Reason 11 announced!!!

[Psuper]

Choosing where to install content is consistent among most software companies and industries, its not something anyone should be 'requesting' - in fact its downright ludicrous that anyone would even have to 'request' something standardized.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

And yet, here we are - over 7 years since Rack Extensions appeared, and we still can't choose where the content is installed. Have you considered that (most) average users just don't care? For the record, I think it would be lovely if they fixed this. But on a scale of "things that are important and need to happen in Reason stat", it ranks pretty low for me.

Most average people don't have a reason to care, or even know about it, until they do.. it's one of those things. Adding an option defining where to install content is a 5 minute choice in the developed install routine, its not something that remotely compares to feature requests which take significant time and effort, hence its 100% laziness on the development end.

There's good reason its been a standard practice for years. The few companies left who don't employ it are making a conscious decision to greatly inconvenience their base, even if some in that base don't know it yet.

[Scotty]

Install location options becomes important for archiving , backups and system rebuilds and made more urgent with SSD startup disks. Just because one can’t see beyond the end of their own nose doesn’t mean there isn’t a pothole just down the road. I can work with it regardless.

[bharris22]

When I ran the installer, Reason 11 did, in fact, ask me for two different install locations: one for the "program", and another for the VST. This fact demonstrates that they do recognize that some customers would like to install to a location other than C. What good reason could there be that only 350 Mb of the "program" is installed into the user-selected location, while more than 3.5 Gb is installed into unknown locations on C without any user input? I like Reason very much, but I really wonder why people blindly defend the company and these types of half measures. Friends shouldn't just agree with everything you do - sometimes friends must tell their friends that they are wrong.

[jackson881]

Installers that don't offer the option to install huge libraries onto an external drive put me off in almost the same way that some people are put off by iLok protected software. I would have already purchased Reason 11 if Reason Studios offered an option upfront to install content to an external drive by default, the way Native Instruments and other companies do. I'm still on the fence about whether to buy R11 because of it. I like having all of my samples/libraries in one place.

[bharris22]

I found about half of the space (around 10 Gb) for the Rack Extensions at this location, but am still about 10 Gb short - maybe sample content used in the Rack Extensions is at another location still?

C:\Users\username\AppData\Roaming\Propellerhead Software\RackExtensions -- installed REs.
C:\ProgramData\Propellerhead Software\Soundbanks -- installed refils.
My Documents\My Music\Propellerhead Content -- optional content, like Radical Piano, Klang, Pangea etc.

It may not be lazy, but it sure is messy.

Thank you for this! Still missing my 10 Gb, though . I am wondering if there is a temporary download folder somewhere that the REs go to before they are installed.

[EnochLight]

Choosing where to install content is consistent among most software companies and industries, its not something anyone should be 'requesting' - in fact its downright ludicrous that anyone would even have to 'request' something standardized.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

And yet, here we are - over 7 years since Rack Extensions appeared, and we still can't choose where the content is installed. Have you considered that (most) average users just don't care? For the record, I think it would be lovely if they fixed this. But on a scale of "things that are important and need to happen in Reason stat", it ranks pretty low for me.

Most average people don't have a reason to care, or even know about it, until they do.. it's one of those things. Adding an option defining where to install content is a 5 minute choice in the developed install routine, its not something that remotely compares to feature requests which take significant time and effort, hence its 100% laziness on the development end.

There's good reason its been a standard practice for years. The few companies left who don't employ it are making a conscious decision to greatly inconvenience their base, even if some in that base don't know it yet.

It took Apple over 10 years and the death of its CEO/founder to add actual file management to iOS. One could easily argue that this is something most iOS users wanted from day one.

Perhaps you’ll get your wish yet!

[Richard_Synapse]

When I ran the installer, Reason 11 did, in fact, ask me for two different install locations: one for the "program", and another for the VST. This fact demonstrates that they do recognize that some customers would like to install to a location other than C. What good reason could there be that only 350 Mb of the "program" is installed into the user-selected location, while more than 3.5 Gb is installed into unknown locations on C without any user input? I like Reason very much, but I really wonder why people blindly defend the company and these types of half measures.

I noticed this as well, since my SSD is pretty crowded, and Reason actually consumes a whopping 14 GB in total on my C: drive due to older versions. On the upside, Reasons now supports multi-threaded VST plugins like DUNE 3 which is great! So they do listen to feature requests, and it is likely this installer issue will get addressed soon (especially since it is fairly easy to implement).

Richard

[Psuper]

Choosing where to install content is consistent among most software companies and industries, its not something anyone should be 'requesting' - in fact its downright ludicrous that anyone would even have to 'request' something standardized.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

And yet, here we are - over 7 years since Rack Extensions appeared, and we still can't choose where the content is installed. Have you considered that (most) average users just don't care? For the record, I think it would be lovely if they fixed this. But on a scale of "things that are important and need to happen in Reason stat", it ranks pretty low for me.

Most average people don't have a reason to care, or even know about it, until they do.. it's one of those things. Adding an option defining where to install content is a 5 minute choice in the developed install routine, its not something that remotely compares to feature requests which take significant time and effort, hence its 100% laziness on the development end.

There's good reason its been a standard practice for years. The few companies left who don't employ it are making a conscious decision to greatly inconvenience their base, even if some in that base don't know it yet.

It took Apple over 10 years and the death of its CEO/founder to add actual file management to iOS. One could easily argue that this is something most iOS users wanted from day one.

Perhaps you’ll get your wish yet!

Its something that makes Propellerheads look bad, not something that I put any thought into beyond knowing it reflects poorly on 'Reason Studios'. My passionate desires toward Reason were laid out plainly the last 2 years when imploring props to DAW, and the community was virtually silent. I saw the writing on the walls, I swapped DAWS, and never looked back. And 11 gets announced, and THEN the community rallies and absolutely goes bonkers behind the idea it should focus on a DAW, while I couldn't be happier with their move now that Cubase is my main DAW, which was quite ironic to say the least.

Regardless, public opinion is not often known. And even if it was, should never be taken into account when forming your own, especially if you know your heart is in the right place.

[tincture]

This is why I'm asking for an official answer on the transfer of a Reason Suite license:
There could be 3 scenarios;
1) The seller loses the 16 REs and the buyer gains them, that means the whole of what you bought is transferred. Which IMO is satisfactory.

2) The seller loses the 16 REs and the buyer doesn't gain them, then only a portion of what you bought is transferred AND you've lost the 16 REs you paid for... needless to say, unsatisfactory all round.

3) Perhaps the most likely thing happens, the seller keeps the 16 REs and the buyer doesn't gain them, only a portion of what you bought is transferred and therefore the relative value of what you can sell is decreased. Whether this is satisfactory or unsatisfactory is much more open to argument.

Hence me wanting to know the answer! Personally for me, the first scenario is much more attractive than the third. If the second is true then there will be a lot of unhappy customers.

It was the third option...

From a topic on Reasontalk:
Just got a reply from RS

I'm afraid that Rack Extensions can't be transfered to another account


so any suite customers cant transfer the RE even though it was a package


oh well at least we know now 100%

[EnochLight]

This is why I'm asking for an official answer on the transfer of a Reason Suite license:
There could be 3 scenarios;
1) The seller loses the 16 REs and the buyer gains them, that means the whole of what you bought is transferred. Which IMO is satisfactory.

2) The seller loses the 16 REs and the buyer doesn't gain them, then only a portion of what you bought is transferred AND you've lost the 16 REs you paid for... needless to say, unsatisfactory all round.

3) Perhaps the most likely thing happens, the seller keeps the 16 REs and the buyer doesn't gain them, only a portion of what you bought is transferred and therefore the relative value of what you can sell is decreased. Whether this is satisfactory or unsatisfactory is much more open to argument.

Hence me wanting to know the answer! Personally for me, the first scenario is much more attractive than the third. If the second is true then there will be a lot of unhappy customers.

It was the third option...

From a topic on Reasontalk:
Just got a reply from RS

I'm afraid that Rack Extensions can't be transfered to another account


so any suite customers cant transfer the RE even though it was a package


oh well at least we know now 100%

This does not surprise me. If how other RE's and rigs were anything to go by, it's always been option # 3. Good to hear you got a definitive answer from RS, though.

[AcrossTheSky]

This is why I'm asking for an official answer on the transfer of a Reason Suite license:
There could be 3 scenarios;
1) The seller loses the 16 REs and the buyer gains them, that means the whole of what you bought is transferred. Which IMO is satisfactory.

2) The seller loses the 16 REs and the buyer doesn't gain them, then only a portion of what you bought is transferred AND you've lost the 16 REs you paid for... needless to say, unsatisfactory all round.

3) Perhaps the most likely thing happens, the seller keeps the 16 REs and the buyer doesn't gain them, only a portion of what you bought is transferred and therefore the relative value of what you can sell is decreased. Whether this is satisfactory or unsatisfactory is much more open to argument.

Hence me wanting to know the answer! Personally for me, the first scenario is much more attractive than the third. If the second is true then there will be a lot of unhappy customers.

It was the third option...

From a topic on Reasontalk:
Just got a reply from RS

I'm afraid that Rack Extensions can't be transfered to another account


so any suite customers cant transfer the RE even though it was a package


oh well at least we know now 100%

This does not surprise me. If how other RE's and rigs were anything to go by, it's always been option # 3. Good to hear you got a definitive answer from RS, though.

...
Now it should be possible to downgrade to Reason 12 or upgrade to Reason Suite 12..
..wondering what the prices will be...hopefully making sense...

[Johnny!]

I found about half of the space (around 10 Gb) for the Rack Extensions at this location, but am still about 10 Gb short - maybe sample content used in the Rack Extensions is at another location still?

C:\Users\username\AppData\Roaming\Propellerhead Software\RackExtensions -- installed REs.
C:\ProgramData\Propellerhead Software\Soundbanks -- installed refils.
My Documents\My Music\Propellerhead Content -- optional content, like Radical Piano, Klang, Pangea etc.

It may not be lazy, but it sure is messy.

Thank you for this! Still missing my 10 Gb, though . I am wondering if there is a temporary download folder somewhere that the REs go to before they are installed.

Use this: https://windirstat.net
It should make finding those 10GB easy

[Benutzername]

I'm afraid that Rack Extensions can't be transfered to another account

If you bought the software in the EU then of course you can sell all your software licenses to a different person. Even giants like Microsoft, SAP and Oracle had to accept that is illegal for companies in the EU to prohibit reselling of used software licenses, especially in the B2C world.

The problem is that Reason Studios don't care so you'll need to go to court to actually make it happen.

[EnGee]

But they are located in Sweden!
You can't even sell your account as the username, Real Name and Country can't be changed!

Anyway, for me I'm ok with the intro 10 version. I might buy intro 11 when they make discount. I need the VST version to run Antidote, Parsac2 and PX7 in addition to make my own Combinators (it is possible I think).
However, I have already Dune 2/3 and several additive/FM synths that can cover 99.99% of all my needs with super quality sounds, so nothing is that unique with the full version of Reason anyway as sound source. On the other hand I prefer Bitwig workflow as a host

[reggie1979]

I have to say, as appealing as having the rack in another host can be, it's just so unnecessary to me. I mean, we all have capable synths and effects, right?