Propellerhead updates Reason to v6.5.1

[drez]

@drez --> well, maybe something you don't know about "audio tracks is a no-no". At that time everyone asked for audio tracks in reason. So why introducing them ONLY years later and ONLY because they had to merge record and reason due to financial failure? I don't find it very coherent... Regarding the dongle, you forgot to underline the key sentence: "we don't want to frustrate our users"...

But, again, english is not my language, so sorry for not grasping the shades... Traslated in italian is much simpler to understand the inchoerence in it.

I guess you don't understand English very well, as I stated it in as simple English as I could so you'd be able to follow it. Read my post over again for the answer and if you can't grasp it, then I guess you won't get it.

[Koshdukai]

I've had no trouble with Reason yet (except needing to close and reopen if I change control surfaces).

Have you tried Edit, Preferences, Control surfaces and uncheck/recheck "Use with Reason" check mark?

This will retry (re-init) the connection to that control surface.

[myrna]

@drez --> well, maybe something you don't know about "audio tracks is a no-no". At that time everyone asked for audio tracks in reason. So why introducing them ONLY years later and ONLY because they had to merge record and reason due to financial failure? I don't find it very coherent... Regarding the dongle, you forgot to underline the key sentence: "we don't want to frustrate our users"...

But, again, english is not my language, so sorry for not grasping the shades... Traslated in italian is much simpler to understand the inchoerence in it.

I guess you don't understand English very well, as I stated it in as simple English as I could so you'd be able to follow it. Read my post over again for the answer and if you can't grasp it, then I guess you won't get it.

what i've understood, as a non english speaker, is that you are "desperately" trying to find a way to justify that incoherence with sofisms and interpretations, like "yes, but you see... here he said for now... for now does not mean never" etc. In italian the sense of what they claimed is much clearer, there is no need to "translate the shades of meaning". But, surely, i am a simple mind

[drez]

what i've understood, as a non english speaker, is that you are "desperately" trying to find a way to justify that incoherence with sofisms and interpretations, like "yes, but you see... here he said for now... for now does not mean never" etc. In italian the sense of what they claimed is much clearer, there is no need to "translate the shades of meaning". But, surely, i am a simple mind

...but his native tongue is Swedish, not English. Apparently it means the same in Swedish as it does in English.

Its pretty obvious in any language but Italian, I guess

[myrna]

what i've understood, as a non english speaker, is that you are "desperately" trying to find a way to justify that incoherence with sofisms and interpretations, like "yes, but you see... here he said for now... for now does not mean never" etc. In italian the sense of what they claimed is much clearer, there is no need to "translate the shades of meaning". But, surely, i am a simple mind

...but his native tongue is Swedish, not English. Apparently it means the same in Swedish as it does in English.

Its pretty obvious in any language but Italian, I guess

well, your "argument" means the same in every language: it is called "take a piece of conversation, change inferences, cheat your interlocutor with such sofisms and rethoric tricks and illude yourself you have a truth". Romans taught that centuries ago

[liquidsound]

what i've understood, as a non english speaker, is that you are "desperately" trying to find a way to justify that incoherence with sofisms and interpretations, like "yes, but you see... here he said for now... for now does not mean never" etc. In italian the sense of what they claimed is much clearer, there is no need to "translate the shades of meaning". But, surely, i am a simple mind

...but his native tongue is Swedish, not English. Apparently it means the same in Swedish as it does in English.

Its pretty obvious in any language but Italian, I guess

well, your "argument" means the same in every language: it is called "take a piece of conversation, change inferences, cheat your interlocutor with such sofisms and rethoric tricks and illude yourself you have a truth". Romans taught that centuries ago

They still do..... Silvio....

[drez]

well, your "argument" means the same in every language: it is called "take a piece of conversation, change inferences, cheat your interlocutor with such sofisms and rethoric tricks and illude yourself you have a truth". Romans taught that centuries ago

Myrna, I quoted the text from your post about what the two PH guys said. I'm not changing inferences. It's self explanatory, really. But I've been reading English for almost 40 years, so I do have that advantage. Maybe your ability to read English is a barrier as well as your ability to speak it? I can see where that would be difficult as well.

Maybe you could start posting in Italian and leave the translation up to us?

Edit...thread crossed.

The 6.5.1 update went fine for me, but I didn't see any issues 6.5 had (32bit plugins i think) so it didn't do anything noticeable on my system. Has anyone else that actually HAS 6.5 seen a difference between the two?

[myrna]

i don't think one has to be mother-tongue to understand that in 2003 they had a CLEAR VIEW about Reason ("putting audio tracks is a no-no: we don't want to make a recorder out of reason" and "no dongle, we don't want to frustrate our users").

Now, if you mean: "well, it was 9 years ago, things have changed", i understand. But the question is not this. The question is: WHY and WHEN.

So: in Italy "coerente" ("coherent") is a term indicating someone who believes in something and his actions and words reflect this belief, in SPACE and in TIME.
Maybe in english there is another word? I mean, inchoerence is not a crime. I just realize that they've changed their mind about Reason in 9 years. They did no kill anyone (... I hope ). I just wonder WHY and WHEN.

What's your problem? You read "well, for now we cannot put audio tracks in reason, the technology is still green, but as soon as we can, maybe in five years, we will do that for sure" or "well, we don't want to frustrate our users with dongle, but you know, in 2012 we will change our mind about that, because piracy is a big problem"

I don't read that, sorry. I just read what they claimed in 2003 and what Reason has become NOWADAYS.

[drez]

I just read what they claimed in 2003 and what Reason has become NOWADAYS.

Its become exACTLY what they said it would back in 2003. Your inability to discern the text on that page from what you wish it says to what it actually says is irrelevant. If anything it was prophetic to a vision the company carried out to a tee.

So do you have anything to contribute to the thread title or no? The thread title is "Propellerheads Updates Reason to 6.5.1". Is there anything that you can say that has anything to do with this topic? Re Read the OP and go from there. Its a listing of the changelog. Can you expound on the release of 6.5.1 in comparison to 6.5? Did you notice a difference?

[myrna]

Its become exACTLY what they said it would back in 2003. Did you notice a difference?

NO... really, once it was a strawberry, nowadays it's a banana... but it's always fruit, ok... you are right. You are COMPLETELY, right

[puzzlefactory]

i don't think one has to be mother-tongue to understand that in 2003 they had a CLEAR VIEW about Reason ("putting audio tracks is a no-no: we don't want to make a recorder out of reason" and "no dongle, we don't want to frustrate our users").

No, that's not what was said. They said that audio tracks were a no-no at that time and that they didn't want to frustrate users with copy protection which was instantly crackable.

It's these extra bits of the sentences that make all the difference to the overall meaning of the statements.

[IncarnateX]

Buhuuuu....sob...they told us that there would be no audio tracks in Reason...buhuuu...THEY DID, THEY DID, THEY DID!

[myrna]

So do you have anything to contribute to the thread title or no? The thread title is "Propellerheads Updates Reason to 6.5.1". Is there anything that you can say that has anything to do with this topic?

yes, of course:

[EnochLight]

Personally I was very happy with audio tracks, and their timestretch is without doubt one of the best I've heard. My point is simply that PH keep doing U-Turns, which is just disconcerting in terms of taking seriously much of what they now say.

Yeah, me too. I'm quite impressed with their timestretch. I've yet to hear it done better.

I think it's safe to say that all companies have to change in order to evolve, in order to survive. Despite what PH may have eluded to in the past that they may not do this or that, at the end of the day, they needed to try something to stay relevant. Audio recording and Rack Extensions placate an immense part of their user base, and it allows them to keep selling software. They took a risk with Record, realized it was a poor choice, and rectified it by putting it in in their flagship product where it should have went to begin with. Can't blame a gal for try'n, though!

Back on topic, I didn't experience any of the issues people had with 6.5 on 32-bit OS. I'm 64-bit and things seemed to hum right along. Good to see they were able to get a fix out in such short notice, though.

[h2ogun99]

So do you have anything to contribute to the thread title or no? The thread title is "Propellerheads Updates Reason to 6.5.1". Is there anything that you can say that has anything to do with this topic?

Well, learned what "sophism" means.