KVR Audio

Teksonik · Post by **Teksonik** » Fri Mar 03, 2006 4:30 pm

Yes but other Hosts can be considered "Instruments" as well. Orion= Toxic 2,WaveDream,Ultran,Screamer,Sampler with multi format support,Plucked String,Bassline,3 Drum machines, A realtime Impulse Resonse Processor, great effects too numerous to mention AND it can host other Plugins, AND it can record audio AND it's less expensive than Reason. The Reason is an Instrument argument just doesn't hold water.

headquest · Post by **headquest** » Fri Mar 03, 2006 4:43 pm

Teksonik wrote:Yes but other Hosts can be considered "Instruments" as well. Orion= Toxic 2,WaveDream,Ultran,Screamer,Sampler with multi format support,Plucked String,Bassline,3 Drum machines, A realtime Impulse Resonse Processor, great effects too numerous to mention AND it can host other Plugins, AND it can record audio AND it's less expensive than Reason. The Reason is an Instrument argument just doesn't hold water.

It does hold water, because it claims to be an instrument on the box and in adverts, and it is in fact an instrument. How is that a problem

As for the wonderful ONION it is a host that includes a range of bundled instruments/effects. As such it sets out - and succeeds - in covering more bases. Although some people, including me, would say that it is not such a high quality product/end result. For me its the stability, efficient CPU and included samples that swing it very strongly in Reason's favour.

alienmachine · Post by **alienmachine** » Fri Mar 03, 2006 4:47 pm

John Vulich wrote: For the love of god!!! Get out while you still can!!!

Nice picture!

John Vulich · Post by **John Vulich** » Fri Mar 03, 2006 4:53 pm

headquest wrote:I was dealing specifically with the charge that they are lagging in terms of integration protocols.

They are, as far as implementing "integration protocols" within Reason is concerned.

headquest wrote:Why ever would they want to? The whole ethos of Reason is to provide a complete set of instruments/effects in one rack. Third party plugins would almost certainly blow that concept.

Yeah, allowing the use of plugin instruments will most certainly ruin Reason's usability.

Oddly enough it can host Rebirth though. I wonder why working as a host for ReBirth doesn't blow the concept for you?

headquest wrote:Specifically they all allow use of Reason

And any other Rewire capable app, often with both Rewire Host and Client capabilities. Odd that Reason itself only works as a Rewire client. You would think that they would allow their own flagship product to utilize the full capabilities of a protocol that they themselves have invented.

headquest wrote:I don't think that stability (to follow up your RTAS example) is their big concern. I think that providing a complete rack of integrated tools, including all the CV cabling etc, is their concern.

I believe that people representing the Propellerheads have used the stability excuse countless times on their company forum.

headquest wrote:People who want Reason to develop into a plugin host have missed the basic concept. They obviously should look elsewhere, because Reason is an instrument, not a host.

Equally it is silly - well, very misguided - to compare Reason with hosts. Valid comparisons would be to compare Reason against plugin instruments and effects. As such I think it actually represents very good value for money and runs very efficiently.

It's an understandable inclination considering that Reason bears a stronger resemblance to most audio hosts than it does to most other software instruments. The only instrument comparisons, that I can think of off hand, are to VAZ Modular and Reaktor. Neither of those instruments has anywhere near as sophisticated a sequencing environment as Reason does.

John Vulich · Post by **John Vulich** » Fri Mar 03, 2006 5:03 pm

headquest wrote:It does hold water, because it claims to be an instrument on the box and in adverts, and it is in fact an instrument. How is that a problem

Actually the Propellerheads originally described it as a "complete music system"...

http://web.archive.org/web/200003031430 ... n/main.htm

Software synths have been around for almost as long as the personal computer. But somehow, they've never really made the grade. Too demanding on computer resources. Too complex. Too limited. Indifferent sounding. Unplayable. Or simply not cool enough. But now, the first software synth to equal and surpass the power, glory and attitude of dedicated hardware has arrived. In fact, it's a lot more than just a synth. It's a complete music system.

Meffy · Post by **Meffy** » Fri Mar 03, 2006 5:07 pm

Come on, John. You know and I know that's marketingspeak. When I see an ad saying "The 2007 Hummer -- it really flies!" I don't go to the local Hummer dealer expecting to see on take wing.

John Vulich · Post by **John Vulich** » Fri Mar 03, 2006 5:07 pm

headquest · Post by **headquest** » Fri Mar 03, 2006 5:08 pm

John Vulich wrote: Actually the Propellerheads originally described it as a "complete music system"...

I answered that point a few pages back...

Meffy · Post by **Meffy** » Fri Mar 03, 2006 5:09 pm

Roll your eyes if you like, but marketing people's job is to talk their products up. Sometimes they do what I'd call exaggerating but there've been exaggerations on the other side too, no?

John Vulich · Post by **John Vulich** » Fri Mar 03, 2006 5:09 pm

headquest wrote:
John Vulich wrote: Actually the Propellerheads originally described it as a "complete music system"...
I answered that point a few pages back...

You did?

John Vulich · Post by **John Vulich** » Fri Mar 03, 2006 5:12 pm

Meffy wrote:Roll your eyes if you like, but marketing people's job is to talk their products up. Sometimes they do what I'd call exaggerating but there've been exaggerations on the other side too, no?

I just think that there is a difference between using a colloquialism like "really flies" and a term like "complete music system".

headquest · Post by **headquest** » Fri Mar 03, 2006 5:14 pm

John Vulich wrote:
headquest wrote:
John Vulich wrote: Actually the Propellerheads originally described it as a "complete music system"...
I answered that point a few pages back...
You did?

headquest wrote:Reason was indeed described that way when version 1 was launched back in 2000. Since then of course a lot has changed in the Music Technology scene, including the terminology that people use. Back in 2000 I believe that Cubase was not yet SX, Sonar was still Cakewalk Pro Audio, Ableton Live and Tracktion had not yet appeared, the VST revolution was in its infancy, and there were no other modular hosts or VST emulations of modular synths. In that context, Reason was a pretty radical product when it was launched.

Of course much has changed now, including the description that Propellerhead give for Reason 3.0: "Standalone Music Production INSTRUMENT".

I think that description from the Reason box sums up what Reason 3 is pretty well... an instrument that can be used within any of the major hosts, or standalone with its own sequencing abilities. Basically it is a software equivalent of the big keyboard workstations that are popular still among hardware users. Trying to judge it on any other criteria is simply stupid imho.

John Vulich · Post by **John Vulich** » Fri Mar 03, 2006 5:16 pm

headquest wrote:Bearing that in mind, I take issue with the point that a few of the Reason-haters have reiterated here that Propellerhead have fallen behind in terms of industry standards. In fact the industry standard format that they themselves developed is currently the only one universally adopted by all the big players! That is precisely why they have no need at all imho to waste development time/resources chasing other, less popular formats/protocols.

Cool, then why don't they at least allow Reason to work as a Rewire host then? They've already done all the work on the protocol, to allow for this, so it wouldn't be a waste of development.

Meffy · Post by **Meffy** » Fri Mar 03, 2006 5:17 pm

John Vulich wrote:
Meffy wrote:Roll your eyes if you like, but marketing people's job is to talk their products up. Sometimes they do what I'd call exaggerating but there've been exaggerations on the other side too, no?
I just think that there is a difference between using a colloquialism like "really flies" and a term like "complete music system".

Yes, it was an exaggeration. :-} But you also know that marketing blurbs are written specifically to give a favorable imperssion of the product and sometimes overstate their point, or word it in a way that not every customer will agree with. I like Reason a lot, and the people who make and market it... but I sure don't accept as gospel every word of promotional copy they publish.

John Vulich · Post by **John Vulich** » Fri Mar 03, 2006 5:19 pm

headquest wrote:Reason was indeed described that way when version 1 was launched back in 2000. Since then of course a lot has changed in the Music Technology scene, including the terminology that people use. Back in 2000 I believe that Cubase was not yet SX, Sonar was still Cakewalk Pro Audio, Ableton Live and Tracktion had not yet appeared, the VST revolution was in its infancy, and there were no other modular hosts or VST emulations of modular synths. In that context, Reason was a pretty radical product when it was launched.

If I remember correctly all of those apps that you mentioned had the ability to record audio, use audio tracks and output MIDI back then, didn't they? How has that changed during the intervening years?

Reason 3 is simply awesome.