Reason 12.2.8 Release Notes

[RobC]

Nice work, RS!

Can I ask for 768 kHz support, including import/export, same with 32 bit? For science (no, seriously)! If Reason and the RRP can handle it, then why not enable it?

[TritoneAddiction]

Shut the fuck up and use the software. It's great.

I assumed that was the new Reason marketing tagline.

Yeah I like the no nonsense attitude. It’s way better than ”Sound like you”.
They should use this one instead.

[joeyluck]

Shut the fuck up and use the software. It's great.

I assumed that was the new Reason marketing tagline.

It's a new quote in this scroll of quotes

[jamesa]

Shut the fuck up and use the software. It's great.

I assumed that was the new Reason marketing tagline.

This is awesome!!!!!

[avasopht]

Nice work, RS!

Can I ask for 768 kHz support, including import/export, same with 32 bit? For science (no, seriously)! If Reason and the RRP can handle it, then why not enable it?

Why not 9000kHz support?

[Propellerhands]

Shut the fuck up and use the software. It's great.

Gonna be my signature hilarious.

[EnochLight]

I assumed that was the new Reason marketing tagline.

It's a new quote in this scroll of quotes

[TritoneAddiction]

Shut the fuck up and use the software. It's great.

Gonna be my signature hilarious.

Reason Studios should make a deal with stillifegaijin and turn that into a t-shirt.

[stillifegaijin]

Gonna be my signature hilarious.

Reason Studios should make a deal with stillifegaijin and turn that into a t-shirt.

HAHA! They can have it. Would be a great t-shirt.

[RobC]

Nice work, RS!

Can I ask for 768 kHz support, including import/export, same with 32 bit? For science (no, seriously)! If Reason and the RRP can handle it, then why not enable it?

Why not 9000kHz support?

Here we go again.

I'll add another reason, the 3rd one, I think:

Brick wall high pass filter your music above 20 kHz (or your own top hearing limit), especially if working all the way at 192 kHz for example. You will find a lot of good stuff happening. But you can bring it down only 2 octaves. Maybe 3, if you're fine with 10 kHz limit.
You can gate it, chop up with slices (it's mostly interesting clicks, knocks and transients in general for me), then speed up the tempo, so it matches the original song (or perhaps non destructive time "stretching", or rather alignment is possible, too). And just like that, you have a really awesome element for your song to play around with.
The higher the sample rate, the more octaves we can choose from - whichever sounds best.

But yeah, I'd love to simply oversample anything I'd like. Reaper can do it. The Reason Rack Plugin is compatible with 768.

Rhetorical: How many more reasons should I list?

32 bits are clipping safe, great for batch processing, and pretty much never need dithering.

Before people come with the 'you take a joke too seriously' - well, RS sees the "joke", too, and just like that the request gets ignored.

I could start complaining, too: what audible difference does it make to your music, to be able to choose your own clip colors?
At least what I suggest, opens actual, audible possibilities (with a little work) - EVERYBODY can learn how to take advantage of higher sample rates / oversampling. It's beyond easy.

[Neo]

lol

Sorry. Very drunk post. Not trying to start anything. The whiskey got to me. My bad.

I used to enjoy a drink myself. All good..

[avasopht]

Here we go again.

I'll add another reason, the 3rd one, I think:

Brick wall high pass filter your music above 20 kHz (or your own top hearing limit), especially if working all the way at 192 kHz for example. You will find a lot of good stuff happening. But you can bring it down only 2 octaves. Maybe 3, if you're fine with 10 kHz limit.
You can gate it, chop up with slices (it's mostly interesting clicks, knocks and transients in general for me), then speed up the tempo, so it matches the original song (or perhaps non destructive time "stretching", or rather alignment is possible, too). And just like that, you have a really awesome element for your song to play around with.
The higher the sample rate, the more octaves we can choose from - whichever sounds best.

But yeah, I'd love to simply oversample anything I'd like. Reaper can do it. The Reason Rack Plugin is compatible with 768.

Rhetorical: How many more reasons should I list?

32 bits are clipping safe, great for batch processing, and pretty much never need dithering.

Before people come with the 'you take a joke too seriously' - well, RS sees the "joke", too, and just like that the request gets ignored.

I could start complaining, too: what audible difference does it make to your music, to be able to choose your own clip colors?
At least what I suggest, opens actual, audible possibilities (with a little work) - EVERYBODY can learn how to take advantage of higher sample rates / oversampling. It's beyond easy.

You can achieve all of that right now.

Just downsample whatever you have (or set your synth to a lower octave). Exact same result (although you'd have to account for temporal settings, e.g., a 1ms compressor release would need to be doubled if you played a sample an octave lower).

Tbh, I wasn't sure if you were joking.

Now that you bring it up, ... ... ... I don't know why RS haven't offered the ability to have mixed samplerate projects. The RE SDK warned developers from the beginning that their RE could be resampled (back when there were discussions about using audio cables to transmit data).

It would be great if I could make one device run at 88.2kHz (like a Subtractor) when desired while the rest of the project runs at 44.1kHz.

That would also reduce unnecessary resampling (which currently happens when using oversampling). Basically, if Reason knows that these three compressors are all running at 96kHz, it can skip the resampling. But if on the other hand your project was running at 48kHz and you used 2x oversampling for the compressor, ... ... well, now you've just resampled that audio 4 times. IIRC iZotope did a video about that.

[RobC]

You can achieve all of that right now.

Just downsample whatever you have (or set your synth to a lower octave). Exact same result (although you'd have to account for temporal settings, e.g., a 1ms compressor release would need to be doubled if you played a sample an octave lower).

Tbh, I wasn't sure if you were joking.

Now that you bring it up, ... ... ... I don't know why RS haven't offered the ability to have mixed samplerate projects. The RE SDK warned developers from the beginning that their RE could be resampled (back when there were discussions about using audio cables to transmit data).

It would be great if I could make one device run at 88.2kHz (like a Subtractor) when desired while the rest of the project runs at 44.1kHz.

That would also reduce unnecessary resampling (which currently happens when using oversampling). Basically, if Reason knows that these three compressors are all running at 96kHz, it can skip the resampling. But if on the other hand your project was running at 48kHz and you used 2x oversampling for the compressor, ... ... well, now you've just resampled that audio 4 times. IIRC iZotope did a video about that.

I'm not joking with this request, hence I mentioned it a couple of times before, here and there.

It could be that there are stability and compatibility issues they would face. I just looked into developing that day, and noticed that REs only run at 192 kHz tops?
Of course, not everything needs oversampling.

[moalla]

First try of 12.2.8 seems like the drag and drop rack extension problem is solved, fine at last.
So RS solved now most of the graphical bugs , next version I strongly suspect will be 12.3.x with M1 support, we will see

[deeplink]

First try of 12.2.8 seems like the drag and drop rack extension problem is solved, fine at last.
So RS solved now most of the graphical bugs , next version I strongly suspect will be 12.3.x with M1 support, we will see

As RS mentioned in their roadmap, we will most likely see VST3 before M1

[mcatalao]

Nice work, RS!

Can I ask for 768 kHz support, including import/export, same with 32 bit? For science (no, seriously)! If Reason and the RRP can handle it, then why not enable it?

Why not 9000kHz support?

Well, 9MHz i don't know but it would be interesting if you could master to DSD.

[Ostermilk]

...
Fixed a bug where Spider Audio Merger/Splitter introduced a slight delay

Wat?

awesome they fixed the mixer faders bug. Also a great sign they did some job on the ol' spider.

Was the spider delay a known issue? I've never noticed it

Was the spider delay a known issue? I've never noticed it

Never noticed it myself. This is more of a nice gesture to me. But the mixer faders thing was doing my head in. I actually thought it was me who's been doing something wrong rather than it being a bug. Good riddance.

Yes, it's a very long-standing issue, but it's also been mitigated for a long time by the fact that there's been alternative splitters and mergers by other devs (thanks JP ) that don't have the same bug. Nice to have the original equipment fixed eventually though.

An easy way to notice the bug in the now fixed spider was to use one in the Master Section insert.

[Manoosh]

I've been getting a "beta test" invitation and cannot reach the betatest side over the link they send me! That's really weired! It brings me to the regular reason site and ask me for login again and again... so I can login 10 times or more, follow the link but come to the regular reason site... why is that?I wrote to Reasonstudios a week ago or so, but no respond I am dissapointed

[selig]

I'm not joking with this request, hence I mentioned it a couple of times before, here and there.

It could be that there are stability and compatibility issues they would face. I just looked into developing that day, and noticed that REs only run at 192 kHz tops?
Of course, not everything needs oversampling.

To be clear, oversampling and sample rates are two separate things. You can have oversampling at 44.1 sample rate, for example.
And just as important, higher sample rates do not necessarily mean higher frequency response when recording audio. It will also depend on sampling/reconstruction filter settings, which must be moved higher in order to take advantage of the higher sample rate - in many cases IIRC the filter cutoff is at a similar place but the slope is made more gentle (because it sounds better than a steeper slope), one big reason that cheap convertors sound better at higher sample rates and high quality converters tend to sound similar at all rates. Plus, higher rates can introduce distortions that are better avoided according to most.
Read more here:

https://sonicscoop.com/the-science-of-s ... n-it-isnt/

If you really want to record ultrasonic frequencies you not only need special microphones but convertors specifically designed to capture the higher frequencies FLAT rather than rolling off starting around 20 kHz.

So even if Reason allowed super high sample rates, most converters do not. Folks who record for SFX use specialized equipment to capture the ultrasonic frequencies accurately/flat, and if that interests you I would suggest you follow their lead with regards to the specialized gear required to do so.

[selig]

...
Fixed a bug where Spider Audio Merger/Splitter introduced a slight delay

Wat?

Yay, FINALLY!!!

[Jac459]

I'm not joking with this request, hence I mentioned it a couple of times before, here and there.

It could be that there are stability and compatibility issues they would face. I just looked into developing that day, and noticed that REs only run at 192 kHz tops?
Of course, not everything needs oversampling.

To be clear, oversampling and sample rates are two separate things. You can have oversampling at 44.1 sample rate, for example.
And just as important, higher sample rates do not necessarily mean higher frequency response when recording audio. It will also depend on sampling/reconstruction filter settings, which must be moved higher in order to take advantage of the higher sample rate - in many cases IIRC the filter cutoff is at a similar place but the slope is made more gentle (because it sounds better than a steeper slope), one big reason that cheap convertors sound better at higher sample rates and high quality converters tend to sound similar at all rates. Plus, higher rates can introduce distortions that are better avoided according to most.
Read more here:

https://sonicscoop.com/the-science-of-s ... n-it-isnt/

If you really want to record ultrasonic frequencies you not only need special microphones but convertors specifically designed to capture the higher frequencies FLAT rather than rolling off starting around 20 kHz.

So even if Reason allowed super high sample rates, most converters do not. Folks who record for SFX use specialized equipment to capture the ultrasonic frequencies accurately/flat, and if that interests you I would suggest you follow their lead with regards to the specialized gear required to do so.

I will need to totally disagree with you Selig .

All these science-based facts are just ... facts.

Now, you need to take into account the magic of marketing and placebo effect. If you put an "hires" sticker on a gear, and the user can see it. it WILL sound better. That is the fact of human placebo.
A 96khz recording ALWAYS sound better as long as the listener is convinced it sounds better .

So even if having higher bitrate or resolution doesn't make any sense from a ... reasonable stand point, it kind of make sense from a marketing standpoint. Because you will find people buying it...

To me, I find it extraordinary than no scientific backed blind-test proof the superiority of hi-res and yet, it is the natural direction of the industry...

[RobC]

To be clear, oversampling and sample rates are two separate things. You can have oversampling at 44.1 sample rate, for example.
And just as important, higher sample rates do not necessarily mean higher frequency response when recording audio. It will also depend on sampling/reconstruction filter settings, which must be moved higher in order to take advantage of the higher sample rate - in many cases IIRC the filter cutoff is at a similar place but the slope is made more gentle (because it sounds better than a steeper slope), one big reason that cheap convertors sound better at higher sample rates and high quality converters tend to sound similar at all rates. Plus, higher rates can introduce distortions that are better avoided according to most.
Read more here:

https://sonicscoop.com/the-science-of-s ... n-it-isnt/

If you really want to record ultrasonic frequencies you not only need special microphones but convertors specifically designed to capture the higher frequencies FLAT rather than rolling off starting around 20 kHz.

So even if Reason allowed super high sample rates, most converters do not. Folks who record for SFX use specialized equipment to capture the ultrasonic frequencies accurately/flat, and if that interests you I would suggest you follow their lead with regards to the specialized gear required to do so.

I know, I just mean, I would be okay with either solution.
I mostly need it when it comes to synthesized sounds, and doing a one-shot sample, then doing destructive editing.
Recording is a different matter. My microphones only go up to 20 kHz. Is there any point to recording above 40 kHz sample rate in that case? I don't think so.

[RobC]

I will need to totally disagree with you Selig .

All these science-based facts are just ... facts.

Now, you need to take into account the magic of marketing and placebo effect. If you put an "hires" sticker on a gear, and the user can see it. it WILL sound better. That is the fact of human placebo.
A 96khz recording ALWAYS sound better as long as the listener is convinced it sounds better .

So even if having higher bitrate or resolution doesn't make any sense from a ... reasonable stand point, it kind of make sense from a marketing standpoint. Because you will find people buying it...

To me, I find it extraordinary than no scientific backed blind-test proof the superiority of hi-res and yet, it is the natural direction of the industry...

What I talk about, is not about high resolution recording, or listening, and I made that beyond clear, even in this thread.

[avasopht]

What I talk about, is not about high resolution recording, or listening, and I made that beyond clear, even in this thread.

Maybe it'll be more clear if you said it at a 900khz sample rate (microphone permitting, of course)

[RobC]

What I talk about, is not about high resolution recording, or listening, and I made that beyond clear, even in this thread.

Maybe it'll be more clear if you said it at a 900khz sample rate (microphone permitting, of course)

Even you agreed that running Subtractor at a higher sample rate can reduce aliasing artifacts for example. Or at least you could agree.

Whatever, I know how to take advantage of it, and as long as it's useful, I very much will make use of it for REs, or VSTs, or maybe a standalone software.