KVR Audio

sellyoursoul · Post by **sellyoursoul** » Wed Apr 19, 2017 7:06 am

It's kind of sad seeing Reason sold off, even though I jumped ship years ago. But at the same time, Propellerhead refused to get it together. VST support is a must. When they went RE instead, it was an obvious bad move, despite the marketing efforts, not to mention refusing to allow Reason to act as a Rewire host, refusal to further develop Rewire, moving to a dongle, and no plugin delay compensation. There is so much to like about Reason, but Propellerhead just refused to move with the times in big ways.

And speaking of moving with the times, Linux is the future, where Microsoft is making terrible moves for Windows, and Apple seems to be going stagnant. Personally, I won't be putting any money into any software which isn't aiming to become Linux native, as I don't see a good longterm future for application developers on any other os.

eXode · Post by **eXode** » Wed Apr 19, 2017 9:37 am

I made these post on ReasonTalk, might just as well repost them here (joined and edited for better context).

Marcus haven't been active in propellerheads for some time now as far as I understand, apart from being on the board and one of the owners. He started his own company in 2012/2013 and have since then released an app for iOS called Trolldom. Pelle is propellerheads main DSP guy, but considering the way their focus have shifted his role may have been changed too.

Possible scenario:
Marcus and Pelle wanted out/Ernst wanted to buy them out, perhaps because of different views regarding the direction of the company and it's products. Ernst didn't have the means to buy them out on his own which prompted the search for outside investors. The majority that Verdande acquired could be mostly Marcus and Pelles shares (Ernst is still a shareowner, remember?).

As a side note, Allihoopa is now a separate company, with Figure and Take in it's portfolio. Soundtrap and Korg Gadget have also implemented support for Allihoopa.

What the future holds is anyone's guess.

DrGonzo · Post by **DrGonzo** » Wed Apr 19, 2017 10:55 am

In either case - it was a long good run for them.

/C

whyterabbyt · Post by **whyterabbyt** » Wed Apr 19, 2017 11:16 am

bungle wrote:
whyterabbyt wrote:
TACruise wrote:I "get" the inclusive platform idea and motive, but give me a break. Major studios aren't going to start producing with your "almost-as-good-as-VST platform**".
No, nor will most of them be producing with your 'VST platform'; they'll actually be running ProTools, which has been firmly embedded in that sector (and post production) since before there was VST...

No silly about 'easily translated' required, PT is still the defacto standard in industry, whether you like it or not.
No it isn't, for recording yes but not for composition.

'Composition' is not the primary function of 'major studios' so outside the scope of what I was responding to. Anyway, I'd disagree that there is any defacto standard software tool for composition.

kmonkey · Post by **kmonkey** » Wed Apr 19, 2017 11:26 am

Trancit wrote:
Orbit-50 wrote:
kmonkey wrote:What the hell are you talking about? That is precisely why VST SDK offer any developer function with which developer (read plugin) can simply report generated delay to a host and then host can delay compensate it.
I'm no developer, but thinking about it logically, what you're saying makes sense. I would think that the whole PDC thing is part of the SDK.
No, it doesn´t make sense...

Reporting a delay and being able to compensate this in a manner, which doesn´t eat up your CPU and is still playable with an acceptable latency for the user are completely different worlds... if not even sun systems...

There are too many scenarios, where APDC of different latency devices, which can be connected freely isn´t simply not possible respectfully not useable anymore...

If it would be that easy, why doesn´t exist any modular system (with this grade of flexibility) with APDC...

Speak to the developer of MuTools... a very nice guy... He stated that APDC is not possible in his modular system MUX because of the routing possibilities... perhaps, he is able to explain you the technical reasons...

Some of you smoke too much weed and are stoned too much or something. Or perhaps are not in the flow with current tech. It goes with most of the Reason users (i have seen some advanced Reason users though).

What i said and what person responded to - makes perfect sense. If it does not make sense for you it's fine like i said you are living under the rock then - and you may split your hairs and now bring other equations in this talk (like you now pulled up CPU usage which noone ever talked about).

Look it like this (repeating this again for weed stoned people) there is completely normal usable way in VST SDK which allow any developer to utilize FULLY AUTOMATIC PDC. It can even be variable PDC. This feature is used among DAW developers and plugin developers for a decade now. UAD, Softube, Cubase, FL Studio, Sonar blablabla...all have this feature. Same feature works just fine in modular hosts. Bitwig can do it. Various modular plugin chainers can do it. So if mux can't do it it's not end of the world or empirical fact. Oh and you can load 50 plugins which need time alignment and this will use what around 1% of your cpu to align them.

I just looked at Reason shop online and there are even free tools created by people to deal with Reason lack of PDC. From reading forum it appear this work - it's just that this is tedious to work with and manual and completely pain in the ass.

https://shop.propellerheads.se/product/ ... ple-delay/

Point is this is even possible in Reason but likely to have it automatic you will have to pay for it in some amazing, superb, game changing and revolutionary Reason upgrade in the future.

sfxsound3 · Post by **sfxsound3** » Wed Apr 19, 2017 11:54 am

whyterabbyt wrote:
bungle wrote:
whyterabbyt wrote:
TACruise wrote:I "get" the inclusive platform idea and motive, but give me a break. Major studios aren't going to start producing with your "almost-as-good-as-VST platform**".
No, nor will most of them be producing with your 'VST platform'; they'll actually be running ProTools, which has been firmly embedded in that sector (and post production) since before there was VST...

No silly about 'easily translated' required, PT is still the defacto standard in industry, whether you like it or not.
No it isn't, for recording yes but not for composition.
'Composition' is not the primary function of 'major studios' so outside the scope of what I was responding to. Anyway, I'd disagree that there is any defacto standard software tool for composition.

Oh, but there is a 'standard tool' for 'recording' in 'major studios'?

whyterabbyt · Post by **whyterabbyt** » Wed Apr 19, 2017 12:05 pm

sfxsound3 wrote:Oh, but there is a 'standard tool' for 'recording' in 'major studios'?

Perhaps you should try rereading what was said, and by whom. Maybe also try reading a few dozen 'making of' articles on work produced in major music and film studios, see if you notice any patterns.

whyterabbyt · Post by **whyterabbyt** » Wed Apr 19, 2017 12:50 pm

kmonkey wrote:[Look it like this (repeating this again for weed stoned people) there is completely normal usable way in VST SDK which allow any developer to utilize FULLY AUTOMATIC PDC. It can even be variable PDC.

Lets be clear here; there's nothing in the VST SDK which implements any kind of delay compensation. However the SDK provides a way for a plugin to report the latency it introduces back to to the host. If the host can sum the total latency in the graph of a given audio path (where the routing in tracks, buses etc are all effectively graphs), then it can then compensate for the latency at any point on the graph But that's something the host has to calculate and manage for itself, its not part of the VST SDK.

However, when there is a feedback path within the graph, as there can be in the fully modular routing systems being talked about, then you have a problem; anything downstream of the feedback loop needs to compensate for the total latency of the feedback loop, not just the total latency of plugins in the feedback loop.

And if any of the plugins in the feedback loop introduce latency, then the total latency of the feedback loop is incalculable, because the signal is being fed back through the process that induces latency an unknown, probably unknowable, number of times, accumulating latency each time. I believe that's what EvilDragon etc were referring to, and the VST SDK will not help there, or in any other case where the latency across any part of the graph is unknown or unknowable.

But lets simplify; do you agree or disagree with the assertion that it is impossible to calculate the 'RT60' of a delay with feedback when the only thing you know is the delay time?

Rappo Clappo · Post by **Rappo Clappo** » Wed Apr 19, 2017 12:57 pm

@whyterabbyt

Thanks for the explanation!
Not that I understand too much of it.
At least I am trying...

EvilDragon · Post by **EvilDragon** » Wed Apr 19, 2017 1:12 pm

whyterabbyt wrote:And if any of the plugins in the feedback loop introduce latency, then the total latency of the feedback loop is incalculable, because the signal is being fed back through the process that induces latency an unknown, probably unknowable, number of times, accumulating latency each time. I believe that's what EvilDragon etc were referring to, and the VST SDK will not help there, or in any other case where the latency across any part of the graph is unknown or unknowable.

This is exactly correct. Bitwig is modular, yes, but no PDC in feedback loops. Reaper is modular, yes, but no PDC in feedback loops. MuLab is modular, yes, but NO PDC in feedback loops.

It is not possible. Period.

mrj1nx · Post by **mrj1nx** » Sat Apr 22, 2017 5:45 am

In my view, ph was never interested in making reason the best tool it could be, instead they are focusing on making money off of newbs-hobbyist market segment with the RE format. Its kinda obvious if you look at their marketing videos and what kind of things they showcase there. I think theres a lot of people who got "trapped" in reason when they should be on a real DAW with access to the best plugins instead of a limited walled garden. Introducing VST they are bound to piss people off who bought into the RE's since they are obviously subpar in comparison, but its still the right thing to do.

Sailor16 · Post by **Sailor16** » Sat Apr 22, 2017 8:36 am

mrj1nx wrote:In my view, ph was never interested in making reason the best tool it could be, instead they are focusing on making money off of newbs-hobbyist market segment with the RE format. Its kinda obvious if you look at their marketing videos and what kind of things they showcase there. I think theres a lot of people who got "trapped" in reason when they should be on a real DAW with access to the best plugins instead of a limited walled garden. Introducing VST they are bound to piss people off who bought into the RE's since they are obviously subpar in comparison, but its still the right thing to do.

While I agree that PH seems more focused on the "newbs-hobbyist" market segment, I disagree with the conclusion that introducing VST are bound to piss people off who bought into RE's. Why? Simply because RE's are actually not subpar in comparison to VST.

Let's look at this from another perspective. If you're a newb/hobbyist and want everything to "just work" while experimenting with those cables on the back of the rack, you'll actually prefer RE's precisely because they offer that experience without any hassle. You have the safety of undo for everything, and let's not forget the RE's will also sync across all your computers. So that means you can sit in front of your studio PC and play around in Reason, save the project in the cloud, and then continue to work on that exact same project with your MacBook Air while on the road. No need to install separate VST and AU plugins for different systems, everything just works as expected.

Now there's a real value in all this. Maybe not for you and me, but for a lot of other people. If one wants a limited walled garden, RE's fit perfectly into that equation. If PH enabled VST and VSTi support (and let's not forget AU), they would probably sell MORE rack extensions because many of their actual customers -- and potential customers -- would feel that Reason suddenly became less limited as a DAW and offered more choice and headroom to experiment with all plugins on the market. Especially the potential customers, i.e. the guys who already have invested in VST plugins but are not happy with their current DAW and are open for a switch, would now be more inclined to try their VST's out in Reason.

Sometimes things seem to be a bit of a paradox. Personally I'm convinced that if PH focused on making VST/AU a reality in Reason and then offered Reason the software to the world for free (i.e. cost $0), they would actually "revolutionize the industry" -- not just claim they do.

Studio Saturn · Post by **Studio Saturn** » Sat Apr 22, 2017 9:15 am

Add me to that I support VST to be included. I have noticed how much Reverbless Reason is with in a short time. BTW you have to install your Re everywhere to use them. You can't install one place and Reason run magically on your another system it is all the same as VST. VST you install them individually. Re there is an installer which is going to manage for you like Waves central. VST you can use offline activation Reason you can't. To try a Re you have to connect to the internet it is a must.

Johnny! · Post by **Johnny!** » Sat Apr 22, 2017 10:04 am

Is connecting to the internet still an issue in 2017?

Studio Saturn · Post by **Studio Saturn** » Sat Apr 22, 2017 12:47 pm

I think that problem is ISP dependent or how good your internet is. I say that cause I have never had connection issue other than sometimes server failing on log in. That is while PH aware of the problem. But for downloading Re I have never had a single problem like others are mentioning.

Propellerhead Software has been bought