or 2.x major upgrades, so early trial users could see and test improvements and reconsider their previous non-purchase decision (even where the outcome might remains the same), the RE trial system is not as good as for VST devs, who both have that ability to add new trials for each build even with restrictions, but perversely, far more so through piracy of restriction-free updated versions.

I am absolutely not advocating piracy, but it is a difficult area where PH have ironically made it more advantageous to the VST producer at the expense of the RE producer without any intervention required by that VST producer. The long and the short and the tall of it is I'm now not convinced that the anti-piracy and trials aspect of REs is the amazingly big deal to shout about, either. On balance, it probably is needed for Reason, but only because it's a small market that probably doesn't support the volume to guarantee a minimum 6:4 ratio, rather than a simplistic and all-encompassing "piracy is just bad, m'kay" ideal. If it was a significant issue, I'd expect more companies would be using unbreakable DRM; despite some frustrations with Authoriser and its "non-existent license is expired I need to phone home for five minutes" shtick, I'd say Codemeter is otherwise pretty transparent, so that can't be reason for the lack of significant penetration for the Wibu system.

We'll roll up our sleeves and get back to work and see what happens. But pretending everything is amazing and ignoring all criticisms the needs of RE developers does yourself and us a big disservice. It will be a lot hard to correct course because you opted for fixed first-party content over flexible third-party creation. There was a way you could have had both; yet you may end up with nothing. That's a brave gambit.

[EdGrip]

I think it's fair to say that in terms of UX and the offer made to new users, Reason is simply the best it's ever been. For someone looking to get into electronic music, I'd say it's the best offer out there right now, unless you need the live performance abilities of Live.
That's true in spite of general progress being slower than we'd like (although Live 10 has certainly made it clear - to me, at least - that we're not alone in that.)

Now, I think that's a separate thing from the fact that various recent decisions have - to some extent - shafted our RE developers who've done so much to keep the rack exciting.

BUT. I also think those decisions were probably necessary. I think it's quite possible that Reason was bumping into the limits of being a DAW which still didn't support VSTs. So I think that had to happen.
Reason has needed a proper native granular synth since Malstrom. So I think that had to happen.
And Reason has needed an big update to Thor for quite a while, to stay (broadly) competitive with modern WT synths. Thor didn't get an upgrade, they just made Europa instead. I think that had to happen. (One of the headline items in Live 10 is a fancy new WT synth.)

I think those decisions were all the right ones, and/but the fact that each one has been detrimental to REs in different ways - and in a short space of time, too - saddens me. Subscriptions and the (apparently) still-restrictive SDK are rubbing salt in the wound.

In short, I'd rather the base product continues to add good new native devices, even if they compete with REs, than not add them. And I think we're very well sorted for new devices for a while, so I hope the focus at PH now is on other things.

The dark doom-monger in me thinks that maybe REs are ultimately a respectable but failed attempt to compete with VSTs.
I've no intention of switching to another DAW, though I demo them from time to time just to see. And I'll still buy REs (although browsing the Shop for Black Friday, I'm facing the fact I've pretty much got everything I need and even want - both in REs and VST. Which is nice.)

Thanks, devs, for all the cool REs. I hope this isn't a total disaster.

Edit: saturation-wise, like I said above, I can attest that I'm there. I have 4 paid VSTs and lots of paid REs and that's me pretty much sorted. It's not that I'm not spending on REs because I'm buying equivalent VSTs instead, or because their prices are too high or because their discount prices are not tempting enough. It's just that I've got all I want. If the data's useful, I started all this malarkey in 2014.

[MattiasHG]

I don't think I can write anything that'll "end" this argument or convince you of my point, or vice versa, so I won't try. Short form, this is all really good feedback so it's appreciated and I'll absolutely bring it upstairs. I do want to comment on some things though:

Decision-making for a major product like Reason should not be dictated based on the personal or anecdotal usage of its own product manager. You may think I'm being facetious there, and knowing me as well as I do, I probably am a bit, I apologise, but at the same time, there is some truth in it: what is clear is that any research you did was from the opening position you've freely admitted that you wanted VST support added to Reason. You've stated that was your aim, therefore it must have been regardless of any alternative option not to do so. Thus any research you did carry out is certain to be biased because you likely placed less value on contrary opinions, and more weight on those supporting your own usage case.

This is simply not true and frankly a bit insulting. VST support was my aim because all user feedback and research pointed to it before I even became product manager. I worked as product specialist, social media guy and in the support department for a long time. I traveled across the world to talk to Reason users. 9.5 was not something I did for me personally, but for all of the users I was in touch with. When continuing the research, I did not place less value on contrary opinions. Then I'd be REAL bad at my job.

Thus "virtually any platform" (which most pointedly is not the same as "any or all other platforms in reality"!) is a moot point if you're not utilising that ability, so that makes zero difference to either RE sales or subscriptions today. Until such time you make Reason available on other platforms, and REs all succesfully compile and run on them, you're marketing in hypotheticals.

Correct, but they ARE hypotheticals. That those hypotheticals exist is one of the coolest things about the format. I can't say when/if it will happen, but it can happen. I definitely see your point here though, this is more long-term, that's fair. It was just something I thought of when thinking of the strengths of the RE format.