So i am just courious has anyone from you guys at KVRaudio
had some sound quality issues with Reason??
Just curious...Reason sound quality...
-
- KVRist
- 261 posts since 31 Oct, 2003
I think blah blah quality blah sound engine blah blah. But blah..kmonkey22 wrote:I see that this is pretty often topic on some sites.
So i am just courious has anyone from you guys at KVRaudio
snareSpanker
-
- KVRian
- 1202 posts since 8 May, 2003 from Munich
2.5 is rather solid in terms of sound quality
-
- KVRist
- 159 posts since 9 Apr, 2004
It's definetely a real issue. someone made a guide comparing Reason to FL Studio. FL Studio was sample accurate while Reason was not entirely accurate. A magazine also said that the Mixer caused alot of problems.
But supposedly the sample accuracy problems will be fixed and they're going to be adding a useable EQ and compressor w/ sidechain... And plus the Combinator. If I used Reason I'd probably be ecstatic.
But supposedly the sample accuracy problems will be fixed and they're going to be adding a useable EQ and compressor w/ sidechain... And plus the Combinator. If I used Reason I'd probably be ecstatic.
hi
-
- KVRist
- 153 posts since 29 Jun, 2003
Has 3.0 fixed this issue?
[PM me if you don't want to break NDA
]
[PM me if you don't want to break NDA
]-
- KVRer
- 15 posts since 21 Aug, 2004
Don't listen to all these noobs here,Reason doesn't have sample accuraty problems anymore,and you need to have some skills to mix with it..once you know how to program it,there's nothing better.If you want to have that FL sound in reason,just lower Reason volume levels ,make some room for your sounds, and turn up your amplifier knob,when mastering it comes to a good end,even better. 
-
- KVRAF
- 2327 posts since 13 Apr, 2004 from Vancouver, Canada
Many people complained that version 1 sounded 'thin'... That's kinda subjective, but I do agree that the subtractor was kinda wimpy for a VA synth...
Version 2 added the unison effect, which did help to fatten things up a little... That certainly helped!
My biggest complaint has always been the compressor. I would argue that it is 98% useless in most circumstances... Even with very modest settings, it still produced this... I am not sure how to describe it... 'elastic' sound to it... not warm at all... to me, it made things sound even more thin! It should have been labeled something like the 'metalic-digitizer' (for lack of a better description)
Hopefully they decide to update that one!
As an asside, I have heard some pretty incredible tracks come out of Reason (even without any post-production). I guess a lot of the sound quality issues can be attributed to the user's skill level!
Cheers.
Version 2 added the unison effect, which did help to fatten things up a little... That certainly helped!
My biggest complaint has always been the compressor. I would argue that it is 98% useless in most circumstances... Even with very modest settings, it still produced this... I am not sure how to describe it... 'elastic' sound to it... not warm at all... to me, it made things sound even more thin! It should have been labeled something like the 'metalic-digitizer' (for lack of a better description)
Hopefully they decide to update that one!
As an asside, I have heard some pretty incredible tracks come out of Reason (even without any post-production). I guess a lot of the sound quality issues can be attributed to the user's skill level!
Cheers.
-
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 5200 posts since 17 Aug, 2004
To nibbzious:
Can you/or anyone explain me what is "sample accurate" term? I mean i can translate this but still i dont have any clue
And how this accuracy thing will perfom in host with wrong sample accurate bug?
Can you/or anyone explain me what is "sample accurate" term? I mean i can translate this but still i dont have any clue
And how this accuracy thing will perfom in host with wrong sample accurate bug?
-
- KVRist
- 116 posts since 4 Dec, 2002 from portland, or
I use Reason often...and I have different impessions.
I think the sound quality improved noticably with 2.5. Just don't try to eval the issue with the Factory sound bank--which is uneven. I've loaded battery samples in Reason and it sounds about the same as Sonar and Live. FL seems a little "toppy" in general. I think Reason's can sound a little dull--but it masters very nicely IMO. I'm looking foward to see what 3.0 brings.
I think the sound quality improved noticably with 2.5. Just don't try to eval the issue with the Factory sound bank--which is uneven. I've loaded battery samples in Reason and it sounds about the same as Sonar and Live. FL seems a little "toppy" in general. I think Reason's can sound a little dull--but it masters very nicely IMO. I'm looking foward to see what 3.0 brings.
-
- KVRian
- 507 posts since 14 Mar, 2004
If it's good enough for Mylo, Fischerspooner and Outkast, Reason's sound quality is going to be the least of your problems. It's been commercially proven as good enough again and again and again. I'm not sure why it's still on trial when the point, IMO, is entirely moot...
It's penetrated deeply enough that I guesstimate that anyone buying dance tracks in the noughties probably has at least half a dozen tracks sourced from Reason in their collection...I know which ones they are in my collection, but only because I've stumbled on it from online information - not how they sound. And that's only the ones I have information about.
As we all know, the biggest limitation to making a good track in any half decent host - especially in Reason, where studio trick knowledge goes a lot longer way than in a some other hosts - is going to be you. In short, Reason is probably going to be the least of your limitations (in fact, you may find as many Reason users do that you thrive creatively in a closed environment)...and no amount of audio voodoo nitpicking is going to change that.
It's penetrated deeply enough that I guesstimate that anyone buying dance tracks in the noughties probably has at least half a dozen tracks sourced from Reason in their collection...I know which ones they are in my collection, but only because I've stumbled on it from online information - not how they sound. And that's only the ones I have information about.
As we all know, the biggest limitation to making a good track in any half decent host - especially in Reason, where studio trick knowledge goes a lot longer way than in a some other hosts - is going to be you. In short, Reason is probably going to be the least of your limitations (in fact, you may find as many Reason users do that you thrive creatively in a closed environment)...and no amount of audio voodoo nitpicking is going to change that.
-
- KVRAF
- 6504 posts since 25 May, 2002 from Bobo-dioulasso\BF__Geneva/CH
advaya wrote:. I guess a lot of the sound quality issues can be attributed to the user's skill level!
.
"les mauvais ouvriers ont toujours de mauvais outils !"
CROACK !
-
- KVRist
- 169 posts since 2 May, 2003 from Home, sweet home.
I use v2.5 on a PC with a M-Audio Delta 1010 card,
and i find that i get a much better (punchier, upfront, brighter) sound
when i connect the individual instruments outputs
directly to the card's hardware outs and mix with a (hardware) digital mixer (Tascam DM24).
As soon as i use the internal software mixer,
the sound is ... different.
I don't care why, but for me, mixing externally works better.
and i find that i get a much better (punchier, upfront, brighter) sound
when i connect the individual instruments outputs
directly to the card's hardware outs and mix with a (hardware) digital mixer (Tascam DM24).
As soon as i use the internal software mixer,
the sound is ... different.
I don't care why, but for me, mixing externally works better.
-
- KVRAF
- 6504 posts since 25 May, 2002 from Bobo-dioulasso\BF__Geneva/CH
Seems that you aren't the only one to experience this, about internal mixing issuesSotiris wrote:I use v2.5 on a PC with a M-Audio Delta 1010 card,
and i find that i get a much better (punchier, upfront, brighter) sound
when i connect the individual instruments outputs
directly to the card's hardware outs and mix with a (hardware) digital mixer (Tascam DM24).
As soon as i use the internal software mixer,
the sound is ... different.
I don't care why, but for me, mixing externally works better.
there was an incridebly huge thread on the subjet on a logic forum ( "Never mis in the box again" said top ten producers)
-
- KVRAF
- 6504 posts since 25 May, 2002 from Bobo-dioulasso\BF__Geneva/CH
This i can agree because i experienced making complete and balanced arrangements of a few measure in a very few minutes, there's something in reason that makes the work way more than just "easy" if you stay around a certain amount of type of musical arrangementsadvaya wrote: As an aside, I have heard some pretty incredible tracks come out of Reason (even without any post-production).
Cheers.
true...
-
- KVRist
- 159 posts since 9 Apr, 2004
Reason 3.0's sound quality problems will be fixed according to Propellerhead's site. Go to the Reason 3.0 page and scroll to the bottom:
Improved sample playback timing and quality.
Although Improved could mean better and not perfect. Them Prophead's is strange folk.
And why do all you Reason users always talk about how great your hos... er sequencer (:hihi:) whenever someone mentions the sound quality of Reason. Are you insecure in your choice? If you love your program and work well with it, why do you care so much? Why do you always attack everyone saying they have sub-par production skills? And why are you especially aggitated when FL Studio is mentioned? When someone says Logic or Cubase you just say "Well, those are like a thousand dollars."
kmonkey22:
I looked all over google for the Reason sample accuracy thing but I wasn't able to find it. It was a long time ago when I saw it and I don't remember everything and it explains everything perfectly. I think it used to be on Simon V's website. Along with that sampler aliasing thing. But I couldn't find it there or anywhere else.
I'm no programmer or anything and I may and will get some of this incorrect but I believe what was done in the guide. a square wave was taken and loaded into FL and Reason. Then rendered the square wave and took the output and compared it against original. Something blah blah 44,100 blah blah blah, lots of numbers blah blah timing blah blah accuracy then more numbers. I really wish I could explain this better. And I might be completely talking out of my ass because I barely remember what the guide said.
You should probably ask someone more qualified what sample accurate means. Probably.
But this is going to be a non-issue soon because Reason 3.0 will probably fix all this. And then everyone can be happy and can make music.
Improved sample playback timing and quality.
Although Improved could mean better and not perfect. Them Prophead's is strange folk.
And why do all you Reason users always talk about how great your hos... er sequencer (:hihi:) whenever someone mentions the sound quality of Reason. Are you insecure in your choice? If you love your program and work well with it, why do you care so much? Why do you always attack everyone saying they have sub-par production skills? And why are you especially aggitated when FL Studio is mentioned? When someone says Logic or Cubase you just say "Well, those are like a thousand dollars."
kmonkey22:
I looked all over google for the Reason sample accuracy thing but I wasn't able to find it. It was a long time ago when I saw it and I don't remember everything and it explains everything perfectly. I think it used to be on Simon V's website. Along with that sampler aliasing thing. But I couldn't find it there or anywhere else.
I'm no programmer or anything and I may and will get some of this incorrect but I believe what was done in the guide. a square wave was taken and loaded into FL and Reason. Then rendered the square wave and took the output and compared it against original. Something blah blah 44,100 blah blah blah, lots of numbers blah blah timing blah blah accuracy then more numbers. I really wish I could explain this better. And I might be completely talking out of my ass because I barely remember what the guide said.
You should probably ask someone more qualified what sample accurate means. Probably.
But this is going to be a non-issue soon because Reason 3.0 will probably fix all this. And then everyone can be happy and can make music.
hi