Is propellerhead the next cakewalk?

[chk071]

Then i dunno where that thing comes from. Obviously, most people buying it want it. I'd keep the engine running too, if i was them. Seems stupid to maintain the status quo.

[gentleclockdivider]

yes .
Because Bitwig is the next propellerhead .
The prop's had their heads too deep and too long in their asses ...

[Jace-BeOS]

Supposedly, they had it in the drawer since 2004 or so. But, why did they never implemented it then? For me, the answer is clear: It was not the vision they had for their software. Right from the very beginning, they marketed Reason as a cost-effective replacement for a whole hardware studio, which works in-the-box out of the box. I really never saw VST support as something which fit to the program, or which they really wanted for Reason. Frankly, i still don't see how it fits, but, obviously the new investors see it as a worthy enhancement.

So you think that VST support would not have been added without the investors' pushing for it, and any statement from Propellerhead people that it was in the pipeline before the investors came around is disingenuous?

Marketing departments, 3rd Party Resellers, Advertisers and Affiliated Employees will always try to spin any information to help benefit their company's image. Half the game is history and reputation, if you can get them believing positive things about a company, it can translate to revenue $$$ (ex. Stock Market). The other half of the equation is actually delivering on the promises for a lifetime.

Yeah, i'm basically asking if the general consensus here is that these statements of VST support already having been in the pipeline were BS. I'm skeptical of entities with marketing departments, especially computer industry companies... I do like to give people the benefit of the doubt at times, though. I don't have it out for Propellerhead. I just wish they'd re-draw all the GUI bitmaps for high-PPI displays so i can get back to playing with Reason.

[Bereket]

Supposedly, they had it in the drawer since 2004 or so. But, why did they never implemented it then? For me, the answer is clear: It was not the vision they had for their software. Right from the very beginning, they marketed Reason as a cost-effective replacement for a whole hardware studio, which works in-the-box out of the box. I really never saw VST support as something which fit to the program, or which they really wanted for Reason. Frankly, i still don't see how it fits, but, obviously the new investors see it as a worthy enhancement.

So you think that VST support would not have been added without the investors' pushing for it, and any statement from Propellerhead people that it was in the pipeline before the investors came around is disingenuous?

If you take a look at how long VST support was "in the pipeline", then, yep, I think it's pretty safe to say that it only has been added because the investors pushed it.

I think Ernst Nathorst-Böös even said "When hell freezes over" once.

I disagree on that. This is my point of view, they bring this we have sold Propellerhead now we are not the majority share holder thing as a cover up. First of all they have been selling Re for faithful costumers including me. After I spend like 2k and bringing VST it is an insult. The only reason I have been purchasing Plugin that I own twice is cause Reason doesn't support VST. But now somehow it supports, I feel like I have been robed. So in order to avoid complaint from users like me who have been invested in Re, First they introduce that we no longer the majority share holders we don't have a voice thing and then bring VST. Now people will assume that they are not the one who pushed VST out.

It is not the DAW will fell them in future it is the manipulative tactics they use over their users will run out. The more their users evaluate what they do, the more they become tired of propellerhead not Reason. I don't want them to be like cakewalk I want them to be like Studio One. NO more this fake upgrade and point update release with flashy advertisement video.

[antic604]

Supposedly, they had it in the drawer since 2004 or so. But, why did they never implemented it then? For me, the answer is clear: It was not the vision they had for their software. Right from the very beginning, they marketed Reason as a cost-effective replacement for a whole hardware studio, which works in-the-box out of the box. I really never saw VST support as something which fit to the program, or which they really wanted for Reason. Frankly, i still don't see how it fits, but, obviously the new investors see it as a worthy enhancement.

So you think that VST support would not have been added without the investors' pushing for it, and any statement from Propellerhead people that it was in the pipeline before the investors came around is disingenuous?

If you take a look at how long VST support was "in the pipeline", then, yep, I think it's pretty safe to say that it only has been added because the investors pushed it.

I think Ernst Nathorst-Böös even said "When hell freezes over" once.

...So in order to avoid complaint from users like me who have been invested in Re, First they introduce that we no longer the majority share holders we don't have a voice thing and then bring VST. Now people will assume that they are not the one who pushed VST out...

That's not how business works - you don't get an investor as a cover-up. You get it because you're either struggling financially and need rescue, or have an idea that costs more money to develop & push to market than you can generate yourself.

In Propellerheads' case I think (hope?) it's the mixture of both.

Despite very vibrant and quite sizeable user base, Reason is not the most popular DAW and probably makes money mostly off of its current user base, with few people jumping in, but - according to financial statements - they're doing OK.

However, in the very dynamic world of DAWs "doing OK" might not be enough, so they decided for a "radical" move of adding VST support - this made people notice and discuss Reason again (for better or worse...) and allowed them to cash-in twice: once, when people not using Reason for years upgraded from v4/5/6 to v9.5 to get VSTs and try Reason again; second time when v10 was released with really great new native synths and content. I hope the investor they got sees how special & different Reason is (despite its obvious flaws) and allows - and encourages - it to develop in a ways to strengthen that individuality, rather than make it "yet another DAW", because it won't win with Cubase or Live, but needs to be different. I think if Propellerheads focus their efforts on improving the sequencer / workflow, up-rez the GUI and enhance the flexibility of REs, then they'll be able to live comfortably in their own niche.

[EnochLight]

For me it's about credibility. At least I except some long term vision when I purchase a software license. A vision that a company has to live up to IMO

Indeed. That's why i never got why people asked for VST support in Reason. Has ZERO to do with their vision. And you can be sure that Ernst Nathorst-Böös would have never signed it off without the new investors in his back.

Except that he did, long before investors were at his back. The "tech" for VST support was done by Magnus at Sonic Charge over a decade ago at the request of Propellerhead. They delayed it to try their own plugin format first.

https://twitter.com/soniccharge/status/ ... 5595515904

[chk071]

EnochLight, then why did it take 10 years, and a new investor to bring VST to Reason? That makes no sense at all. It's also pretty obvious that this will be the death of all RE development of the plugin developers who developed both VST and RE versions of their plugins. Which developer in his sane mind would develop RE, when he already has to support VST, AU, AAX, and maybe RTAS (especially as it's a "special" plugin format, which needs another approach, coding wise)? Nah, PH never wanted it, i think that's safe to say.

[EnochLight]

EnochLight, then why did it take 10 years, and a new investor to bring VST to Reason? That makes no sense at all.

Sure it does, if you decide to try something else first. They started development for Record as a separate program to try and diversify; ultimately chose to keep the "1 product" strategy and bring Record+ Reason into 1 program (hence Reason 6) because that strategy didn't work. Let's be honest - Record was a DAW in its infancy that had no way of competing with all the other DAW.

They clearly tried to make RE's their secondary revenue stream and keep Reason locked down as long as possible. Mattias (Props) has gone on record here at KVR and stated that he was personally pushing for VST support in Reason prior to the venture capital deal. We can choose not to believe him, or to believe him, though.

It's also pretty obvious that this will be the death of all RE development of the plugin developers who developed both VST and RE versions of their plugins. Which developer in his sane mind would develop RE, when he already has to support VST, AU, AAX, and maybe RTAS (especially as it's a "special" plugin format, which needs another approach, coding wise)? Nah, PH never wanted it, i think that's safe to say.

Is it? Rob Papen has gone on record and stated that he will continue to develop RE's as long as people buy them. I don't doubt many will stop, though, since you can just buy their VST instead. Anyway, I'm actually in agreement that future RE development will largely remain the realm of indie-devs and Prop's own platform for adding devices. But that doesn't mean that VST-support was added only because Ernst had a VC-gun at his back. For all we know, it could have always been in the pipeline for an eventual addition.

I'll concede that considering a VC group offer might have made the choice a lot more easier, though. It's also possible to consider that the choice to support VST was pushed forward before the choice to accept VC to make the company more appealing.

I suppose we'll never really know what happened, though it's fun to speculate. I'm just glad they did support it, as I hate going into other DAW just for my VST wares.

[chk071]

They clearly tried to make RE's their secondary revenue stream and keep Reason locked down as long as possible.

Exactly! Well, i guess we can argue for a long time, as we won't definitely know, without an official confirmation, which won't happen. But, if i have the VST support blueprint lying in my drawer for 10 years, then there's surely a point to believing that it was a business decision to not take "advantage" of it. Although i'd rather say it's to their disadvantage, because they're competing with the "creme de la creme" of VST hosts now, which support it for 20 years, and offer functionality Reason users can only dream about (no offense). For me, it's one of the best examples why you shouldn't listen to the crowd of users, who have no idea of business, but always feel excluded, and predestined to take a business deciding decision. Frankly, i still think VST support is the worst decision the Propellerheads ever made, and, even though i don't think they're near-term endangered, i think, in the longrun, it will rather hurt than help them. Although i have no idea which way to turn in their place either. In-the-box Reason has outlived itself, and, going out-of-the-box doesn't seem so smart either. Maybe developing something entirely new would be the way, i don't know.

Sorry for being so negative BTW, as i mentioned earlier in this thread, i can't see them going out of business at all, although the fact that they got bought surely doesn't mean that everything is rosy.

[THE INTRANCER]

I've a bunch of RE's which are never being used since moving to Presonus Studio One, can't get rid of /sell - transfer and are already being scaled out to obscurity or will be if I buy a 4K screen. I wouldn't have bought them in 2012 /2013, if I had any idea that VST was going to be 4 or 5 years later. In May 2013 I got Reaktor 5 for £90... I had no reason to buy any RE's beyond that, and Propellerheads marketing shift was just a big turn off, the jump couldn't have come sooner..

I gave up forgiving Propellerheads shortfalls in development after 13 years with them...it was time to move on and find something better..

[EnochLight]

Having a VC as a majority share holder is not the same thing as being bought, to be clear. An example of being bought is more akin to the Gibson/Cakewalk fiasco.

[chk071]

Having a VC as a majority share holder is not the same thing as being bought, to be clear. An example of being bought is more akin to the Gibson/Cakewalk fiasco.

You're right. Should have stated that more clearly. Still, a "share holder", in this case holding the majority of shares, will have a big saying. And, VST support being implemented shortly after surely indicates that it was a requirement from Verdane.

[highkoo]

Reason threads are insane.
Benefit of doubt at every turn, even as the clock ticks down and the hail mary is in the air...

[EnochLight]

Having a VC as a majority share holder is not the same thing as being bought, to be clear. An example of being bought is more akin to the Gibson/Cakewalk fiasco.

You're right. Should have stated that more clearly. Still, a "share holder", in this case holding the majority of shares, will have a big saying. And, VST support being implemented shortly after surely indicates that it was a requirement from Verdane.

Well, at the risk of going around in circles - not necessarily (as explained earlier).

[THE INTRANCER]

I never did look at the vote results.. but with 'No 42%' & 'Yes 58%', the votes indicate that people really didn't hold much confidence for Props Reason... from the end of last year...