Guess the beta release date for Reason 10.3 ...

This forum is for discussing Propellerhead's music software. Questions, answers, ideas, and opinions... all apply.
RandyEspoda
Posts: 270
Joined: 14 Mar 2017

Post 22 Feb 2019

Loque wrote:
21 Feb 2019
Ad0 wrote:
21 Feb 2019


... which means rewriting the engine. They have to accomodate for this through the whole system.
Rewriting means "throw away and REWRITE". Nobody with a brain would do this with a big system.
Exactly. Changing the code relating to the locked sample buffer for one part but not for the other
is not rewriting the engine in my book. They are not rewriting the engine.

Ad0
Posts: 59
Joined: 13 Jun 2017

Post 22 Feb 2019

Loque wrote:
21 Feb 2019
Ad0 wrote:
21 Feb 2019


Sometimes with a big system the only way to rewrite is to just do that, and maybe copy in something from the old source here and there.
Yours truly, a software developer with > 20 years experience in the field.
>25 years 😆
:lol:

I just imagine that this problem propagates through the whole engine :)
RandyEspoda wrote:
22 Feb 2019
Exactly. Changing the code relating to the locked sample buffer for one part but not for the other
is not rewriting the engine in my book. They are not rewriting the engine.
It's not like it's some small piece of code in one place. It is probably through every facet of the audio engine, and needs possibly a full rewrite. The time they have spent is a proof of that.

User avatar
reddust
Posts: 418
Joined: 07 May 2018

Post 22 Feb 2019

guitfnky wrote:
22 Feb 2019
just seeing someone mention working for two hours in a session without even considering saving stresses me out. I mean, I get that Reason is fairly stable, but that’s only a small piece of the rationale for frequent saves. what if there’s a power outage? what if some other hardware component decides to fail at an inopportune moment? what if a driver issue crops up unexpectedly? there are thousands of reasons a program—or your computer—might stop working.

kind of baffling that anyone with more than a couple of years using computers still hasn’t learned that lesson. not really trying to be snarky as I’m probably coming across, but I just don’t get it. it’s not like saving takes a lot of time. literally a two-button keystroke.
Totally agree with this, I am using Ctrl + S in an obsessive compulsive way, it doesn't cost anything to click that combination so I do every couple of minutes.

User avatar
Loque
Posts: 5958
Joined: 28 Dec 2015

Post 22 Feb 2019

Ad0 wrote:
22 Feb 2019
Loque wrote:
21 Feb 2019

>25 years 😆
:lol:

I just imagine that this problem propagates through the whole engine :)
RandyEspoda wrote:
22 Feb 2019
Exactly. Changing the code relating to the locked sample buffer for one part but not for the other
is not rewriting the engine in my book. They are not rewriting the engine.
It's not like it's some small piece of code in one place. It is probably through every facet of the audio engine, and needs possibly a full rewrite. The time they have spent is a proof of that.
I agree, if sometimes a "rewrite" in sense of modernize or reorganize or refactor might be usefull, as long it is not a throw away rather than a migration(-strategy)...If Props would throw away what has grown over the last 20 years just to start from scratch, this would be fail.

Just look at MS with Windows...they migrated it over around 10 years...ok, might be a bad example, because they better had thrown it away :-D
:reason: 11, Win10 64Bit.

User avatar
Zac
Posts: 1487
Joined: 19 May 2016

Post 22 Feb 2019

TheGodOfRainbows wrote:
22 Feb 2019
March 1st.
Thanks for staying on topic. :puf_wink:
Image
Now available, see viewtopic.php?f=8&t=7512836
New Tune - Tonight - Tech-House: see viewtopic.php?f=9&t=7514209

User avatar
Mmj85
Posts: 66
Joined: 28 Jan 2015

Post 22 Feb 2019

My Guess is:

MARCH 1st

User avatar
Oquasec
Posts: 2472
Joined: 05 Mar 2017

Post 22 Feb 2019

Oh wait they said beta. should have been out now, especially if it isn't the full release.
Producer/Sound Designer.

User avatar
miscend
Posts: 1370
Joined: 09 Feb 2015

Post 23 Feb 2019

Well they've totally missed the original release estimate by a long shot its now nearly March 2019. I hope this delay with 10.3 doesn't mean that Reason 11 gets pushed back.

User avatar
Aosta
Posts: 290
Joined: 26 Jun 2017

Post 23 Feb 2019

My guess April 5th
Tend the flame

User avatar
guitfnky
Posts: 1380
Joined: 19 Jan 2015

Post 23 Feb 2019

miscend wrote:
23 Feb 2019
Well they've totally missed the original release estimate by a long shot its now nearly March 2019. I hope this delay with 10.3 doesn't mean that Reason 11 gets pushed back.
the only reason I think they’d delay 11 would be if it’s ready to go before the 10.3 patch. they certainly can’t release 11 first, but I don’t think it’d have a huge impact on a major release date, otherwise.

User avatar
avasopht
Posts: 1934
Joined: 16 Jan 2015

Post 23 Feb 2019

Maybe we're getting some extra goodies thrown in with it.

Either that or there's some near intractible problem / dilemma they've incountered, like inherent conflict with increasing VST buffer sizes and maintaining backwards compatibility.
---

User avatar
Zac
Posts: 1487
Joined: 19 May 2016

Post 23 Feb 2019

avasopht wrote:
23 Feb 2019
Maybe we're getting some extra goodies thrown in with it.

Either that or there's some near intractible problem / dilemma they've incountered, like inherent conflict with increasing VST buffer sizes and maintaining backwards compatibility.
I also wonder if they're spending time trying to pre-empt individual vst issues? If it does go to public beta it will get tested against a vast number of vsts and maybe they are spending time testing as many of those as they can to make the beta run smoother??? Just a thought.
Image
Now available, see viewtopic.php?f=8&t=7512836
New Tune - Tonight - Tech-House: see viewtopic.php?f=9&t=7514209

RandyEspoda
Posts: 270
Joined: 14 Mar 2017

Post 23 Feb 2019

Ad0 wrote:
22 Feb 2019

It's not like it's some small piece of code in one place. It is probably through every facet of the audio engine, and needs possibly a full rewrite. The time they have spent is a proof of that.
Of course it's pretty obvious they underestimated the process and likely indeed it would be nested
much deeper and more intricately than expected, requiring a lot more changes throughout the code,
but it still wouldn't be a full 'rewrite', which is literally starting from scratch. I guarantee you 1000% they are not doing that.

Thing is that the amount of changes needed in the 'existing' code is what is taking so much time.
It's a time-consuming process to sift through millions of lines of code to make alterations where needed.

Loque wrote:
22 Feb 2019

I agree, if sometimes a "rewrite" in sense of modernize or reorganize or refactor might be usefull, as long it is not a throw away rather than a migration(-strategy)...If Props would throw away what has grown over the last 20 years just to start from scratch, this would be fail.

Just look at MS with Windows...they migrated it over around 10 years...ok, might be a bad example, because they better had thrown it away :-D
The migration method would be most likely 'if' they would take it to that extent,
of which I'm personally not that convinced...I am curious though.

User avatar
Luxuria
Posts: 131
Joined: 17 Mar 2016

Post 23 Feb 2019

My guess is late April (22nd-27th).

Since Pheads doesn't communicate the process in detail I'm going to speculate a bit here.

I recall reading somewhere that the dev that created Malstrom had written code for reason to be able to run VST's some many years ago but Pheads didn't want anything to do with it. What I'm guessing is happening is they finally got around to adding it in and that is what the current state of reason 10 could potentially be using. Does the dev still work for Pheads or didn't he go on to other things? If it's new devs trying to use his code, they, as well as any developer that comes in to build off of someone else's work knows that it's like deciphering Davinci's code at times. The delay could be due to interpretive troubles.

If they are using code that was built from the ground up- the core program could be set up in a way that make buffering seamless with a constant set value for everything from native devices to RE's. Unlocking that and introducing variables can potentially break a bunch of processes down stream. Maybe it's difficulty with measuring latency properly? They did kind of release a half-assed attempt at plugin delay compensation so that would make sense. It could also be a matter of them not wanting to release something that works but has bugs or crashes a lot. Isn't VST always getting a bad rep for crashing DAW's anyways? Maybe the rack paradigm with CV doesn't mix well with VST plugins?

The talk about whether version 11 will be delayed is an interesting topic. How much of the dev team is working on the VST performance issue? Is there a team that focuses solely on adding features? I doubt it. I could see a separate team that's in charge of instruments since they are releasing new ones constantly through this delayed update. I wish the community was a bit more cautious with throwing around question's on new version releases because it's not about seeing the number go from 10 to 11. It's more important to see how much is added with said update. I don't think the features in 10 were worthy of a jump from 9.5 to 10 in terms of core improvements or features adding to it. For example: In my opinion if you are going to add multi note lane editing, may as well add it for audio clips too right? Pheads likes to make big jumps though so I can't starting blaming them now. I wish their updating was a bit more like Reaper's. The cockos team is also small but they crank point updates like no one else. Their 5.97 update list is HUGE and that's not even a tenth of a point. Before that it was 5.965 and before that 5.962 with update lists longer than 3-4 versions of full reason updates.

I'm still happy on 8.3 so I'm in a different ecosystem as the majority of the community here. I'm stern with not giving Pheads the cost of the upgrade till they fix core performance. Someone mentioned in the other performance thread that they also have issues with reason struggling with too many audio files playing at the same time. I am too. Audio clips have been out since V6, I shouldn't be seeing disk overload on an SSD in a session of 30-40 audio stems.

User avatar
BananaSkins
Posts: 241
Joined: 29 Sep 2017

Post 23 Feb 2019

Adding VST support so late down the line has opened up a whole ‘Cans Of Worms’ for Props! I honestly don’t think we will have a stable working Reason with VST support until 2020...until then track freeze might be thrown into the mix to keep frustrated Reason users happy. IMHO

User avatar
jappe
Posts: 2213
Joined: 19 Jan 2015

Post 23 Feb 2019

avasopht wrote:
23 Feb 2019
Maybe we're getting some extra goodies thrown in with it.

Either that or there's some near intractible problem / dilemma they've incountered, like inherent conflict with increasing VST buffer sizes and maintaining backwards compatibility.

In that case Plan B could be to split Reason in a pure version and a VST-capable version. Not good from a maintenance perspective though.
I don't know if the VST feature introduced some general performance trade-off for non-VST projects, but if it did then there's probably a large user group who can manage just fine using a version without VST's (me included)

User avatar
jappe
Posts: 2213
Joined: 19 Jan 2015

Post 23 Feb 2019

BananaSkins wrote:
23 Feb 2019
Adding VST support so late down the line has opened up a whole ‘Cans Of Worms’ for Props! I honestly don’t think we will have a stable working Reason with VST support until 2020...until then track freeze might be thrown into the mix to keep frustrated Reason users happy. IMHO
If they can allow putting unused tracks into idle in a 1-button click way, then that would fix a whole lot of problematic projects I have. The problem is that even tracks I keep in the project in case I would eventually like to use it (i e template projects), consumes DSP.

User avatar
bxbrkrz
Posts: 1173
Joined: 17 Jan 2015

Post 23 Feb 2019

What if 10.3 never happens and they'll go straight to 11.

User avatar
jam-s
Posts: 749
Joined: 17 Apr 2015
Location: Aachen, Germany

Post 23 Feb 2019

bxbrkrz wrote:
23 Feb 2019
What if 10.3 never happens and they'll go straight to 11.
I'm OK with this, but only if they make the upgrade to 11 free (for V10 owners) or PWYW.
If you're in Aachen, come and visit us at the Voidspace.

User avatar
Wobbleburger
Posts: 236
Joined: 14 Sep 2018
Location: Austin

Post 24 Feb 2019

bxbrkrz wrote:
23 Feb 2019
What if 10.3 never happens and they'll go straight to 11.
:lol: :lol: :lol:
I like jungle.

Reason 10 - Win10 - i7 9700k - 32gb DDR4 - Novation Launchkey 25 - Korg Nanokontrol 2 - Scarlet 2i2 2nd Gen - Shure SM58 - Currently obsessed with Phase Plant

User avatar
miscend
Posts: 1370
Joined: 09 Feb 2015

Post 24 Feb 2019

bxbrkrz wrote:
23 Feb 2019
What if 10.3 never happens and they'll go straight to 11.
That would cause such a massive shit storm on the internet.

Anyway Props said on the Youtube comments for Reason Drum kits that they have a separate team for rack extensions and for the core Reason. So I'm guessing the same team working on 10.3 will move on to working on version 11 after the release. Whatever new features that ship with version 11 will probably be reliant on the under the hood performance improvements made in 10.3.

botnotbot
Posts: 240
Joined: 26 Oct 2017

Post 25 Feb 2019

RandyEspoda wrote:
22 Feb 2019
Loque wrote:
21 Feb 2019


Rewriting means "throw away and REWRITE". Nobody with a brain would do this with a big system.
Exactly. Changing the code relating to the locked sample buffer for one part but not for the other
is not rewriting the engine in my book. They are not rewriting the engine.
Mattias only said that the wasn't sure whether RE performance improvements were involved in the work they were doing months ago. I expect that this position was not well received by many people. This was back when they were aiming for Q4 2018.

That deadline has slipped by almost a whole quarter by now. Suppositions: a) the scope of their goals has changed, adding work; b) the scope of the goals has not changed, but the amount of work required is more than expected; c) both.

Personally, I think they realized that REs are their bread and butter and increasing VST performance while doing nothing to allow users to run more REs at the same time would be a major mistake. That means option C, because they both underestimated the amount of work it would take (just like every software project ever, btw) and expanded the scope beyond the initial (and inadequate) starting goal.

tl;dr - Making statements in absolute terms about the scope of their goals or the scope of the work to achieve those goals doesn't make a lot of sense. It's proprietary software with a private roadmap, we have no idea what's actually happening. Speculation is fun until someone acts like they know the truth as if it were revealed by a burning propeller bush.

User avatar
guitfnky
Posts: 1380
Joined: 19 Jan 2015

Post 25 Feb 2019

do people really complain about the performance of REs? I use countless REs in almost every project without running into performance issues. I know I’m not alone.

I mean it would be amazing if they could improve RE performance even more, but honestly, they’re incredibly efficient already.

User avatar
jam-s
Posts: 749
Joined: 17 Apr 2015
Location: Aachen, Germany

Post 25 Feb 2019

guitfnky wrote:
25 Feb 2019
do people really complain about the performance of REs? I use countless REs in almost every project without running into performance issues. I know I’m not alone.
Most complaints I've seen come from people using fruity hardware OS or who have to rewire.
Last edited by jam-s on 25 Feb 2019, edited 1 time in total.
If you're in Aachen, come and visit us at the Voidspace.

User avatar
guitfnky
Posts: 1380
Joined: 19 Jan 2015

Post 25 Feb 2019

jam-s wrote:
25 Feb 2019
guitfnky wrote:
25 Feb 2019
do people really complain about the performance of REs? I use countless REs in almost every project without running into performance issues. I know I’m not alone.
Most complaints I've seen come from people using fruity hardware OS or that have to rewire.
ah, that makes a bit more sense then. guessing there’s probably not much more blood to squeeze from that stone, though.

  • Information
  • Who is online

    Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests