Let's talk reaktor 6.4

[ccooll]

...In any case, if there were a "tool" to convert any standard blocks to a rack blocks (any block - your own something from the user library, something modded, a locked block), you could create a Rack, save it, etc. ...

Unless I'm missing something there's no business reason that couldn't exist, so I'm guessing the problem is technical...

The reason for the registration requirement is that Racks are saved using references to blocks files, which makes the file format very small, so it can be saved in a DAW 'host chunk'. For this to work it's very important tat there is consistency - every Rack Block must have a unique identifier that applies only to that version of the Block, or the whole system will collapse - which makes sense...

That then would be the technical issue - hashing the block for linking so that it uses a unique identifier.

There's actually a simple solution for that. Microsoft uses it, so you can install / release software on Windows without a central authority, but it's not unique to Microsoft. Tools are easily available and it would work in Reaktor for both paid / free commercial and personal creations:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal ... identifier

Small businesses like mine can release software along with Office, etc., and the version is, for practical applications, guaranteed unique. So you can mix user / commercial without central registration.

NI - problem solved!

Not really, the point is that they want to maintain control over identifiers for any blocks that will work with the Reaktor player - That's part of their new revenue model for Reaktor - earn through licencing 3rd party Blocks that work with the free Player.
For existing licenced Reaktor users to be able to build and use their own Rack content, there would need to be a non-centralised registration for them that doesn't work with the player (they need to prevent or at least control the creation of free Player content) - so that's two separate systems required. It was cheaper and easier for them just to make one system - the closed paywall version - and ignore their existing user base.

[JoeCat]

...Unless I'm missing something there's no business reason that couldn't exist, so I'm guessing the problem is technical...

The reason for the registration requirement is that Racks are saved using references to blocks files, which makes the file format very small, so it can be saved in a DAW 'host chunk'. For this to work it's very important tat there is consistency - every Rack Block must have a unique identifier that applies only to that version of the Block, or the whole system will collapse - which makes sense...

That then would be the technical issue - hashing the block for linking so that it uses a unique identifier.

There's actually a simple solution for that. Microsoft uses it, so you can install / release software on Windows without a central authority, but it's not unique to Microsoft...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal ... identifier

...

NI - problem solved!

Not really, the point is that they want to maintain control over identifiers for any blocks that will work with the Reaktor player - That's part of their new revenue model for Reaktor - earn through licencing 3rd party Blocks that work with the free Player.
For existing licenced Reaktor users to be able to build and use their own Rack content, there would need to be a non-centralised registration for them that doesn't work with the player (they need to prevent or at least control the creation of free Player content) - so that's two separate systems required. It was cheaper and easier for them just to make one system - the closed paywall version - and ignore their existing user base.

Forgot about NI making the $.
I get it. Still kinda sucks.

[GaryG]

Front panel patching also works in ensemble mode , without the benefit of the new preset system and only white cables ( see my posted screenshots )

But can you use the FPP with existing blocks from the UL or that you've written yourself? Not that I can see. So I appreciate you can make a rack with FPP and export it as an ensemble, then open it traditionally and drag your own Blocks in but then you have to wire those up in the structure view. I find this messy, swapping between the two methods in an ensemble. Happy to be proved wrong on this.

[aMUSEd]

...In any case, if there were a "tool" to convert any standard blocks to a rack blocks (any block - your own something from the user library, something modded, a locked block), you could create a Rack, save it, etc.

The ability to lock blocks from being modded is already built-in to the Reaktor eco-system, so you could still have an environment for commercial third-party blocks, - NI could have a library of locked blocks (free/purchase) that work with Reaktor Player in Racks, and the existing User-Library for sharing and working in Ensembles, with the ability to convert any blocks to the Rack system for the convenience of cabling, smaller file sizes, and host saving.

Unless I'm missing something there's no business reason that couldn't exist, so I'm guessing the problem is technical. And that means maybe it's something NI will in fact address in a future release. If that's true and I were an NI rep, I'd want to announce that ASAP because I think the "branching" affect of these to environments is (IMO) going to discourage Reaktor development. I think a future commercial market has a better chance of success if the existing market of User Library fans like me stay with it.

What doesn't make sense is that the cool new feature - front panel patching - could have been a separate development that worked just as well in the non Racks parts of Reaktor, but it has been developed in such a way that it only works properly in Racks. If front panel patching worked with standard ensembles of Blocks, and could be saved in snapshots and presets, I think everyone would be loving this update!

Front panel patching also works in ensemble mode , without the benefit of the new preset system and only white cables ( see my posted screenshots )

But can you save snapshots that include the patchings?

[bob swans]

You can add FPP to existing blocks as far as I am aware but they can't be used in rack mode. Someone posted and example ensemble in the UL and lots of discussion about it on the Reaktor forum
https://www.native-instruments.com/en/r ... how/12947/

[leonalex]

Native Instruments posted in the beta forum that they left off the feature to allow user generated content in racks for the launch to keep the host chunk saving feature (the ability to save just pointers to blocks and their connections rather than the entire ensemble with DAW projects) simple and stable for what they called a 'minimum viable product', but are open to feedback.

I think they didn't want to commit to one model but rather planned to release the front panel patching and host chunk saving features and then get feedback on them.

I don't think we should read too much into it at this point. Generating content is very much at the heart of what Reaktor is about so I don't think it will be long before they address this.

[gentleclockdivider]

Front panel patching also works in ensemble mode , without the benefit of the new preset system and only white cables ( see my posted screenshots )

But can you use the FPP with existing blocks from the UL or that you've written yourself? Not that I can see. So I appreciate you can make a rack with FPP and export it as an ensemble, then open it traditionally and drag your own Blocks in but then you have to wire those up in the structure view. I find this messy, swapping between the two methods in an ensemble. Happy to be proved wrong on this.

You're not wrong
The update stinks , and is primarly focused on the non builders , and I am not the only one voicing this opinion .
We can't even colour the cables in ensemble mode , and in rack mode there is only a small selection of colours to choose from because of the NKS limited color palette
Why are we reaktor builders /users the dupe of a non reaktor related restriction ?
Online reg. of user blocks clearly shows the direction they are heading , eff them
Because now N.I. offically sucks balls , that's why

[gentleclockdivider]

Front panel patching also works in ensemble mode , without the benefit of the new preset system and only white cables ( see my posted screenshots )

But can you use the FPP with existing blocks from the UL or that you've written yourself? Not that I can see. So I appreciate you can make a rack with FPP and export it as an ensemble, then open it traditionally and drag your own Blocks in but then you have to wire those up in the structure view. I find this messy, swapping between the two methods in an ensemble. Happy to be proved wrong on this.

NO user blocks for patching .
You don't need to save the rack as an ensemble for fpp in ensemble mode ( altough it's an option )
Just initilazing an empty ensemble and dropping the new (patchable ) blocks into ensemble view is enough for fpp

[vurt]

ive emailed my mp and mep about this outrage.
and telegrammed the queen!

this needs fixing! cant believe they've killed reaktor

[gentleclockdivider]

Go troll elsewhere or join the reaktor forum and see for yourself
Do you actually build stuff in reaktor ?
If so , you would understand why the majority is upset .
If you don't then I guess we'don't have anything to say to each other , and surely not the sound of VURT coming to my ears

Thank god there's the ignore list

[Deep Purple]

Stan: “Oh my god, they killed Reaktor!”
Kyle: “You bastards!”

[vurt]

Go troll elsewhere or join the reaktor forum and see for yourself

am already a member, have been for years...

Do you actually build stuff in reaktor ?

more a tinkerer in others ensembles than from ground up.

If so , you would understand why the majority is upset .

but nothing has been lost? has it? if so, then of course its not a positive move.
but so far, its an additional feature, and everything else works as it did before no?

If you don't then I guess we'don't have anything to say to each other , and surely not the sound of VURT coming to my ears

yeah, only negative opinions are valid...

Thank god there's the ignore list

[vurt]

ps: the queens exact words where "what? the updates bitchin!"

still waiting on the mp and mep.

[aMUSEd]

The ability to lock blocks from being modded is already built-in to the Reaktor eco-system, so you could still have an environment for commercial third-party blocks, - NI could have a library of locked blocks (free/purchase) that work with Reaktor Player in Racks, and the existing User-Library for sharing and working in Ensembles, with the ability to convert any blocks to the Rack system for the convenience of cabling, smaller file sizes, and host saving.

Problem with this locking ensembles and blocks ability is it leaves you dependent on the developer to fix bugs. Fine if it's someone as engaged and responsive as Mike Hetrick perhaps, but some, like Tim Exile, just ignore them and say they are too busy.

[pdxindy]

Obviously Reaktor is not killed, but my own interest in it is on life support. Blocks was what made me interested in Reaktor in the first place. Now we get a new thing called Racks. Racks addresses the poor preset handling of Blocks and offers the front panel wiring but it loses the whole user library which contains lots of useful additional blocks. I find it off-putting that the reason we lose the user library is not because it is benefitting me somehow, but for reasons of monetization.

NI may be doing exactly what they need to do, but VCV seems more inviting to me as a model. I think I will go in that direction as far as a software modular setup.