Neither is Renoise, but it still supports vsts.
There is a historical reason why propellerhead won’t support vst. I suggest you read that before commenting why reason/record don’t support vst.
Where can i read about this ?
Well, to me that sounds like a “historical” weakness of Propellorhead. Maybe a few years back it was “cool” to not support vsts, but now users expect the possibility of expanding their programs.
It’s kinda like buying a piece of gear (hardware) that won’t let you hook it up to anything else. Like for example multi effect processors or even those little guitar pedal effects. That would limit you on what you can do with it, would it not?
I’m curious about this as well… i can find tons of topics on google where various folks mention “Propellerheads have given their statements about why not, many, many times”, yet i just could not even find one so far and no one seems to want to even give a small summary of why not except for “It won’t come and never will come”…
On the other hand, i personally don’t care, it’s their choice to limit their marketshare.
I don’t have any links. But I have read it many years ago that Propellerhead and Steinberg was working together with a similar technology similar to vst, after the sucess with rebirth, but a point steinberg dropped the colaboration and introduced VST by them self.
Cakewalk didn’t support VST either and made their own standard called DXi, based on direct x. But later Sonar did support vst og DXi is now obsolete.
edit: And now the say it’s because reason wants to be reliable and effiecent.
http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/Jan03/arti…opellerhead.asp
If its possible to feed rewired sounds into Reason then Id be interested.
Exactly, Taktik. It’s a load of marketing, a load of hype from the magazines, and nothing that we don’t already have in umpteen other pieces of music software.
Why anybody would want to deny themselves the ability to use VSTs is beyond me.
Oh my god…
I can’t believe they actually wrote that on that picture!!!
“Record’s software mixing console is a fully featured, big studio desk inside your computer”.
Reminds me of that classic quote from a Reason fanboy:
“It’s like a whole rack of synths!”
You can see what sort of market the Propellerheads are aiming for!!
“Record’s software mixing console is a fully featured, big studio desk inside your computer”.
What an incredible idea! Nobody has ever thought of that before!
Prepare to drown in the sickening hype and bluster that is going to be poured from every computer music mag printing press up and down the land…
Very true. I challenged loads of Reason 4 fanboys to upload some of the ‘amazing’ sounds that Thor can allegedly produce, and not one of them was able to! Synth1 and Oatmeal sound just as good as Thor.
The success of ‘Reason’ is very interesting from a psychological standpoint: it’s a classic example of how hype and marketing leads people to ‘defend’ a product which they have bought, and then to hype it themselves so that even more people end up buying it, and then ‘defending’ how ‘wonderful’ it is to others. The spread of memes…
That old chestnut. Buzz08 has never crashed on me. Renoise has never crashed on me. Why not just remove all VST support from ALL music programs, thereby making them more ‘stable’? Only ancient, dodgy VSTs will crash your DAW.
By routing any device into another in Reason, are you able to produce MUSICAL sounds that are better than what can already be produced with any number of currently available VSTs? I doubt it. Therefore - what exactly is the point?
No, people are negative towards Reason because it’s overhyped, overpriced, and we get fed up of hearing about how ‘amazing’ it is, from the latest bunch of newbies for whom it is their first ever piece of computer music software. Having been foolish enough to use Reason to produce their music with, rather than any of the other software which is, of course, VST compatible, they then try to cover up their ‘mistake’ by desperately trying to make out that VSTs aren’t that big a deal, when obviously they are.
I can tell you this from personal experience - three people I have met over the past ten years, after I mentioned something about computer music, Renoise, or Buzz, told me that they either used Reason, or “Have you seen Reason? It’s AMAZING”. When I then asked them if they used VSTs, they replied “What’s that?” See the connection?
And “Reason” is a STUPID name for a piece of software- for anything, for that matter. And “Record” is just as stupid and lazy. Couldn’t they spend a few minutes thinking up a NEW name, that would make it easy to search for? How are you going to search, for example, for forum posts about “Record” without typing in “Propellerheads” every time, and in how many posts concerning “Record” to posters also write “Propellerheads”? Not many, I would think, as it’s tiresome.
Why don’t they call their next masterpiece “The”? Then nobody will ever be able to find any inforrmation about it…
Becouse typing “The Propellerheads” in google will guide you to their homepage where you can buy more amazing software? ]:-> Who knows maybe they plan to release such product? ]:->
I used Reason at uni. It was quite painful. More than anything else, I found it stodgy to enter/edit notes, and most of all change the (VERY nicely rendered) wires at the ‘back’ of the mixing desk. There were loads and they overlapped like crazy, causing a chaotic mess with wires hanging down around 5 screens worth sometimes. Perhaps there are better ways to arrange them than what I did, but it seems to me that trying to emulate real life ™ is a messed up philosophy when computers can organize things much more efficiently with a decent UI.
Renoise is a breath of fresh air in comparison.
You can’t argue with people using their products. Jelousy, sure. Pity? A bit pretentious but OK. Angry rants? Well, this is the internet after-all.
Everyone can use a pencil, doesn’t mean that everyone can draw or write masterpieces.
The fact is most people are just hobbyists. A big part about having a hobby is blah blah blah blog blog blog coffee shop talk, no tangible results.
I know several Reason users. They are happy using it. I’m happy using Renoise. I don’t see a problem with different strokes for different folks.
I’m more than happy to talk about how awesome Renoise is, but no need to froth at the mouth like a rabid dog. It’s a waste of energy. If people don’t want to use it, well it’s not going to stop me from using it.
Haha, I’m the same way.
The opposite feeling must be far more intimidating though (Coming from Reason to Renoise must make no sense at all) But now we have ReWire. So kudos to Propellerheads there, bridging the gap can’t hurt. It only opens up possibilities.
To put it another way
GOBOTS are the same as TRANSFORMERS and only idiots would buy the more expensive toys.
Discuss.
I suppose I for one may be a little less bitter if more unis/studios/composers even knew what a ‘tracker’ was to begin with (never mind used one). It reminds me of ppl who dismiss say… C64 SID music in the first two seconds of listening without waiting to properly hear what content might be there.
Ahh cmon people …reason isn’t really that bad …in fact I really dig the thor synth and mahlstrom …and to call it even with synth1 or oatmeal is like comparing oranges and kiwis for that matter .
Reason’s Workflow is a real pita , unlesss you use a midi keyboard …but hey rewired with renoise …you can still have all the advantages of a tracker and still use reason’s synthst…
On a sidenoite …Oatmeal is a nice vst but boyoboy that filter sounds so weak …compared to thor …or even renoise’s own filter 3 ( which I really like …hint to taktik …make filter 3 available in the instruments envelopes please …
Ah, the Malstrom (graintable synthesis - whatever that is) was awesome admittedly. Some really nice sounds out of that, wish there was a VST. There’s an effect VST called “KTGranulator” which is pretty awesome too, though it’s not a source of instruments of course.
I have this friend who’s really proud of his Tascam 24-channel portastudio. He is quite excited about it: “Man, I can record multi-channels, apply reverb and effects, and it sounds so professional!”. In his world, it simply rocks. Because he has yet to discover and learn about the computer based DAW, trackers, etc.
I have another friend who’s always updated with the latest gear the industry has to offer. He only works with “the best”. The sound he produces is so clean that you could almost wash your face in it. He only accepts Pro Tools; Cubase is crap, Sonar is crap, Renoise is the crap the crap itself considers crap.
Now there is a difference between these two guys.
The first one is perfectly happy with his little portastudio, his voice and his guitar. And I’ll tell you: he produces lots of songs every week, some of them are extremely good, and his limitations in regard to gear/software/samples/etc seem only to be to his creative advantage.
The second one is never happy with anything. Nothing is perfect. He spends a lot of time comparing his mixes to the big studios. He spends even more time tweaking knobs, trying to create (or find, on all his hardware synthesizers) the best sound patches, etc. And I’ll tell you: he produces a few songs a year. None of them are any good, just ordinary commercial, big-sounding audio without any soul or feeling whatsoever.
When Propellerhead Software creates a software such as “Record”, do you really expect them to address KVR-nerds? Or the guys who virtually can (in theory) develop or design their own DAW? Or the guys who crave “something new”, outside of the established box, and who will frown at any new product that does what thousands others have done before?
Well, I don’t. Judging by the marketing alone, “Record” is a product for people such as my friend – who’s now on a Tascam but wants something easy (and limited - that’s the fucking point, stupid!) to play with on his little MacBook laptop whenever inspiration strikes.
If such people truly identify a product as being inferior in comparison to other products, then why just not leave it at that with a smile? There is no “best” product floating out there outside of context. In fact, there is no “best” anything outside of context. There are only the questions: “Good, by what standard? For whom? For what purpose? In what respect?” etc. And what is the best choice for person A may not be the best choice for person B, since they are in different contexts.
You say that it is a “mistake” to make music in Reason when there are other tools available on the market that offers a broader range of possibilities. Yet, one has to begin somewhere. I’ve seen it first hand (when I worked as a salesman of music software) that Reason offered a very attractive learning curve. That, along with visual cosmetics, made quite many people feel safe and inspired to go straight into experimenting and being creative with sound, rather than spending lots of effort figuring out what to do. And THAT is a real value to many people.
I’m grateful to Propellerhead Software for having created ReBirth, the second music/audio software (the first was Fasttracker II) I fell in love with. I’m grateful for their product Reason, which at that time in the 90’s released my musical creativity and made it fun again to produce songs. I’m grateful for their product ReCycle, which enabled me to do some cool things with my sampled stuff, again releasing creative power within me. I’m grateful for their ReWire technology, which lets me live the old dream of having the world’s greatest musical software (Renoise) communicating in perfect sync with other (good) music softwares. And, yes, I am grateful that Propellerhead Software is taking care of the newbies to computer based recording in their so-called “stupid” Record software. That means more people will enter the field of music production, and that means more people will be able to check out what software such as Renoise can do for them and their musical creativity.
Personally, the main reason I’ll check out “Record” is found at ~1:17 in this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EGXPOryWpME…feature=related
This reminds of today’s Slashdot story about a quantative comparison of programming languages. It rates them according to speed and ‘verbosity’ and plots the results in a graph. It’s pretty interesting, and goes to show that even though some things may be hard to judge, that doesn’t mean there aren’t answers if you look hard enough.
Music itself is made of basic structures and ways of doing things (additive/subtractive synthesis, ADSR envelopes, and the ways to enter/record musical notes, being a few examples), and it’s surely a fact that some programs will implement them more concisely, more intuitively and more sensibly than other programs.
I haven’t tried Pro Tools (does it even have a sequencer/piano roll as such?), but I bet you that Renoise would certainly give at least a run for its money. Perhaps one day, I’ll compare the two…
I use Logic, Renoise and Reason and probably use Reason the most. Not sure what that says about me but hey…
Having said that I see no point in Record whatsoever, except it would be pretty cool to feed external audio through the Reason effects but then again you could always do that by importing audio as samples.
Transcender, I have to disagree with you - there is such a thing as a ‘best’ piece of music software - otherwise, why does any software exist at all, and why do programmers update software to improve it, and why do users of software ask for improvements?
The idea that all software is ‘equal’ is ridiculous. If I made a tracker that required you to type in “YES” every time you entered a note, would that be okay? If I made a tracker that forced you to click on a 2 by 2 pixel square whenever you wanted to press ‘Play’ or ‘Stop’, and you couldn’t use the keyboard, would that be alright? Of course not.
To those people who started using Reason - why didn’t they just do a little research and find out about free software first? Why spend money on Reason before they even know if they have an ounce of talent yet? Most likely because the heavily biased magazines didn’t tell them about free software, or constantly made out that it was somehow inferior to expensive software.
Let’s be honest - most commercial music is absolute rubbish. Just listen to the top 100 albums - for the past twenty years, they have been getting worse and worse. The occasional classic comes out, but 99% of modern music is just not worth listening to. Then if we look at hobbyist musicians (like myself) who make music for their own pleasure, most of that isn’t worth listening to either, but actually I find far more good music from hobbyists (if that’s the correct term) than from commercial musicians.
My point is that the magazines are still lying to people about what they need to make good music. They are still selling products, rather than telling the objective truth, and therefore they cannot be trusted. ‘Record’ is yet another unnecessary product which offers nothing new, no advantages, and will keep people in the non-VST dark ages.
Of course, by definition, most people who use Reason and are STILL using it, are going to say that VSTs aren’t necessary (for them), etc. but how many people have used Reason and then sold it and bought something that was VST compatible? Obviously they aren’t going to be saying that Reason is wonderful and VSTs are unnecessary. I regard Reason users as people who haven’t ‘seen the light’ and are determined to continue ignoring VSTs forever. That’s their right, but I don’t want even more people ending up going down that road, and then realising that they’d wished somebody had told them about Buzz, Renoise, FLStudio, Cubase, etc. BEFORE they fell for Reason’s charms…
Gentleclockdivider - can you post up some examples of Maelstrom and Thor, without any effects, so I can hear? I’ve heard loads of sounds from them both, and nothing particularly amazed me.
So, basically Reason users are just simple rubes who need to be protected from themselves? Very nice assessment of a large group of people, because as we know, that kind of generalizing is rarely wrong.
I started composing a post that outlines some of the strengths I see from using Reason as my primarily music-making tool, but ultimately this isn’t really about that, is it? I mean, we’re not really discussing the merits of one piece of software as compared to another. No, this is the internet, so at best this is just a pissing contest and at worst its… well… there’s no need to be insulting.
XG2003, you keep asking people to post samples from different Reason synthesizers, but your mind is made up. Why bother? You’re happy making music your way and other people are happy making music their way. Don’t assume that your way of thinking is right and that other methods or processes are somehow inferior. You’re not that smart. Neither am I, so let’s all just assume we’re not capable of making decisions for the rest of the world.
Robb