Musikmesse 2012: Propellerhead to share "exciting news"

[Dogboy73]

All this waffle is getting a little tedious now Headquest let me lay it down for you - RE is great news for Reason users. If you are a Reason user & you don't like RE then you don't have to buy any. I don't even think the subject warrants this amount of discussion any more to be frank. End of story.

No idea what your point is here

RE is getting picked to pieces! Plus plenty of the usual Reason bashing going on. RE is not even out for at least a couple of months. A lot of criticism for something that is not even out yet RE for Reason users only seems like a good thing to me. And I think it's possible this could even change the whole landscape of plug-ins. But who knows how things will actually pan out.

[keyman_sam]

Reason fits in a category that most synths dont. I have Reason 3 and its still wonderful as it had ever been. When I had 2.5 I used to do amazing things with it.

The problem with VSTs nowadays is that the sounds are too fancy, too ambiencey, too spacey and a great percentage is unusable. The classic pads, leads, basses, where do you find them? NO where. In Reason, you can count on some simple sounds that are invaluable to production.

[SLiC]

And I think it's possible this could even change the whole landscape of plug-ins. But who knows how things will actually pan out.

I'm not sure it is any different to Live having Ableton Devices, but if a major platform like logic started to sell its plug in via an app store (higly likely as it is apple) others may follow- the new Cubase 6.5 synths could have been VST3 'plug ins' bought from as 'apps'. Who knows, maybe that will be the next big trend, but I think it will be bad for VST if it does, I prefer an open platform.

[liquid wind]

The problem with VSTs nowadays is that the sounds are too fancy, too ambiencey, too spacey and a great percentage is unusable. The classic pads, leads, basses, where do you find them? NO where. In Reason, you can count on some simple sounds that are invaluable to production.

Because presets are the only reason to buy a synth

I do agree on some level with the simplicity though, was demoing Reason last night and oddly enough I think subtractor might be my favorite synth in Reason, it's simple and has some great character. Malstrom is also pretty interesting, have to say both of these simpler synths impress me way more than Thor does.

[sensorium]

I'm curious - can you point to actual audio examples of this supposed deficiency? I've not heard anything in the examples you mentioned that Reason can't compete with, but admittedly - I don't use any of those other products on a regular basis.

I often wonder if VST users are in their own little walled garden world as well. Granted, this is not meant as a slight against your preference of tools, rather - I just haven't heard anything that seemed as groundbreaking as everyone thinks.

I'll assume this is a serious question and answer as best I can without being too long... But the fact Propellerhead are introducing their Rack Extensions rather speaks for itself in terms of what they and/or their users consider to be obvious deficiencies in the present product

In terms of quality, I was not merely considering the audio output of VST effects, but also their ease of use, the functions and workflow they offer, and the features they include which enable audio tasks that are impossible in Reason (or which require very time consuming workarounds).

To keep it as brief as possible let's focus on a single application - the EQ effect - and consider the three general points I mentioned. The following points are true of most modern VST EQ effects, and show just how superior they are to Reason's M-Class EQ in each area.

If you want to try out some of the better EQ plugins in the VST format, here's three you should definitely have on your short-list:

Fabfilter Pro-Q: http://www.fabfilter.com/products/pro-q.php
Waves H-EQ: http://www.waves.com/content.aspx?id=11818
DMG Audio EQuality: http://dmgaudio.com/products_equality.php

1) Ease of Use.

At the most simple level, the first thing you will notice is that these EQ effects all have larger interfaces with clear and accurate visual feedback. Each EQ band is shown in a different colour. And in each case the EQ nodes can be physically dragged with the mouse if you would prefer that to using the traditional knobs. EQ filter types are freely selectable and precise information is given. You will also see that most of these effects now include spectrum analysis built into the EQ interface (Reason doesn't offer spectral analysis at all, let alone within the EQ interface!) and a nice feature of the Waves one is that there is a piano keyboard display for quickly zoning in on particular notes (for example if you know that one note on a piano you recorded hadn't been regulated properly by the tuner).

In terms of "Ease of Use" alone you can hopefully already get an idea what I mean about the superior "quality" of these effects when compared with the Reason M-Class EQ. But let's move on:

2. Features.

I've already mentioned several important features relating to ease of use and workflow, but what about the features that relate to the effect processing itself?
Well, these VST EQ effects all offer a far wider selection of Bands. They have a bigger range of fully selectable filter types too. They can provide separate processing for left and right channels, and mid-side processing. They can all operate in Linear Phase mode, and are capable of a range of vintage, modern or transparent processing.

Most important one in my opinion though is that these EQ effects all have notch filters - something the M-Class EQ lacks. Notching is an essential feature for zoning in and removing problem frequencies, e.g. for hum/noise reduction, and is a key essential feature of a professional-grade EQ effect.

Beyond the three I mentioned there are many VST effects that have shelving and bell curves specifically modelled on particular analogue equipment - not just marketing blah-blah, but a feature that a recording engineer working with an artist looking for a retro sound would obviously find desirable.

3. Audio Quality

The improved audio quality of these EQ plugins is obviously in part because of their DSP, but probably results mostly from their superior feature sets. As somebody who has used Reason for many years I would be quick to confess that I find it difficult to analyse and notch our problem frequencies using the tools they offer, for example. To take another example, suppose I want a vintage EQ sound for one track, but a transparent one on the next... in Reason this isn't going to happen.

You ask for specific audio examples, so (and I don't mean to be facetious here) I'll give you a huge number: for the quality of Reason effects check out the songs on the Propellerhead site, and the Propellerhead User Groups on Soundcloud. To hear audio demos of the Waves effects, just switch on the radio. Every commercial track in the last decade and a half is smothered in them. Including the ones that started life in Reason...

This last point is a serious question for you: why do commercial artists who use Reason all get their final mixes done in Pro Tools using Waves/etc effects? Read any of their interviews and they will admit it's because the software environment is preferred by engineers for the workflow and tool set it offers, and because the finished result sounds better.

None of this is a criticism of Reason in it's own right: within it's price point it is an awesome programme, and I am comparing it here with far more expensive professional tools. For me the question then becomes - how much is my music worth? And how much can I afford right now?

Also it's worth noting that the three developers I linked to, along with PSP Audioware, Voxengo, Wave Arts and many more, usually offer bundles of their plugs, covering all bases, all available with one account in one store from one vendor, with common interface solutions and presets management, etc. In most cases they don't use dongles now (because the big players are gradually moving away from dongle protection) and we're talking about highly stable professional effects used daily in studios worldwide without crashes, etc. Just to correct that absurd myth

I hope this answers the question. Of course I have limited the discussion to EQ, but this applies to any other effect you mention. Want a reverb? I bet a lot of Reason users would like to get their hands on the recent Lexicon bundles and Altiverb. How about delay? Let's consider Waves Super Tap, PSP 608 MultiDelay, etc. Mastering effects? Well how about Ozone, TrackS, etc. Spacial Effects? Waves S1, Wave Arts panorama, etc.... and so it goes.

To be fair, ease of use is subjective. I have known someone (and this is absolutely true) who doesn't like EQs with a display at all, and finds it easier to use the EQs with just the knobs. I like using Ableton with the draggable EQ nodes, but I don't mind using MClass either. I don't mind the size of MClass too, and I've had many VST EQs in my time, some with bigger displays, some smaller, some coloured bands... I like 'em all to be honest.

Features? Reason is a modular environment, so if you want more bands on the MClass you have to add another MClass; that's just the way it is. Some people don't mind that workflow, some do.

The MClass has a good narrow cut which will do for a notch (try doubling up two bands with the same narrow cut settings). If that's not acceptable, stick on a Pulverizer with its dedicated notch filter. Just comes down to the modular environment again, and workflow opinions.

You can do mid/side processing in Reason too. Don't think there's a linear EQ though. Vintage EQ? Subtle bit of the ol' trusty tape after or before the EQ.
I agree there's a lack of modelling on specific analog equipment in Reason, unless you want the SSL mixer/compressors/EQs.

You ask for specific audio examples, so (and I don't mean to be facetious here) I'll give you a huge number: for the quality of Reason effects check out the songs on the Propellerhead site, and the Propellerhead User Groups on Soundcloud. To hear audio demos of the Waves effects, just switch on the radio. Every commercial track in the last decade and a half is smothered in them. Including the ones that started life in Reason...
This last point is a serious question for you: why do commercial artists who use Reason all get their final mixes done in Pro Tools using Waves/etc effects? Read any of their interviews and they will admit it's because the software environment is preferred by engineers for the workflow and tool set it offers, and because the finished result sounds better.

You're comparing mostly amateur-made songs on the Props site and soundcloud to commercially released and properly mastered radio edits. You could use the same argument against an Ableton user song site, or Reaper, or whatever.

Engineers who use ProTools and like the workflow/tool set, etc, will mix and master songs in that environment regardless of whether the song was made in Reason, Ableton, Logic, Fruity Loops, or whatever.

[koushks]

3. Audio Quality

The improved audio quality of these EQ plugins is obviously in part because of their DSP, but probably results mostly from their superior feature sets.

I understand what you mean when you talk about ease of use or features. But I don't understand your point on audio quality. I'm not trying to challenge your opinion here. I consider myself a newbie and I'm genuinely trying to understand.

Let's go with your EQ example. Let's set aside the extra features and analog characteristics. Let's take any popular parametric EQ VST, not analog modeled and not linear phase but reputed for quality. And let's take Reason's MClass EQ. Say I cut 2 DB at a particular frequency with a particular Q on both these EQs and feed the same signal through it. Are you saying that the output will not be the same? If that's what you are saying, doesn't it mean that one of the EQs is not cutting 2 DB at that frequency with that Q? Or is it something else?

[headquest]

Well developers don't tend to share their DSP readily
However not long ago Computer Music interviewed Voxengo and PSP and some others about how their EQs are different and have unique qualities - very interesting stuff. For example, filter shapes and Q curves may behave differently, some developers consciously introduce subtle saturation, etc in their EQ effects.

Not my area, which is precisely why I glossed over that part and focussed on the obvious feature and workflow differences. However, if you try the demos of a variety of different EQs you will soon realise that there are clear differences in their behavior.

[Crackbaby]

Somehow this thread turned into a Waves vs Reason war? Bring back interesting posts please! Something creative and dreamy, tell me what you see in the future!

I think that Behringer's new midi controllers may find a home in Reason now. Only the deck would need some serious programming compared to the others. Why not use Reason as a dj enviroment! If it's stable enough to be used live. A lot depends on RE limitations though.

[koushks]

Well developers don't tend to share their DSP readily
However not long ago Computer Music interviewed Voxengo and PSP and some others about how their EQs are different and have unique qualities - very interesting stuff.

Thanks. I'll look for it.

For example, filter shapes and Q curves may behave differently, some developers consciously introduce subtle saturation, etc in their EQ effects.

If this is true, it worries me. I can understand saturation or characteristic Q curves being applied in analog modeled EQs. But for EQs without any modeling characteristics mentioned on the box, I'd like to know what saturation, or other effects are being applied. (Well, saturation is actually distortion, isn't it?) Do these effects, albeit subtle, happen all across the spectrum? Is it just for a slice of frequencies that is being boosted or cut (which I doubt, coz that'll really mess up the signal, depending on the effect itself).

Can somebody please help me understand this?

[headquest]

I suggest that's a topic for a separate thread really ... and if you search in the effects forum you'll find it is a topic that has been debated there

[ShawnG]

well yes, truly digital EQ's will by definition all sound exactly alike, and "modeling" eq's will have "character" added which results in subjective differences at the expense of 100% accuracy. the larger point of the reason EQ's though is that Reason's EQ's are designed with a hardware paradigm rather than software, and hardware EQ's don't have the graph. there is a sizeable portion of music pro's who absolutely hate software EQ graphs because they've learned to trust their ears and don't want their mix desisions influenced by how they think it should look on the graph. In short, props made a conscious design decision, it's not that they weren't capable of programming it in the way that you prefer. at least with RE's someone will probably come up with what you will believe is a better EQ. all good

[xh3rv]

I'm not sure it is any different to Live having Ableton Devices

In terms of functionality, other than a couple side-chains in Corpus that may save a few clicks or superfluous routing tracks, Ableton devices aren't anything past VSTs. GUI-wise it's squeezing something down to around 160 pixels and making it conform to Live's minimalist choices. This is a very plus/minus thing. It's a little more immediate, but even for something of low to medium complexity like AAS's UltraAnalog the sacrifices are limiting.

In terms of contrast with Reason I'm not sure this could be more opposite - Reason is very much about a proliferation of components paired with modular flexibility. To get the same amount of stuff usably into a Live track means streamlining rack assignments and very quickly choices become fixed simply because digging into things becomes unmanageable.

Just a tangent - I can't really see myself ditching Live for Reason + RE, but I've already moved out of Live's GUI with most VSTi sorts of things. If Reason + RE becomes the 'right' way to host with an extra level of connectivity and freedom, I think it might be a great way populate Live's session grid with nice clips ... that's Live's best trick, really foundational to everything else about it.

A decent tool, just didn't gel with me.

I'd definitely give up Live way before I gave up u-he stuff

[bmrzycki]

A decent tool, just didn't gel with me.

I'd definitely give up Live way before I gave up u-he stuff

Yep, same here! I was really happy u-he was one of the first devs on the new platform. UHBIK in the rack is gonna rock.

[DuX]

It would be so nice to have Cubase, Protools, Reaper, EnergyXT, Live, Logic... only plugins. So nice. [sarcasm]

Greed is insatiable. Support it. That's the best thing you can do.

[EnochLight]

..I was actually answering a specific (and so far as I can tell genuine) question from EnochLight.

Oh yes - it was genuine. I appreciate the well thought out response and links to product pages demonstrating your examples - cheers!

You bring up some valid concerns about working in a Reason-only environment in its current form, but some of your comments did seem a bit generalized. As sensorium mentioned already, "you were comparing mostly amateur-made songs on the Props site and soundcloud to commercially released and properly mastered radio edits. You could use the same argument against an Ableton user song site, or Reaper, or whatever."

I'll go one step further and include Pro Tools and any other DAW of your choice in there. Despite the fact that it's marketing, a plethora of artists who are successful commercial musicians that sell lots of records and have radio play, are featured in the "Artist Feature" stories that have been out for years on the Propellerhead website. These are professional musicians - many who use Reason and Reason alone - and sound no less impressive than the artists who use the plug-ins you linked to. Many of these artists are even using an older version of Reason sans many of the recent effect devices!

Its truly modular environment, admittedly, does pose a more strenuous challenge to the uninitiated in getting these kind of results out of it. This is true. I do admit that for a software package of its price, it's pretty amazing what you get taking into consideration that just a bundle of Waves plugins can exceed the cost of Reason two-times over.

I was interested in finding an A/B comparison of audio examples to hear the difference, but that seems difficult to come by. I tried searching for one myself but didn't have any luck.

Don't get me wrong - I think that the features that many of the plug-ins you linked to are truly amazing, and I'm sure they sound fantastic. I think it's potential like these plugins hold that truly make me excited that Rack Extensions are here, and I look forward to the new devices that developers outside of Propellerhead will come up with. It really will be a win/win situation in all involved, IMHO.