Reason 12 has arrived

[PropitiousME]

FFS gentlemen, this thread has become an abomination.... I feel like I need a Xanax bar after reading all this. @AttenuationHz, you came pretty hard with the critical first post in this thread. With that you probably should learn to expect most enthusiasts that thrive here are going to be defensive and just as likely critical of any subsequent posts you bring to topics (since everyone seemingly ignored your first post). Your follow-up posts seemed less "knee jerk" emotional and more constructive. So your second post was excellent, well thought out feedback IMO. You have a right to your subjective opinion and especially a right to gripe about any broken workflows that resulted from a blind side whether RS intends to restore that functionality at a later date or not. I do believe you proposed a salient list of concerns probably shared by a relatively silent and passive number of users. One thing is for certain, nobody else is gonna speak up on them after reading this thread.

Mods, well lets just say most people come to expect more from you then what many of you have brought to this thread. The equivalent of pouring gas on a fire... because you can't just let a man express his dissatisfaction in a manner that clearly outlines his particulars even if it is a little emotional (RE: obviously because of said poster's passion for the software). Below is the first response to AttenuationHz from a mod in this thread. It is 100% guilty of being dismissive and attempting to minimize or trivialize solid feedback / examples. All you had to do was leave out the portion highlighted in bold underline, but instead you pissed in the "remote users'" cheerios (nevermind the rest of the unconstructive replies from others "attempting to be funny" at an inappropriate time). It's not any man's place to dictate what is or isn't a loss to another man's workflow, period:

What was the thought process to getting rid of the built in combinator in a mix channel? Was it lack of ability to place a combinator inside a mix channel to begin with. Was it that the built in combinator on a mix channel just wasn't used by the majority of users who happen to have analytics still turned on? Was it that if there was a combinator inside a mix channel then you don't really need to control anything from the mixer?
Whatever the issue there is a solution that has been overlooked here: the option for both features.

• You call the new combinator something different and keep the old one which can't be placed inside a mix channel and patches from the old can work with the new or not and just replace the combinator but keep the mix channels built in combi

• The new combinator can only control device inside it. The mix channel can control up to 8 parameters on the new combinator that is inside of it or the devices that are outside of the new combinator inside the mix channel.

• You add a trimmed down version of the new combinator to the mix channel where the 4 buttons can switched out for 4 knobs individually (gaining features)

Insert fx will still work outside of a mix channel you just won't be able to program them and in turn lose the control you have with them on the Mixer. You now have very little control on those inserts because of the removal of the controls on the mix channel and in turn from the Mixer. How bad is removing buttons and knobs you can program from the mix channel, extremely if it is an EQ band not available on the EQ channels on the mixer or some other utility insert to allow you to mix while at the Mixer you no longer have control and have to search for a combinator in the rack. Not only has the removal been a feature lost it is also a hindrance on workflow something that is in need of much attention - one step forward 2 steps back!

The decision to remove the built in combinator from mix channels really was a terrible one, why would you want to remove features that are used??

I think your solution would actually cause more confusion. 2 different combinator where 1 can be used in a mix channel and the other not is just complicated. One device is just a cleaner way to handle it. As far as combinators in the mix channels, you barely had control over much to begin with. Anything in depth had to be done from the rack anyway, so no real loss there aside from those who relied on remote mappings (which are said to be returning in some form with choice of parameters). You don’t have to search for the combinator in the rack, there’s a button in the mixer now that takes you directly there.

While yes, you could still use insert fx outside of the insert fx slot I’m not complaining about the tidiness of things be able to be in a designated collapsible spot. Without being able to place combis inside of each other I think changing the mix channel so that it’s no longer a combi was an ok compromise though the one thing I’d wish was possible is being able to save and load and fx chain that contains combinators. Otherwise most of the old functionality is still there and there’s far more flexibility.

Now, before everyone starts attacking my attempt at highlighting the absurdity of this entire thread just because I'm new around here, consider I'm trying to make an example of the very real fact that this pandemic has absolutely ruined people's ability to critically think and or communicate. People with relatively negative dispositions, but legitimate concerns can't express feedback without the pitchforks coming out, vice versa. I'm going back to being a lurker on this forum with this post. Having said that, can we attempt to get replies out of a defensive posture and into a more objective / suggestive reflection as it relates to how you approach another man's feedback? We all got enough toxicity to deal with in daily life given the socioeconomic climate we're living under without bringing the affects of that to this forum.

If it can be perceived as overly emotional, or minimizing in it's effect, it's probably better to rephrase it if not leave it out. This constant exchange of blows is tiresome when there is actually some very good feedback being surfaced around this release. RS definitely stirred the pot with Reason 12 Lets spend more time supporting the different POV's being shared here even if they don't affect ourselves and less time effectively cannibalizing our own! Sound engineers, designers, etc. They are a special breed! Have a great week everyone.

[avasopht]

Now, before everyone starts attacking my attempt at highlighting the absurdity of this entire thread just because I'm new around here, consider I'm trying to make an example of the very real fact that this pandemic has absolutely ruined people's ability to critically think and or communicate. People with relatively negative dispositions, but legitimate concerns can't express feedback without the pitchforks coming out, vice versa. I'm going back to being a lurker on this forum with this post. Having said that, can we attempt to get replies out of a defensive posture and into a more objective / suggestive reflection as it relates to how you approach another man's feedback? We all got enough toxicity to deal with in daily life given the socioeconomic climate we're living under without bringing the affects of that to this forum.

If it can be perceived as overly emotional, or minimizing in it's effect, it's probably better to rephrase it if not leave it out. This constant exchange of blows is tiresome when there is actually some very good feedback being surfaced around this release. RS definitely stirred the pot with Reason 12 Lets spend more time supporting the different POV's being shared here even if they don't affect ourselves and less time effectively cannibalizing our own! Sound engineers, designers, etc. They are a special breed! Have a great week everyone.

There were no pitchforks.

He's explained why it might be "more confusing".

That's not being defensive.

That's not minimizing its effect.

I haven't thought about it too much, so I'm on the side of keeping them how they were. I don't yet understand why keeping it that way could be more confusing because I've just not really thought about it too much.

But that response is not minimizing, pitchforks or defensive. It is, as you have claimed, a different point of view with a clear explanation as to why keeping it that way might cause issues going forward.

At the same time others have explained that a workaround/fix is on the way. That too is not being defensive or minimizing its effect.

I understand the issues being described very well. If it's not fixed it means that all of the work creating those mappings goes to waste (even if the workaround provides identical features but doesn't support the old maps).

But in order for Reason to get new features, some old features might need to be changed a little. So we could either keep things how they are or get the new functionality. Maybe it would have been better to have the option of both through a toggle (or just having the old combinator and insert types still available).

[fullforce]

There’s no gaslighting.

Well it's a GAS LIGHTNING!!!!

There was combinator device with four knobs rather yeah....

<next please>

[joeyluck]

of course mods are free to share their opinions like anyone else. but in my experience there are a few who are very dismissive of anyone even remotely critical of Reason. constantly suggesting that things others find frustrating are just misunderstandings is short sighted, condescending, and arguably selfish.

I'm sorry if I wasn't very clear. I'm apologizing and saying that misunderstandings can go both ways. I'm not trying to dismiss anything, I myself am likely just misunderstanding. The issues that people have with the change seem to be more nuanced or things I don't see.

I see that I can still save effect chain combis in inserts...I can save and load multiple. I realize that Remote functionality was a big thing for some, and that is being fixed. And to me that only leaves the removal of the 4+4 macros to adjust with a mouse from the mixer as the change. And I think we will have a back and forth forever if I don't just agree to disagree.

[Billy+]

[QVprod]

FFS gentlemen, this thread has become an abomination.... I feel like I need a Xanax bar after reading all this. @AttenuationHz, you came pretty hard with the critical first post in this thread. With that you probably should learn to expect most enthusiasts that thrive here are going to be defensive and just as likely critical of any subsequent posts you bring to topics (since everyone seemingly ignored your first post). Your follow-up posts seemed less "knee jerk" emotional and more constructive. So your second post was excellent, well thought out feedback IMO. You have a right to your subjective opinion and especially a right to gripe about any broken workflows that resulted from a blind side whether RS intends to restore that functionality at a later date or not. I do believe you proposed a salient list of concerns probably shared by a relatively silent and passive number of users. One thing is for certain, nobody else is gonna speak up on them after reading this thread.

Mods, well lets just say most people come to expect more from you then what many of you have brought to this thread. The equivalent of pouring gas on a fire... because you can't just let a man express his dissatisfaction in a manner that clearly outlines his particulars even if it is a little emotional (RE: obviously because of said poster's passion for the software). Below is the first response to AttenuationHz from a mod in this thread. It is 100% guilty of being dismissive and attempting to minimize or trivialize solid feedback / examples. All you had to do was leave out the portion highlighted in bold underline, but instead you pissed in the "remote users'" cheerios (nevermind the rest of the unconstructive replies from others "attempting to be funny" at an inappropriate time). It's not any man's place to dictate what is or isn't a loss to another man's workflow, period:

I think your solution would actually cause more confusion. 2 different combinator where 1 can be used in a mix channel and the other not is just complicated. One device is just a cleaner way to handle it. As far as combinators in the mix channels, you barely had control over much to begin with. Anything in depth had to be done from the rack anyway, so no real loss there aside from those who relied on remote mappings (which are said to be returning in some form with choice of parameters). You don’t have to search for the combinator in the rack, there’s a button in the mixer now that takes you directly there.

While yes, you could still use insert fx outside of the insert fx slot I’m not complaining about the tidiness of things be able to be in a designated collapsible spot. Without being able to place combis inside of each other I think changing the mix channel so that it’s no longer a combi was an ok compromise though the one thing I’d wish was possible is being able to save and load and fx chain that contains combinators. Otherwise most of the old functionality is still there and there’s far more flexibility.

Now, before everyone starts attacking my attempt at highlighting the absurdity of this entire thread just because I'm new around here, consider I'm trying to make an example of the very real fact that this pandemic has absolutely ruined people's ability to critically think and or communicate. People with relatively negative dispositions, but legitimate concerns can't express feedback without the pitchforks coming out, vice versa. I'm going back to being a lurker on this forum with this post. Having said that, can we attempt to get replies out of a defensive posture and into a more objective / suggestive reflection as it relates to how you approach another man's feedback? We all got enough toxicity to deal with in daily life given the socioeconomic climate we're living under without bringing the affects of that to this forum.

If it can be perceived as overly emotional, or minimizing in it's effect, it's probably better to rephrase it if not leave it out. This constant exchange of blows is tiresome when there is actually some very good feedback being surfaced around this release. RS definitely stirred the pot with Reason 12 Lets spend more time supporting the different POV's being shared here even if they don't affect ourselves and less time effectively cannibalizing our own! Sound engineers, designers, etc. They are a special breed! Have a great week everyone.

Welcome to ReasonTalk! or at least officially as a poster. Since my post was quoted I'll clarify. In that very quoted post I stated:

"so no real loss there aside from those who relied on remote mappings (which are said to be returning in some form with choice of parameters)"

So I could not have "pissed in the cereal of remote users cheerios." On the contrary, I actually showed support for them.

Since you are new, I'll say that mod's here are just like any other user here, a Reason fan free to share their opinions. Can't speak for other forums, but we don't lord over people here. In no way do our opinions or points of view carry more weight than anyone else's. So there's no pitchforks. It a discussion amongst Reason users, nothing more. I simply shared a different perspective.

[Billy+]

[moalla]

FFS gentlemen, this thread has become an abomination.... I feel like I need a Xanax bar after reading all this. @AttenuationHz, you came pretty hard with the critical first post in this thread. With that you probably should learn to expect most enthusiasts that thrive here are going to be defensive and just as likely critical of any subsequent posts you bring to topics (since everyone seemingly ignored your first post). Your follow-up posts seemed less "knee jerk" emotional and more constructive. So your second post was excellent, well thought out feedback IMO. You have a right to your subjective opinion and especially a right to gripe about any broken workflows that resulted from a blind side whether RS intends to restore that functionality at a later date or not. I do believe you proposed a salient list of concerns probably shared by a relatively silent and passive number of users. One thing is for certain, nobody else is gonna speak up on them after reading this thread.

Mods, well lets just say most people come to expect more from you then what many of you have brought to this thread. The equivalent of pouring gas on a fire... because you can't just let a man express his dissatisfaction in a manner that clearly outlines his particulars even if it is a little emotional (RE: obviously because of said poster's passion for the software). Below is the first response to AttenuationHz from a mod in this thread. It is 100% guilty of being dismissive and attempting to minimize or trivialize solid feedback / examples. All you had to do was leave out the portion highlighted in bold underline, but instead you pissed in the "remote users'" cheerios (nevermind the rest of the unconstructive replies from others "attempting to be funny" at an inappropriate time). It's not any man's place to dictate what is or isn't a loss to another man's workflow, period:

I think your solution would actually cause more confusion. 2 different combinator where 1 can be used in a mix channel and the other not is just complicated. One device is just a cleaner way to handle it. As far as combinators in the mix channels, you barely had control over much to begin with. Anything in depth had to be done from the rack anyway, so no real loss there aside from those who relied on remote mappings (which are said to be returning in some form with choice of parameters). You don’t have to search for the combinator in the rack, there’s a button in the mixer now that takes you directly there.

While yes, you could still use insert fx outside of the insert fx slot I’m not complaining about the tidiness of things be able to be in a designated collapsible spot. Without being able to place combis inside of each other I think changing the mix channel so that it’s no longer a combi was an ok compromise though the one thing I’d wish was possible is being able to save and load and fx chain that contains combinators. Otherwise most of the old functionality is still there and there’s far more flexibility.

Now, before everyone starts attacking my attempt at highlighting the absurdity of this entire thread just because I'm new around here, consider I'm trying to make an example of the very real fact that this pandemic has absolutely ruined people's ability to critically think and or communicate. People with relatively negative dispositions, but legitimate concerns can't express feedback without the pitchforks coming out, vice versa. I'm going back to being a lurker on this forum with this post. Having said that, can we attempt to get replies out of a defensive posture and into a more objective / suggestive reflection as it relates to how you approach another man's feedback? We all got enough toxicity to deal with in daily life given the socioeconomic climate we're living under without bringing the affects of that to this forum.

If it can be perceived as overly emotional, or minimizing in it's effect, it's probably better to rephrase it if not leave it out. This constant exchange of blows is tiresome when there is actually some very good feedback being surfaced around this release. RS definitely stirred the pot with Reason 12 Lets spend more time supporting the different POV's being shared here even if they don't affect ourselves and less time effectively cannibalizing our own! Sound engineers, designers, etc. They are a special breed! Have a great week everyone.

You have the right Intention but sometimes it‘s difficult to except when things changing there functionality...

So i would say, with an objektive view something needs a reworking/update of RE savefiles by users how worked often with this combinator feature and also there must be ability from the combinator sight to have this automation issues like in the past.

Negatively I would say this su..s, way they do that, and why they give me to choose which combinator (1or2)I would use at the end.

For me i‘m happy with the new comb features, is started a comb2 with d16’s drumazon and now decide to build a mixer and tune, decay XY comb panel to have a direct control over the 11 voices of this drumachine without opening the vst window, with two drum sequencer under this controls.

Also automation curves are a great thing, and for me the sequencer updates since R10 are more than enough, outherwise for new users the learning curve in sequencer features are too much! My opinion

The only thing in reasons stability I think is caused by vst‘s and gpu drivers, as w10 user I can say this windows is now more or less finalized and much faster than 2years ago.

So i‘m tense how far RS will implement vst3 and if they will give us the ability to load vst‘s in the rack plugin especial in context with ableton, for live performance usage with midi clips.

But yeah I know from this forum, people would text like, we need a midi clip launcher, we need a new .... but at all I think forget about these, to complicated, a hardware tracker or ableton is the better choice for this amount!

Reason now gets an adult status, I really hoped for this and thought maybe with number 12 it could be and i would say yeah it happened successfully.

The only thing what would be really nice and needed are trackfolders for clarity and such a great redo record function like ableton has, without the extra way of loading sequences, but maybe sequences has more power... I don‘t checked out now all functions of this player, so had not enough time with a 6 month old baby.


Make music, not war or iss there a especial reasoners NRA division who is armed by self destruction!?

[wikholm]

As this thread is currently stickied as the R12 is here, here goes; I went R12 yesterday, and I'm personally pretty pleased. Some pixels aren't perfect yet and some features may be narrower in scope than one could desire. Yet, as an (unrelated) software developer, I'm fine. This is the first rewrite of the Reason graphics engine, ever. Polishing it perfect, could have pushed us into 2022, as the last few percent of issues, trivial as they may look, can be fiendishly hard. Devils can hide in any detail, forcing you to rethink and rewrite lots of code.

Thanks to this thread, my upgrade was pretty smooth. I installed R12 along R11, just in case, but didn't immediately launch R12. Instead, I went to my account on the RS web site and synced all Rack Extensions, to get the Hi-Res assets. Then I thought, I was ready to go, only to get the online verification, as I hadn't yet put my license onto my Ignition Key, which I should have done after syncing, but the online dialog had a small "more options", from which I got to the authorization web page.

That page, however, didn't try to open the Authorizer app, ending up telling me to not close the not open Authorizer. A cup of tea later, it instead asked me to plug in my already plugged in Ignition Key. Un- and replugging didn't help, but reloading the page, made it ask permission to start the already running Authorizer. I said yes, and it worked. R12 started, showing the content management dialog, even though everything was already installed, but did not offer me to import any settings from R11, so I had to set up all my MIDI stuff again (as I kind of expected).

I was subtly excited to see how hard they've worked to make the UI look like almost unchanged, yet touching up things like the subtly clearer seven-segment digits on SubTractor the, now shiny, big red lights on Pulverizer, and the obvious spinning ReDrum fan. Everything doesn't look great yet. Maybe I'm too old, I can't get bothered. It'll get fixed. Blowing up one SubTractor over my entire 24" studio PC touchscreen, and making a patch with my fingers, was so fun it cost me a bit of sleep.

Not everyone likes how the application zoom affects everything, in fixed steps, as they probably expected to zoom each sub-window, in real time, like a web browser. I feel there's a disconnect bewteen that, and the issue the devs are trying to solve right now. While being able to whiz in and out in, would be great, the current version, seems to be about screen resoultion issues, in particular. If I run Reason at 100% on my 4K laptop, each RE is less than three inches wide. Forcing Windows to run it at 200%, makes my 4K screen a bit worse than FHD, as 2x2 blocks in 4K are more noticable than single pixels in FHD.

Now I can use 200% inside Reason instead, and then I *need* everything to scale up. Would the browser or the bars between sub-windows remain tiny, it wouldn't work (well). Thus, I think the current application zoom, and hi-res assets, are aimed at hi-res screens, mainly meant to be set once, and left there. I would love to be able to set the application zoom to a good base value and use ctrl-mousewheel to zoom individual things on top of that, but that is not the problem addressed right now.

In summary, I like what I see. My transport bar looks no worse now than when I zoomed with Windows, and it will get fixed. I'll likely go R12 only soon, and enjoy it evolving over time. I will absolutely geek out in the new Combinator. That alone, is €129 for me, honestly. I hope RS will "level up" Reason as a DAW host next, as I only use it standalone.

Finally, more than a trend, I see "rolling releases" as a consequence of software getting so complex internally, that perfecty polished programs aren't that viable any more, lest we users starts saying less is more, and pays for the smallest possible feature set that could do the job. Until such a time, developers will dance to the beat of the market(ing).

[moalla]

wikholm
your right rolling releases and user motivated updates are the thing of this time. Nothing or less things could be invented new, there is only the way of refine the workflow. And yeah there are big differences between fun sometimes musicians, professional studied musicians and producers. The first group iss searching for fun, the second are looking for a good way to record and realize there projects and jams, the third are searching for the sound and tools to make naiv voices or ideas big. At the end wath’s the eierlegende wollmilchsau it‘s called in german, the all purpose thing.... Mhh Reason was different to other Daw‘s and is still different, it‘s still made for sound design, with a fast working flow in it‘s sequencer, at least with the sequencer not to complicated and that’s a real good thing. I‘ don‘t know, maybe at the end someone codes the ultimate player which could load midi tracks and then reason get‘s a clip launcher, doctor Rex is a little bit a wav launcher like in ableton... but what can I know, i‘m only a person how knows to code html scripts and from that view of things, how could work a graphical interface, things like syncing and connection between different basis of code are far over my horizon. Yeah I feel right in my assumption use different machines for different especial tasks, than the problems are not so big at the end!

[jam-s]

I have been digging into R12 as well and came across the following issues:
1 - After creating a new combinator, remote over-ride mapped the controls and saved the patch. When I reopened the combinator or patch the remote mappings were gone.
I was able to modify the codec of my Nektar P4 to allow all eight rotarys to work but that is as far as I got. I would like to map all the controls of the P4 to the new combinator.

Remote override mappings are a property of the song file and thus saved in the .reason file. If you want those to persist you can set up a template with those mappings.

[Stamatz]

Yes but when I reload the new song file with premaps to my nektar and then switch to another device the controls stay with the remote mapped device. That leaves the nektar only being able to control one device at a time, or am I missing something here?
I figured the only way around this is to update the codec with I have done somewhat amatuerisly but got at least the 8 rotary knobs to work.
What I'm trying to figure without much success is to also map at leat eight buttons.

My goal to have selectable menus where you select the rotary, faders, buttons, etc. Sort of like they way Thor navigates.

This is what I came up with so far, small minor edits to the original:

Scope Propellerheads Combinator
Define Group Mode Instrument Mixer Transport Channel
Define Group X_Menu Level 1 Level 2
Define Group force_patch_Feedback Patch 1 Patch 2
// Control Surface Item Key Remotable Item Scale Mode

Map Mixer Mode Mode=Mixer
Map Instrument Mode Mode=Instrument
Map Transport Mode Mode=Transport
Map Channel Mode Mode=Channel

Map Device Name "Combinator" HOME
Map Patch Name Patch Name Instrument Patch 1
Map Patch Name Patch Name Instrument Patch 2

Map Force_patch_change force_patch_Feedback=Patch 1 Instrument Patch 2
Map Force_patch_change force_patch_Feedback=Patch 2 Instrument Patch 1

Map Page Name "" Instrument

Map X1_Labeli " 1 " Instrument Level 1
Map X2_Labeli " 2 " Instrument Level 1
Map X3_Labeli " 3 " Instrument Level 1
Map X4_Labeli " 4 " Instrument Level 1
Map X5_Labeli " > " Instrument Level 1
Map X1 Button 1 CTRL Instrument Level 1
Map X2 Button 2 CTRL Instrument Level 1
Map X3 Button 3 CTRL Instrument Level 1
Map X4 Button 4 CTRL Instrument Level 1

Map Bypass Enabled Instrument

Map X1_Labeli "Bypass" Instrument Level 2
Map X2_Labeli "Run Ptn" Instrument Level 2
Map X3_Labeli "BypassFX" Instrument Level 2
Map X4_Labeli "Random" Instrument Level 2
Map X5_Labeli " < " Instrument Level 2
Map X1 0 BYPASS Instrument Level 2
Map X2 Run Pattern Devices CTRL Instrument Level 2
Map X3 Bypass All FX CTRL Instrument Level 2
Map X4 0 RANDOMIZE Instrument Level 2

Map X5 X_Menu=Level 2 HOLD Instrument Level 1
Map X5 X_Menu=Level 1 HOLD Instrument Level 2

Map Name Element 1 "Rotary 1" Instrument
Map Name Element 2 "Rotary 2" Instrument
Map Name Element 3 "Rotary 3" Instrument
Map Name Element 4 "Rotary 4" Instrument
Map Name Element 5 "Rotary 5" Instrument
Map Name Element 6 "Rotary 6" Instrument
Map Name Element 7 "Rotary 7" Instrument
Map Name Element 8 "Rotary 8" Instrument
Map Ch Knob 1 Rotary 1 NAME Instrument
Map Ch Knob 2 Rotary 2 NAME Instrument
Map Ch Knob 3 Rotary 3 NAME Instrument
Map Ch Knob 4 Rotary 4 NAME Instrument
Map Ch Knob 5 Rotary 5 NAME Instrument
Map Ch Knob 6 Rotary 6 Name Instrument
Map Ch Knob 7 Rotary 7 Name Instrument
Map Ch Knob 8 Rotary 8 Name Instrument

[AttenuationHz]

FFS gentlemen, this thread has become an abomination.... I feel like I need a Xanax bar after reading all this. @AttenuationHz, you came pretty hard with the critical first post in this thread. With that you probably should learn to expect most enthusiasts that thrive here are going to be defensive and just as likely critical of any subsequent posts you bring to topics (since everyone seemingly ignored your first post). Your follow-up posts seemed less "knee jerk" emotional and more constructive. So your second post was excellent, well thought out feedback IMO. You have a right to your subjective opinion and especially a right to gripe about any broken workflows that resulted from a blind side whether RS intends to restore that functionality at a later date or not. I do believe you proposed a salient list of concerns probably shared by a relatively silent and passive number of users. One thing is for certain, nobody else is gonna speak up on them after reading this thread.

Mods, well lets just say most people come to expect more from you then what many of you have brought to this thread. The equivalent of pouring gas on a fire... because you can't just let a man express his dissatisfaction in a manner that clearly outlines his particulars even if it is a little emotional (RE: obviously because of said poster's passion for the software). Below is the first response to AttenuationHz from a mod in this thread. It is 100% guilty of being dismissive and attempting to minimize or trivialize solid feedback / examples. All you had to do was leave out the portion highlighted in bold underline, but instead you pissed in the "remote users'" cheerios (nevermind the rest of the unconstructive replies from others "attempting to be funny" at an inappropriate time). It's not any man's place to dictate what is or isn't a loss to another man's workflow, period:

I think your solution would actually cause more confusion. 2 different combinator where 1 can be used in a mix channel and the other not is just complicated. One device is just a cleaner way to handle it. As far as combinators in the mix channels, you barely had control over much to begin with. Anything in depth had to be done from the rack anyway, so no real loss there aside from those who relied on remote mappings (which are said to be returning in some form with choice of parameters). You don’t have to search for the combinator in the rack, there’s a button in the mixer now that takes you directly there.

While yes, you could still use insert fx outside of the insert fx slot I’m not complaining about the tidiness of things be able to be in a designated collapsible spot. Without being able to place combis inside of each other I think changing the mix channel so that it’s no longer a combi was an ok compromise though the one thing I’d wish was possible is being able to save and load and fx chain that contains combinators. Otherwise most of the old functionality is still there and there’s far more flexibility.

Now, before everyone starts attacking my attempt at highlighting the absurdity of this entire thread just because I'm new around here, consider I'm trying to make an example of the very real fact that this pandemic has absolutely ruined people's ability to critically think and or communicate. People with relatively negative dispositions, but legitimate concerns can't express feedback without the pitchforks coming out, vice versa. I'm going back to being a lurker on this forum with this post. Having said that, can we attempt to get replies out of a defensive posture and into a more objective / suggestive reflection as it relates to how you approach another man's feedback? We all got enough toxicity to deal with in daily life given the socioeconomic climate we're living under without bringing the affects of that to this forum.

If it can be perceived as overly emotional, or minimizing in it's effect, it's probably better to rephrase it if not leave it out. This constant exchange of blows is tiresome when there is actually some very good feedback being surfaced around this release. RS definitely stirred the pot with Reason 12 Lets spend more time supporting the different POV's being shared here even if they don't affect ourselves and less time effectively cannibalizing our own! Sound engineers, designers, etc. They are a special breed! Have a great week everyone.

Most wholesome post I've read in a while, unfortunate that others can't or won't see your perspective. I appreciate your decision to share your thoughts on the matter. However as you can see by replies I think it is a lost cause.

[EnochLight]

I think it’s pretty clear that AttenuationHz has some sort of personal vendetta against us mods for some reason. Looking forward to how this plays out.

[MirEko]

Wow. Been a few years since I've visited the forum, but saw Reason 12 releases and thought I'd see what reasonistas thought..
Glad to see nothing has changed round here
Still the same old reason forums.
See you again when reason 13 drops ‍♂️

[TritoneAddiction]

Finally, more than a trend, I see "rolling releases" as a consequence of software getting so complex internally, that perfecty polished programs aren't that viable any more, lest we users starts saying less is more, and pays for the smallest possible feature set that could do the job. Until such a time, developers will dance to the beat of the market(ing).

I'm probably in the minority, but I'd rather have a smaller upgrade where everything feels polished and tightly integrated. I'd rather pay for that than having a couple of more features swimming around in a complete mess. I really value a hassle free experience and I would be willing to pay for that. That goes for the installation process as well.

[DaveyG]

I think it’s pretty clear that AttenuationHz has some sort of personal vendetta against us mods for some reason.

Whilst I think this is true I also think that a couple of the mods on here are too keen to press their argument even though it fans the flames. A good mod know when to put away their personal feelings and calm things down.

[avasopht]

Finally, more than a trend, I see "rolling releases" as a consequence of software getting so complex internally, that perfecty polished programs aren't that viable any more, lest we users starts saying less is more, and pays for the smallest possible feature set that could do the job. Until such a time, developers will dance to the beat of the market(ing).

I'm probably in the minority, but I'd rather have a smaller upgrade where everything feels polished and tightly integrated. I'd rather pay for that than having a couple of more features swimming around in a complete mess. I really value a hassle free experience and I would be willing to pay for that. That goes for the installation process as well.

Same.

[aeox]

What do you think about two separate zoom options for RS? One for Seq, Rack, Mixer. Another for the rest of the GUI, browser, etc.

Then we could make the other stuff small, because I personally don't need that taking up screen space.

Maybe even separate zoom options for Seq, Rack, and Mixer.

[Marc64]

I noticed that Complex isnt in Reason12 upgrade. Will I loose that since it is in the R11 suite when I upgrade?

[PGR]

I noticed that Complex isnt in Reason12 upgrade. Will I loose that since it is in the R11 suite when I upgrade?

No, all RE you have in version 11 suite are also there in version 12

[Marc64]

I noticed that Complex isnt in Reason12 upgrade. Will I loose that since it is in the R11 suite when I upgrade?

No, all RE you have in version 11 suite are also there in version 12

Thanks, got nervous there

[EnochLight]

What do you think about two separate zoom options for RS? One for Seq, Rack, Mixer. Another for the rest of the GUI, browser, etc.

Then we could make the other stuff small, because I personally don't need that taking up screen space.

Maybe even separate zoom options for Seq, Rack, and Mixer.

In Reason DAW proper, for me I would love to be able to just zoom in on the rack - perhaps even just on a single device - and that's it. That's really all I need to zoom in on - the sequencer, mixer, and everything else can stay at 100% for all I care.

I noticed that Complex isn't in Reason12 upgrade. Will I loose that since it is in the R11 suite when I upgrade?

Any and all RE's you own can be opened in any future version of Reason you buy or use, so no worries there. You'll have Complex-1 (and the others) forever.

[Billy+]

In Reason DAW proper, for me I would love to be able to just zoom in on the rack - perhaps even just on a single device - and that's it. That's really all I need to zoom in on - the sequencer, mixer, and everything else can stay at 100% for all I care.

See I'm would rather have the rack smaller the mixer smaller and the sequencer bigger, but I'm also happy running my screen at 1920x1080 and have never liked using a higher resolution

[EnochLight]

See I'm would rather have the rack smaller the mixer smaller and the sequencer bigger, but I'm also happy running my screen at 1920x1080 and have never liked using a higher resolution

I can already zoom in on the sequencer all I need, and the mixer is a perfect size for me currently (at 100%). I'm so used to resizable GUI on most VST I use, that I really miss that in Reason's rack. RRP is the closest I can get in another DAW, but even that zooms the entire rack all at once istead of on a device--by-device basis. Ahhhh well...

I've been on dual 1080p's for over a decade, and I'm planning to retire them for a single 4K panel. Been looking at ultra-wides now that Reason can be zoomed to some degree:

81Zt42ioCgL._AC_SL1500_.jpg (86.75 KiB) Viewed 9958 times

61OXKiHUMTL._AC_SL1000_.jpg (85.08 KiB) Viewed 9949 times