Isn't this kind of normal? If you "change the sound" of Subtractor(or any synth), you break backwards compatibility, once a synth is out you can only reasonably add new things to it, not change what's already there

Yes, it's surely about that 70/30 money split.

Trying to understand this correctly, and happy for Mattias to clarify. But from what is shared so far it seems that a VST developer who wishes to port their product to the Reason platform via Re, the DSP coding can be done in 15 minutes. Then there's the GUI to finalise, which would presumably also comprise design elements lifted from the original VST, so might take a graphics person an hour or two tops (if they are a perfectionist). Given that they are making an Re port of an existing VST, they have no need for medling around the back with CV in/out/etc.

So after a morning's work, they are ready to send their product off to Propellerhead, and head out to lunch.

After Propellerhead approve this, the product can then be sold exclusively via their marketplace, with Propellerhead taking a 30% cut.... and here's the big catch.... how does this affect pricing??

The developer seems to have the choice of either doing extra work, increasing sales, but with a 30% loss of earnings on the original product. Or... raising the price. Do they then raise the price on the Reason Re version only (which would obviously be fair, but would hurt Reason users, and ultimately might lead to an exodus of Reason users to other platforms where they can buy and use the cheaper VST version) or do they incorporate the Propellerhead cut into their overall pricing strategy, so driving up the price of their VST versions too?

Either way, the second catch is that once you remove the fancy marketing, Propellerhead has in this case effectively just provided a VST wrapper. Hardly a technological breakthrough...

So the better outcome seems to me for VST developers to ignore Re in this case, but welcome it as a platform where completely different products could be developed - ones which actually ustilise the unique strengths of the Reason platform, such as the CV routings.

...and per my previous post, affect pricing - possibly for the VST version too.

A lot of people lap up the hype, actually, and are really excited by the announcement. Propellerhead are geniuses at marketing. It's when you examine the detail that some things don't always stack up, but not everyone does that so much

I don't particularly buy the Propellerhead's arguments for not implementing VST's. The stability issues are more likely on the host side. For example I've found Renoise extremely stable. In Renoise you can undo VST parameter changes and run them sandboxed. CV out integration is just basically VST parameter automation being routed.
What they really want is a piece of the pie - 30% commission on sales. Everyone is trying to copy Apple now with their App Stores as it's been such a successful business model.

Well Propellerhead spin this myth that VSTs are unstable .... and then invite VST developers to come on board with their own format for a mere 30%

I know you guys are very good at being skeptical, heck that's why I've read KVR for so long, but you're forgetting a lot of the stuff that actually DOES cost money and take times if you work with for example VST.

We made this graph after interviews (IIRC) with devs about what time is spent on: http://live.midifan.com/images/85473e595158013a5363eab69f71a 85f.JPG

There is no longer need for a dev to support multi-OS, when an OS gets upgraded we upgrade the plug-in, we maintain the code base, we solve copy protection, we solve rack integration, distribution. This means a developer can instead focus on the DSP, the GUI and the workflow. There are also lots of Reason users that a developer might not read otherwise - i.e. more money for devs! We want the devs to have more money too

There is still a while until this all is ready, this is just the beginning, but we really are trying to make this very developer friendly AND user friendly and we'll talk more about it.

RE: the suggested "VST wrapper" that would go against everything we've stood for with Reason. Integration in Reason's environment would be long from smooth, the code wouldn't be sandboxed as such (I guess, I'm not a developer), we still wouldn't have native undo and copy+paste of devices/patches (this is something people underestimate). There would be no cables, audio or CV etc.

The video uploading touches on plenty of these and we'll of course talk more about it but there are some points that you might not have thought of in any case!

Fun to read your feedback though, keep it coming. We're reading all of it and listening.

So this opens up potential customers for Uhe etc who uses reason. They will be able to sell more, even if they loose 30%. Or is the controversy that lots of people with go from cubase etc to Reason?

Personally i welcome having my favourite vst's in rack format. I cant stand having windows of various sizes all over the place.

It's entertaining yet depressing reading all these doom posts.

I've read several times how all major hosts becomes more and more identical to each other. Reason is but anything identical to anything else. This is a good thing.

Maybe Urs can comment on how much distraction the Ubric plug conversion was from his "regular" work with vsti's. I know that Urs is a honest and nice guy who works on several projects, big and small, and always deliver well thought out high quality products. So his point of view on this would be lovely to hear

Still the question on crossgrades exist. Personally i think that buying a plug should include all formats. It usually does.
Consider if i would buy one of two plugins. The first one i get the RE version but not VST. The other one provides both. I would buy the second one of course! (if features were similar etc). Remember that Reason works on both PC and Mac so there's a lot of new potential customers to be had.
Do i want to pay for the development of an AU version of a plugin? No, but i do it anyways when i buy a plugin that comes in multiple formats. Oh well, i think i made my point..

Gosh, I'm just back home at Howie's, after the event - too many pages to catch up with (and too much Applewoi). Got about 5 hours of sleep ahead, then prepare for first day at the trade show.

I'll be happy to post some more details soon. This is *not* another plugin format. It's something different. We are very happy about it.

As for pricing, I don't think we can give it away as a free crossgrade. We'll unbundle Uhbik and we'll work something out. Also for things to follow. We'll see.

Agreed - and the same applies to sample libraries that come in multiple formats including the Reason ReFill alongside Acid, Wav, etc.

BUT - I don't see how this could work if the Re version has to be bought from the Propellerhead marketplace with a 70/30 split. That would surely be the Re version only, and the Re version surely couldn't be bundled with the VST version by the developer without Propellerhead getting their cut.... so it looks like you will be buying one or the other.

will there be any advantage as a result for us users who don't ever use reason?
and will there be disadvantages.

rsp

Clemens: A week or two to get Uhbik A dsp running. An hour to port Uhbik-F after that.

Me: A few hours to figure out how to convert single frames to filmstrips in Photoshop. A day to redesign both A and F in Cinema. 2 hours to edit the script files for the GUI with correct positions.

However, we also have to do 3D files for the final, scalable version. I started on this, but I didn't make it to the final version within a day. We'll see once their final toolset arrives.

There's a lot more to this format, and it boils down to developing a workflow. It might require doing a special gui (for the rack...) but this is much, much easier than your normal plugin format.

OTOH we couldn't do Zebra, ACE or even Diva just yet. But we've got a close wire to Props to work out ways to port a few things.

If you don't use Reason I don't see any disadvantage. At least not for us and with our stuff.

We install workflows for plugin formats and rack estensions, and then we go from there. At some point we'll have VST3, AAX and RE going with pretty much the same compile step as AU and VST2. This is one of our major topics for this year, so the timing for RE fits perfectly.

I don't recall them mentioning anywhere the rack having a scalable GUI?

thanks for the openness and honesty as always.

rsp