Record: New DAW from Propellerheads

[dhruan]

I've been betatesting Record for a while now.

Ok, it has its faults (lack of more comprehensive audio editing capabilities etc.) but I love it already. Ok, the fact that I am a long time Reason user helped me like Record but the program is definitely not without merits of its own.

For the price it is a no brainer upgrade for *any* user of Reason. Even to those that do not record external instrument and vocals, the added features are a boon for those users too.

It is not everything for everyone but for singer/songwriter types, solo artists and small bands it might just be the thing.

Being a self contained environment it might not be the thing for those who want (and sometimes even actually need) to use software plugins. I do see Propellerheads point here, they want to keep the program lean, mean and stable and that suits me just fine.

Besides, one can always plug in real (outboard) gear and use that. And the program itself allows for some massively useful (and at times bizarre) shit be built if people are so inclined. I for one love tinkering with routing.

The workflow is different but I got used to the interface pretty fast so it should not be that much of a problem for other users too.

And it does sound great. =)

[koalaboy]

It's a completely different "workflow". Perhaps that word gets overused around here, but in this case it's entirely true. Recording and mixing a project in Record is a quite different process from any other software.

I disagree. It's the exact same workflow that every (most ?) other DAWs offer.

You choose a track, hit record, and then edit/mix your audio.

Doesn't Reaper (for example) open by default with the tracks along the top and the mixer along the bottom ? Okay, so Record turns this around, but that's just screen layout - the workflow is what you make it.

The only thing record does differently, is put a lot more* functionality into the default mixer and limit your expansion options (although integrates Reason if you have it). That's it. I suppose for anyone that want's to change the speed of a whole track at once, that may be useful but I can't see it in reality.

It does what it sets out to do, but it's absolutely not a completely different workflow.

*depending on your definition of more.

[captain caveman]

I don't get how it is different though.

Have you tried it out?

For example, they talk about how easy it is to set up and record, but it is just as easy to load a track preset on another daw and start recording.

Agreed. I think that part of the blurb isn't smart...

What is it specifically that make it a whole new take in you opinion?

It's a completely different "workflow". Perhaps that word gets overused around here, but in this case it's entirely true. Recording and mixing a project in Record is a quite different process from any other software. While the "conceptual heart" of most audio software - and the main focus - is the sequencing window (with everything else fitting around that), in Record it is firstly the Mixer, then the rack and sequencer.

It is unique. And not so much because of the features (although some of those are actually unique too - e.g. the modular routing on every audio track, the amazing behind the scenes timestretch, the whole SSL mixing paradigm in software, the huge track count that is possible due to the closed environment, etc). More than the features, it is unique because of the workflow imho.

Having said that, the marketing is odd. Record is a hugely complex programme. Those who found the rack in Reason intimidating will be completely floored by Record. To start with, the SSL mixer is totally seperate to the Rack. Every audio track and every MIDI instrument track requires its own Combinator-style unit which sits in the Rack and acts as an interface between the Rack/Sequencer and the SSL Mixer. Each of those "Mix Track" units has its own Rack-in-a-Rack abilities to host chains of instruments and effects, with a Combinator style routing matrix. From there the track goes into the SSL Mixer, which again has its own send effects setup. This is all pretty damned complex...

For the Reason Power-User types who love experimenting with all the crazy routing stuff, I think this will be a dream come true. But for Joe Guitarist who want to buy his first easy-to-use recording programme... I'm certainly not convinced. I think that such users will barely scratch the surface of Record's real power. For that type of user, stuff like Steinberg's Sequel or Apple's Garageband are FAR better options imho.

I'm not being funny or anything but it's ok to refer to the mixer as just the "mixer" and not the "SSL mixer".

Is it just the old algos from the C-series getting, *cough*, recycled again? If it is then the mixer will impart as much vintage SSL sound as any other digital mixer, virtual or real, made by SSL or otherwise - ie none. The Duende did demonstrate that people will buy designer plugins though and subsequently give them all sorts of cutting edge and/or vintage attributes to justify their purchase.

Anyway, I'm prattling on. I signed up for the beta team so if I get a link I'll put the mixer through it's paces to see if imparts anything apart from straight digital summing.

[headquest]

I'll put the mixer through it's paces to see if imparts anything apart from straight digital summing.

It's great in two respects actually:
1) the ergonomics of it are very good indeed.
2) the sound is great, i.e. the included compression, gating, EQ, master compression, etc.

I'm refering to it as the SSL Mixer to distinguish it from the ReMix 14:2 mixer and Line Mixer 6:2 (both from Reason, but also included in Record). So there are a whole bunch of Mixer options available in Record, not just the SSL one!

[ZombyWoof]

If anyone wants to try the beta, PM me with your email address. I have 5 invites for beta testers up for grabs.

[whyterabbyt]

If anyone wants to try the beta, PM me with your email address. I have 5 invites for beta testers up for grabs.

likewise.

[ozmoz2008]

For the price it is a no brainer upgrade for *any* user of Reason. Even to those that do not record external instrument and vocals, the added features are a boon for those users too.

...Being a self contained environment it might not be the thing for those who want (and sometimes even actually need) to use software plugins. I do see Propellerheads point here, they want to keep the program lean, mean and stable and that suits me just fine...

Yeah but if you want something lean...any other recording software will be pretty much stable...no big deal.

As for updates on Reason...I've ask them about 3years ago about 64bit...and it was quite deceiving...Being a Reason power user since the beginning...I switch to Cubase and VST freedom world...choose what I want and have the possibility to grow a lot faster than from Props upgrade scheme.

But hey...if they do wake-up and give Rewire and Reason a 64bit capability...it could change the equation...

You can have a lot more bigger libs when using Kontakt ....just with DFD it's quite a huge difference...add to that 64bit (Play, RMX are already there and Kontakt in beta)

On a positive note...I've always like Reason Asio stability...so we'll see how they do develop...In a close minded world...or in an open one

I will continue supporting Reason development...but I won't go in a close system like Record...not until they get into 64bit

[ZombyWoof]

You know, it is what it is. I'll spring for the crossgrade from Reason 4. Record sounds pretty darn good, it's easy to use, and it has a user interface that is sexy as hell. For what it doesn't do, I have a glut of other possibilities, many of them free. I don't even mind Rewire. I'm easy as Sunday morning.

[whyterabbyt]

But hey...if they do wake-up and give Rewire and Reason a 64bit capability...it could change the equation...

why? what do you think that will change that's significant?

[Jeremy_NSL]

I have no clue whether the SSL mixer has modeled 'analog summing'. But it does have modelled EQ, track comp, bus comp, gating. As well as 8 sends and Combinator insert fx. *That's* what you get real-world. Any summing magic would just be a bonus.

Is it just the old algos from the C-series getting, *cough*, recycled again? If it is then the mixer will impart as much vintage SSL sound as any other digital mixer, virtual or real, made by SSL or otherwise - ie none. The Duende did demonstrate that people will buy designer plugins though and subsequently give them all sorts of cutting edge and/or vintage attributes to justify their purchase.

Anyway, I'm prattling on. I signed up for the beta team so if I get a link I'll put the mixer through it's paces to see if imparts anything apart from straight digital summing.

[ozmoz2008]

But hey...if they do wake-up and give Rewire and Reason a 64bit capability...it could change the equation...

why? what do you think that will change that's significant?

Let's say I want to work in C5 in a 64 bit native environment...then I could...now I can't with Reason...because of rewire restrictions...

Also It will give the possibility to use bigger banks within Reason...which was one of the main "reason" I am a lot less using it since the last 2years...and you know at the end...I am a lot more productive....which is THE most important thing for me

BTW I've always like Reason looks...not to worry! ...and I'm pretty sure that Record will follow the same path...

[fceramic]

Record is quite simply a great upgrade/addon for Reason and fulfills a lot of feature requests. As any franchise I'm sure they want to keep some planned features for future upgrades.

The SSL mixer sounds glorious!

[captain caveman]

I have no clue whether the SSL mixer has modeled 'analog summing'. But it does have modelled EQ, track comp, bus comp, gating. As well as 8 sends and Combinator insert fx. *That's* what you get real-world. Any summing magic would just be a bonus.

Yes, but my point is that if they are taken from the SSL C-series consoles then they are no better than your average run of the mill plugin EQs, compressors and gates from 6 years ago. If the mixer is also just a normal mixer with none of the analogue distortions present in a real console the whole mixer package is no better than any other hosts with their bundled plugins.

If the high track count that is possible (taking this from headquest's post) because of the closed technology is true, then it is safe to say that nothing "analoguey" is going on with the SSL stuff.

But then labels do sell jeans.

[Jeremy_NSL]

I don't know about the specific SSL-series differences. But it is supposedly modelled on the SSL 9000k.

[KleVeR]

If the high track count that is possible (taking this from headquest's post) because of the closed technology is true, then it is safe to say that nothing "analoguey" is going on with the SSL stuff.

I'm a betatester too.. I think Record is really cool.. haven't really had the time to testdrive the mixing engine..
but that's not why I'm writing here.

I made the experience that analog sounding plugin algorithms really don't need to take up too much CPU cycles. Unless they are based on component modelling -> that is IMHO the "too" precise way of modelling analog circuits that oftentimes eats to much ressources for what it achieves.

The other way - actually don't know what it's called and how it's done exactly - where input and output of a device are measured (no not convolution) and it's treated like a black box yields better results in regards to sound/cpu-hit ratio.

For example the classic McDSP plugins CompressorBank, Analog Channel and FilterBank sound and behave really really incredibly good and are very flexible. I sold all my UAD-1s and all the plugs because those thre plugin (bundles) do at least what the UAD has to offer soundwise, but they don't introduce any latencies and don't tax the (native) CPU.. I could run hundreds of them on my laptop with Core2Duo T7200.

That tells me that high track and plugin (or algorithm in this case) counts are possible with good analog emulations.