What do you think re control room in Reason?

[Theo.M]

That's the video.

I honestly thought it would confuse noobs to the software and tried to explain in a post that the control room is simply the monitoring level to your speakers and mix is the mix level and no one is using reason wrong, as the manual is likely outdated and every modern audio interface has a monitoring level knob on it.

I said that Reason always followed the analog mixer style of thinking and that if one was using an analog mixer as their final monitoring point, they would indeed plug their monitors into the ctrl room out and use the control room level to control the audible level coming from the speakers, and of course the master fader mix knob is to control the level of the Mix, but if one were to use an external monitoring station (as MANY do), they would take the mix out into the in of the monitoring station, not the ctrl room out. And in the modern age our interface IS the ctrl room out. Heck even my very cheap Arturia Minifuse 2 has a large tactile control room level knob (or monitor level as it's called nowadays).

Am I crazy? Have I got it all wrong? I thought I understood this stuff now that I have been doing it since I first learned to shave.
The guy then went on a tangent and said the ctrl room out can give an extra 6 DB of audible gain in reason, so that why one should use it, then he went on to completely gaslight me and that I agreed with his video when I was saying stuff to the contrary.

I find people like this extremely difficult to deal with so I just said you seem like a nice guy and good luck and exited the comments.

The video is literally 10 minutes of telling people to take the control room out to the interface out, not the mix out, with over 1000 likes, and I think it's poor info to say the least and incorrect. The mix level should be controlled from the master fader and the monitor level from your interface. For those using really old school PC's or not using an interface at all, then sure, they can control the audible level from Reason's control room out if they like the idea of using a mouse and a tiny knob on a screen to do so. It works but I do feel props wrote all that info in the manual in the days that interfaces were just say a plain pci card like the old emagic audiowerks for example, which had no mixer of their own and no physical knobs. Not for 2024. Even the info and tutorial videos on the official Reason channel are using the mix out LOL.

But to tell people they have been using Reason wrong all this time, when it's just a very very tiny sub set of users that should use the ctrl room out, and not be willing in any way to listen to someone with years of experience, well, maybe I AM wrong, but I think this is a perfect example of a video that gives people bad "internet info" from someone who is not really understanding what is happening or how a monitoring setup works.

So how do you use Reason? Do you just use the default mix out setting or do you re route the wiring to use the ctrl room out, and if the latter, I am curious what interface you use?

BTW, just re other DAWs, Cubase added the control room out option for those who want to control their monitoring setup from Cubase and Logic has a non visible (by default) master fader which you can enable in the mixer if you want to control the monitoring level without affecting the mix level in Logic via software. All Daws out of the box are set up to have the mix out wired to the interface out, what do you think?

BTW I am not bothered or anything by the guy or video, it's more me wanting to genuinely know if *I* have been doing it wrong for 30 years, and there are a lot of users here whose word I will take and listen to if I have!

[dan_g]

i think i saw the video also and tried it for a bit but realized that this does not fit my workflow and makes no sense to me. i want to hear how loud my mix is with the master level. for me this has nothing todo with how loud my controlroom sound is.

[jam-s]

The video thumbnail is typical click bait. So I did not watch it, yet.

But my preferred setup is like this:

Code: Select all

Control Room out -->
         spider audio splitter --> AB-switch (with mix out) --> (Masteriing FX) --> Hardware interface
                               --> sampling input

That way I can easily switch between both and also sample anything into devices using the sampler function.

[robussc]

Yeah, now I have a headphone volume control on my audio interface the need for this routing option is moot (and the Reason control doesn't actually work as I imagined, making it more confusing than useful).

[Tinnitus]

The video thumbnail is typical click bait. So I did not watch it, yet

I'm in the same camp, drop the click bait covers unless you're targeting teens.

[QVprod]

To be fair. YouTube thumbnails is how you get views. You’d have to blame YT for the clickbait culture.

Aside from that. If we were using Reason wrong, it wouldn’t be wired the way it is by default. Really the control room out is good for listening to sends, fantastic if you were sending multiple monitor mixes which is what you would do on a physical mixer in a studio. But you can still make use of that for a custom headphone mix if you have a multi-output interface. Otherwise the master makes the most sense for hearing the mix as a whole.

[selig]

It only works like a console if you have a separate pair of outputs for monitors (as the manual states), because output 1/2 is what gets bounced so it’s basically the “two track out” of the “console”, and CR is the “monitor out” (on channels 3/4). But I’ve never used the CR outputs myself, since I’ve always had a monitor controller and didn’t need the other functions.
A more interesting way to use the CR outputs I’ve heard of is to connect them to the Sample Inputs. Now you can sample anything you hear, or use a Pre Fader Send just for sampling and set the CR out to monitor that send (and thus sample anything on that send).

[Theo.M]

Right, so regardless of the destination, my train of thought is correct in that CR out follows the analog mixer paradigm in that is controls audible level to the listener, nothing to do with mix level, which is controlled by master fader.

[crimsonwarlock]

I have console output to output 1/2, as that is where Reason renders its output. I have CR-out patched through my monitor correction software, and into output 3/4 of my audio interface which is connected to my monitors. That way, it prevents me from rendering a song out through the monitor correction. This is one of the great options from having separate CR-outputs.

[Theo.M]

I have console output to output 1/2, as that is where Reason renders its output. I have CR-out patched through my monitor correction software, and into output 3/4 of my audio interface which is connected to my monitors. That way, it prevents me from rendering a song out through the monitor correction. This is one of the great options from having separate CR-outputs.

Yes I must admit it's a good feature option any way you look at it and the only other main DAW I know of that has a control room is Cubase.

[Theo.M]

BTW, sorry to bump, but just to clarify, as in another topic I said I got 6 free months of Reason plus with an M-Audio 192/6 interface but in this post talked about my Arturia minifuse, no, I do not have both interfaces, I actually recently returned the 192 to Amazon as I was very unhappy with the output latency and the drivers not being updated for 3 years tells me they don't intend to ever improve it. As I am sure most of you know, output latency is the one that matters when playing a virtual instrument and is solely responsibly for how long the delay is between a key press and the instrument being audible. Input latency comes into account for analog or digital ins, and then roundtrip is for monitoring through the interface from the ins, through Reason's Mixer and to the outs (of course most interfaces also have direct monitoring but you can't use native effects but the latency is basically negligible).

The Arturia drivers are OUTSTANDING in this regard. Although the total roundtrip can not be lower than 3.2ms total at 44K at the lowest buffer size with "safety" disabled, I still think this is good enough for all uses if you need to monitor external inputs, and if I was running a large studio I'd be thrilled to use say an AudioRig 16.
But the output latency is incredible. Just 1.5ms at 64 or below buffer (doesn't change from buffer 8 to 64) at 44K and lower again at higher sample rates.
I am running Reason at 96K with the buffer at 64 and there is not a single pop or stutter and I can play any of my VI's fine, even the really high CPU stuff. They are some of the most stable drivers I have ever used outside of uber expensive RME gear. Although I feel bad for getting 6 free months, I got it prior to the M-Audio return and I just found after a few days the latency was just too high and the driver a bit unstable, so, I did indeed return it. Just wanted to clarify the conflicting info between posts and why I have the minifuse now. The 192 did have a nicer monitoring knob though, for sure.

[Carly(Poohbear)]

Right, so regardless of the destination, my train of thought is correct in that CR out follows the analog mixer paradigm in that is controls audible level to the listener, nothing to do with mix level, which is controlled by master fader.

I remember commenting on that video when it came out, a lot of people now have bad information..

If you incorrectly wire up the control room out to hardware 1 and 2 per the video, you are in fact changing the mix level with the control room level.

[Theo.M]

Right, so regardless of the destination, my train of thought is correct in that CR out follows the analog mixer paradigm in that is controls audible level to the listener, nothing to do with mix level, which is controlled by master fader.

I remember commenting on that video when it came out, a lot of people now have bad information..

If you incorrectly wire up the control room out to hardware 1 and 2 per the video, you are in fact changing the mix level with the control room level.

The guy can't handle any kind of adult discussion about it, so I am just presuming he's either a troll or broken.

[Carly(Poohbear)]

The guy can't handle any kind of adult discussion about it, so I am just presuming he's either a troll or broken.

He failed to read the manual correctly, I remember (either on youtube or on a facebook group) pointing out that the control room out go to separate outs and it's stated in the holy bible (Reason Manual), his reply was his hardware only has 2 outputs and this is why he did it, however he failed to mention that in the video and went on how everyone is doing it wrong quoting from the holy bible incorrectly.

This video is a great example in life, how you can take something (even written down) and twist it into something "new" (incorrect). I was amazed at how many people brought into it.

[Theo.M]

The guy can't handle any kind of adult discussion about it, so I am just presuming he's either a troll or broken.

He failed to read the manual correctly, I remember (either on youtube or on a facebook group) pointing out that the control room out go to separate outs and it's stated in the holy bible (Reason Manual), his reply was his hardware only has 2 outputs and this is why he did it, however he failed to mention that in the video and went on how everyone is doing it wrong quoting from the holy bible incorrectly.

This video is a great example in life, how you can take something (even written down) and twist it into something "new" (incorrect). I was amazed at how many people brought into it.

I was surprised how many bought into it too, and will now use reason INcorrectly LOL.

[crimsonwarlock]

I remember commenting on that video when it came out, a lot of people now have bad information..

If you incorrectly wire up the control room out to hardware 1 and 2 per the video, you are in fact changing the mix level with the control room level.

Yep. I finally decided to watch the video to see what it is about. Funny that he shows the manual where it states that you have to connect the control-room out to a SEPARATE set of outputs

[robussc]

I'll admit to having been confused at one point. I believe I've got it wired correctly now (going to go have another look! lol)

[crimsonwarlock]

I'll admit to having been confused at one point. I believe I've got it wired correctly now (going to go have another look! lol)

The way I found out what is what, is when I connected the control-room to my outputs 3-4, and I thought that not using output 1-2 meant those could stay unconnected (which would solve an issue with the Scarlett MixControl software). Imagine my surprise when I rendered out the song, and I got a completely silent WAV-file

[robussc]

The way I found out what is what, is when I connected the control-room to my outputs 3-4, and I thought that not using output 1-2 meant those could stay unconnected (which would solve an issue with the Scarlett MixControl software). Imagine my surprise when I rendered out the song, and I got a completely silent WAV-file

Great minds think alike it seems. I did the exact same thing!

[robussc]

So my final solution to this is to hook up the control room to 3&4 and monitor on 1&2 while writing music . Then I'll use Focusrite Control to switch the headphone out to 3&4 for the mixing stage so that I can utilize the send monitoring and it's also where I've patched in my reference track input (direct connect to a 6:2 mixer) and also my "small speaker", "mono switch" combinator which also ensures the actual master signal chain is nice and clean.

So I think that's a good compromise.

[selig]

So my final solution to this is to hook up the control room to 3&4 and monitor on 1&2 while writing music . Then I'll use Focusrite Control to switch the headphone out to 3&4 for the mixing stage so that I can utilize the send monitoring and it's also where I've patched in my reference track input (direct connect to a 6:2 mixer) and also my "small speaker", "mono switch" combinator which also ensures the actual master signal chain is nice and clean.

So I think that's a good compromise.

I think that's exactly how the manual says to use it - are you writing with 1/2 because of the click only being on 1/2? If that's the only reason, try using ReDrum as the click so you can have it on a pre fader send and only hear it when you monitor that send bus (a "mix plus" setup, you can also do "mix minus" with this same setup).

[crimsonwarlock]

are you writing with 1/2 because of the click only being on 1/2?

The click is on the control-room output as well. However, the browser preview (samples etc.) is completely bypassing any routing and goes directly to output 1/2. So that's probably the reason to have them active during writing/composition.

[robussc]

The click is on the control-room output as well. However, the browser preview (samples etc.) is completely bypassing any routing and goes directly to output 1/2. So that's probably the reason to have them active during writing/composition.

Exactly.

[selig]

are you writing with 1/2 because of the click only being on 1/2?

The click is on the control-room output as well. However, the browser preview (samples etc.) is completely bypassing any routing and goes directly to output 1/2. So that's probably the reason to have them active during writing/composition.

That makes sense, but one clarification.
The click isn't on the Master Outputs OR the Control Room Outputs. You can disconnect both and still hear the click.

As far as I've always understood it, the Click audio path is exactly the same as the Browser/Audition path, coming out of the main 1/2 Interface connections directly, which is why you can still hear it (and the browser) when you disconnect all cables.
Which means you cannot hear it if you monitor outputs 3/4, for example when using CR output on outputs 3/4 as suggested in the user guide.

BTW, this special routing also applies to the Sample Input when the monitor button is engaged. Which can lead to another interesting situation if you have connected the CR outputs to the Sample Inputs as some here have done - you can now monitor the entire mix (or send/return) without connecting any cables to any of the outputs! As long as you keep the monitor button engaged you can even export what you're hearing (minus the click, thankfully), again with no cables connected to any audio outputs at all!
The fact the click is not included suggests it is either being sent to a slightly different point in the signal path, or is automatically muted no matter what when exporting (or something else entirely, I don't have a clue and can't think of any way to test it!).

[crimsonwarlock]

The click is on the control-room output as well. However, the browser preview (samples etc.) is completely bypassing any routing and goes directly to output 1/2. So that's probably the reason to have them active during writing/composition.

That makes sense, but one clarification.
The click isn't on the Master Outputs OR the Control Room Outputs. You can disconnect both and still hear the click.

I always have at least one set of outputs active, so either 1/2 or 3/4. So I never tried to hear the click without any outs connected. What you say makes perfect sense.

Just thinking some more about CR-out: I grabbed the Robotic beans toolbox-bundle during the latest sale (basically for the time-slider) and got his click-RE. It has the option to disable itself when exporting. I also have the Metro Click-machine by Turn2On (got that free some time), that doesn't have this option, but this is solved when routing it to your CR-out (with the proper routing).