Reason 9.5 – VST in Reason

[pquenin]

I expecting many crashes with VST's ...

Rethinking about all the "PH acquired by the rich guys" i've imagined it's gone something like this

Money guy: what is your number one request from users?
PH guy: well... they ask about VSTs support but...
Money guy: and why you don't have it?
PH Guy: ehm...
Money Guy: Add those damn STD or how it's called. Now.
PH Guy: (oh fuck)... ok

about the part of money I THOUGHT EXACTLY THE SAME THING AHAHAHHA. Sense of practical business... [emoji16][emoji16][emoji16]

Inviato dal mio SM-G925F utilizzando Tapatalk

Funny because It's something that also came to my mind... We can expect more "incredible" things in the future...

[QVprod]

they should have pushed way further into the direction where reason is already good at instead of using resources to catch up to other platforms strengths.

But they did. What other DAW allows CV control of VSTs? There are now even more things that can be done in Reason that can't be done elsewhere.

CV is basically the equivalent of another daws macro controls, or in the instance of live of bitwig, their entire suite of lfos/envs/etc. Its just either an on/off or 0-127 value which is the same thing those other daws do. Its just a different way to think about the same thing that you've been able to do for a long time in alot of daws.

The one thing reason has that's different is CV outs from env/lfo's of specific instruments/effects, but you could mock up something similar using a daws built in modulators

It's not the same. Macro controls would be more similar to a combinator. CV control in Reason is most comparable to automation except without having to draw in or record midi curves. Yes other daws have modulators, but as you mentioned, the level of control isn't the same.

[Electric-Metal]

loop syncing and match the grid to tempo, Dr Wav slicer, Automation curves, Audio tracks external managemt options, freeze track, automation curves, more players, Thor 2.0, Malstrom waveform loading.. etc.etc

And let's not forget about automation curves

[Oquasec]

thor can get alotta new oscs also.

[Ostermilk]

Anyone else more excited about PDC than VST support? I remember it was not too long ago when someone from their team claimed it would be impossible to implement PDC. v9.5 is truly a case of the impossible coming to reality!

I remember all that talk too how it couldn't be done.

It still can't be done in various scenario's because of the free routing. Say if you had 8 devices with different processing latency times going into for example a bunch of audio combiner/splitters or a line mixer, how would you compensate for that when the resultant end to end signal path varies at its origin? That's just one example. I reckon it would be impossible to implement it to deal with every routing setup you can do in Reason.

I wouldn't worry though as it will be taken care of where the routing is more like a conventional DAW. i.e most scenarios where PDC will be useful, according to the blurb I've read about it so far anyway. The way it is being implemented will save a lot of time AFAICT.

Don't forget you can still use Normen's VMG-01 (which is now free) if the PDC doesn't cut it for you somewhere back down a tangled line that you have setup.

[Gorgon]

I expecting many crashes with VST's ...

Was it not exact the "Reason" why we had no VST implementation ? Is the ultra stable Reason time over ?

From https://www.propellerheads.se/reason-95

"What about stability? Will Reason be less stable now?
We've implemented a limited crash protection system for VSTs that means we attempt to detect crashes in the VST and prevent the plugin from crashing Reason. Since VST plugins are third-party code, it is still possible to experience problems with plugins. Keep in mind that our VST support in Reason in itself doesn't make the application less stable if you don't have or use any VST plugins."


For my experience, most problems with VST stability comes from the host (especially in the Live 8 era) or from pirated vsts.

---------

I'm happy for serum, some kontakt libraries and fabfilter... except that, i didn't miss anything on reason :p.... but anyway is a good and REALLY unexpected news


----------


Rethinking about all the "PH acquired by the rich guys" i've imagined it's gone something like this

Money guy: what is your number one request from users?
PH guy: well... they ask about VSTs support but...
Money guy: and why you don't have it?
PH Guy: ehm...
Money Guy: Add those damn STD or how it's called. Now.
PH Guy: (oh fuck)... ok

about the part of money I THOUGHT EXACTLY THE SAME THING AHAHAHHA. Sense of practical business... [emoji16][emoji16][emoji16]

Inviato dal mio SM-G925F utilizzando Tapatalk

This is just stupid. You can't just pull VST support out of your sleeve in a few months. They've been working on this for over a year, at least.

[WongoTheSane]

I wonder if Reason Essentials will support VSTs too ???

Yes it will.

[ezelkow1]

Anyone else more excited about PDC than VST support? I remember it was not too long ago when someone from their team claimed it would be impossible to implement PDC. v9.5 is truly a case of the impossible coming to reality!

I remember all that talk too how it couldn't be done.

It still can't be done in various scenario's because of the free routing. Say if you had 8 devices with different processing latency times going into for example a bunch of audio combiner/splitters or a line mixer, how would you compensate for that when the resultant end to end signal path varies at its origin? That's just one example. I reckon it would be impossible to implement it to deal with every routing setup you can do in Reason.

I wouldn't worry though as it will be taken care of where the routing is more like a conventional DAW. i.e most scenarios where PDC will be useful, according to the blurb I've read about it so far anyway. The way it is being implemented will save a lot of time AFAICT.

Don't forget you can still use Normen's VMG-01 (which is now free) if the PDC doesn't cut it for you somewhere back down a tangled line that you have setup.

In that case you find max delay at the combiner/splitter and adjust at that point, delaying inputs up to the max, basically exactly what props stated in their press release:
Some effects in a signal chain will introduce delay in the timing. With the delay compensation on, Reason will calculate the total delay in each signal path and adjust the timing of each discrete signal path accordingly, to assure perfectly timed, phase correct playback

The only place you cannot account for PDC is the same in every daw, feedback loops. Its the same reason ableton warns you that if you setup a feedback path say from track1->send->track1 then you will lose PDC. So I would expect the same in reason. In almost every scenario PDC will work except if you route something to a splitter and then back into that device again

[ejanuska]

Well this is one way of getting Kontakt content into Reason.

So 8 CVs in to the new VST device? Does that mean maybe a Combinator 2.0 with 8 dials and inputs is around the corner?

That would be cool.

[pquenin]

I don't think VST support is something complex, I'm sure it's pretty basic stuff. PDC is far more complex.

[Exowildebeest]

I expecting many crashes with VST's ...

Was it not exact the "Reason" why we had no VST implementation ? Is the ultra stable Reason time over ?

From https://www.propellerheads.se/reason-95

"What about stability? Will Reason be less stable now?
We've implemented a limited crash protection system for VSTs that means we attempt to detect crashes in the VST and prevent the plugin from crashing Reason. Since VST plugins are third-party code, it is still possible to experience problems with plugins. Keep in mind that our VST support in Reason in itself doesn't make the application less stable if you don't have or use any VST plugins."


For my experience, most problems with VST stability comes from the host (especially in the Live 8 era) or from pirated vsts.

---------

I'm happy for serum, some kontakt libraries and fabfilter... except that, i didn't miss anything on reason :p.... but anyway is a good and REALLY unexpected news


----------


Rethinking about all the "PH acquired by the rich guys" i've imagined it's gone something like this

Money guy: what is your number one request from users?
PH guy: well... they ask about VSTs support but...
Money guy: and why you don't have it?
PH Guy: ehm...
Money Guy: Add those damn STD or how it's called. Now.
PH Guy: (oh fuck)... ok

about the part of money I THOUGHT EXACTLY THE SAME THING AHAHAHHA. Sense of practical business... [emoji16][emoji16][emoji16]

Inviato dal mio SM-G925F utilizzando Tapatalk

This is just stupid. You can't just pull VST support out of your sleeve in a few months. They've been working on this for over a year, at least.

I suspect that about two years ago, they saw that after the growth of Reason with RE's, that the growth was stagnating. At the same time, the RE platform matured. Now that it's no longer a danger to RE's, and the most obvious way to start growing again, VST's can be introduced.

I wouldn't be surprised if the PH shop starts selling VST's at some point as well. They might want to build a huge music making platform... Verdane must have known this was coming of course, seeing potential.

[Ostermilk]

Anyone else more excited about PDC than VST support? I remember it was not too long ago when someone from their team claimed it would be impossible to implement PDC. v9.5 is truly a case of the impossible coming to reality!

I remember all that talk too how it couldn't be done.

It still can't be done in various scenario's because of the free routing. Say if you had 8 devices with different processing latency times going into for example a bunch of audio combiner/splitters or a line mixer, how would you compensate for that when the resultant end to end signal path varies at its origin? That's just one example. I reckon it would be impossible to implement it to deal with every routing setup you can do in Reason.

I wouldn't worry though as it will be taken care of where the routing is more like a conventional DAW. i.e most scenarios where PDC will be useful, according to the blurb I've read about it so far anyway. The way it is being implemented will save a lot of time AFAICT.

Don't forget you can still use Normen's VMG-01 (which is now free) if the PDC doesn't cut it for you somewhere back down a tangled line that you have setup.

In that case you find max delay at the combiner/splitter and adjust at that point, delaying inputs up to the max, basically exactly what props stated in their press release:
Some effects in a signal chain will introduce delay in the timing. With the delay compensation on, Reason will calculate the total delay in each signal path and adjust the timing of each discrete signal path accordingly, to assure perfectly timed, phase correct playback

The only place you cannot account for PDC is the same in every daw, feedback loops. Its the same reason ableton warns you that if you setup a feedback path say from track1->send->track1 then you will lose PDC

Yes but in that scenario you'd have to take into account the maximum delay and compensate each step of each device in the chain rather than the end to end result of each main mixer channel. And that's just for the simplest scenario say 6 devices would need to be calculated before they go into a line mixer, compensated there and then again between each subsequent device where again they could be split into different amounts, you might then automate something to turn off that is currently giving you the highest figure and switch on something that has even more latency on the same channel. I hadn't even gone into the signal looping capabilites which could happen at any point down the line, in order to demonstrate simply how that it in itself isn't a trivial task. The word 'total' in the props press release on it is the key one as you can have infinite number of devices wired up and calculating the max between each one and not the total on the fly would certainly not be trivial.

So anywhere that a max total can be reliably arrived at sure PDC will work fine.

Sign up for the beta if you want to learn how it's going to be implemented, as there's a post by the Dev's which explains how it is going to work, and why it won't in some cases.

[Gorgon]

I suspect that about two years ago, they saw that after the growth of Reason with RE's, that the growth was stagnating. At the same time, the RE platform matured. Now that it's no longer a danger to RE's, and the most obvious way to start growing again, VST's can be introduced.

I wouldn't be surprised if the PH shop starts selling VST's at some point as well. They might want to build a huge music making platform... Verdane must have known this was coming of course, seeing potential.

Verdane would never have bought them if they wouldn't be doing this.

[pjeudy]

VSTs in Reason is a strange decision, I think the RE format will be less and less supported. PDC is certainly mandatory to run VSTs in a DAW but it can introduce some bugs, because it's a complex thing, there can be problems when looping things for example...
But I think Propellerheads have made this decision because they plan to release VSTs...

I don't think so. I think the RE market will be focused on interesting devices that can be used in Reason only, instead of porting and imitating existing VST's. The VST's can be used now inside Reason so the RE's can be focused on completely different things, such as interesting modulation devices.

The way I see it now (And keep in mind that I don't fully have a clear picture of all this VST in REASON stuff) VST's in REASON Will almost KILL if not kill the RE market. The Hype over VST devices is real in the VST world...and the VST influence is not to be underestimated, just ask Propellerheads

....and when ever there's a trade show or a place where dev gather to announce there up coming VST devices, that Hype will over shadow many,many RE that can't get peoples eyes to open wide with excitement. Also what's to stop a VST developer to create a utilities device that can compete if not surpass what ever utilities Rack Extension SDK built device can?

Again I'm not clear on what this VST in REASON thing will mean but....there are good free VST devices that might now compete with any 9$ dollars RE SDK built devices.
And Why would any developer bother developing with the limited REASON SDK? Why not build with a VST SDK and OPEN it in REASON.

Sure I understand that an RE dev can integrate there devices to go deeper into the modulation aspect of REASON...but that will still have to compete against possible other devices that can get close to those built RE devices with the added benefit of WHAT THEY CAN DO WITH VST SDK.

For example OchenK Glitch has all the CV you might need to glitch a sound and it's well integrated with REASON since it was built for REASON....I bought it and loved it...but If a new REASON user sees OchenK Built for Reason Glitch devices against Izotopes Studder Edit...why in gods name would you go for OchenK glitch? just for the few added CV abilities? because it's cheaper? why not wait for Studder Edit to go on sale.

Sure there might be a few RE devs left but to me I don't need every single parameters on a VST device to be CV controlled...if they are cool, if not...then not a deal beaker. I think that REASON users expect that there devices can be controlled by CV at a 100% but with the older and curent VST we shouldn't expect that...maybe in the future that can be changed ..But we now have Studder Edit,WAVES Plugins in REASON ...and maybe even FABFILTER...yea..REASON users will quickly adjust to limited CV options with those device once they get there hands on plugins like Fabfilter Pro-q ..that PRO-Q will kill my long time RE favorite Synapse GQ-7. Good day for Musicians Not so good for Rack Extension only developers.

[Abstrax]

It might have been mentioned in this sea of emotion we call a thread, but can we drop VSTs into combinators? That's the make or break detail for me.

[chimp_spanner]

It might have been mentioned in this sea of emotion we call a thread, but can we drop VSTs into combinators? That's the make or break detail for me.

Yes They work inside Combinators, and with player devices also.

[Abstrax]

It might have been mentioned in this sea of emotion we call a thread, but can we drop VSTs into combinators? That's the make or break detail for me.

Yes They work inside Combinators, and with player devices also.

OMG this is great news thx. The possibilites!

[raymondh]

hahaha funny!

[chimp_spanner]

The way I see it now (And keep in mind that I don't fully have a clear picture of all this VST in REASON stuff) VST's in REASON Will almost KILL if not kill the RE market. The Hype over VST devices is real in the VST world...and the VST influence is not to be underestimated, just ask Propellerheads

....and when ever there's a trade show or a place where dev gather to announce there up coming VST devices, that Hype will over shadow many,many RE that can't get peoples eyes to open wide with excitement. Also what's to stop a VST developer to create a utilities device that can compete if not surpass what ever utilities Rack Extension SDK built device can?

I think like I was saying in another reply, RE developers have had a monopoly on new instruments and effects - obviously not through their choosing, but, that's the way it's been. So to take OchenK for example; I love the A-Series modular racks. There's nothing else really like them outside of the Blamsoft stuff which, IMO, is a bit too complex. I really just want some simple, straightforward, visually streamlined Eurorack style goodies to play with and A-Series scratches that itch. BUT, the envelopes are weird. There's no option to choose between legato or retrigger. The oscillators get a bit weird at high rates. And there's approximately zero chance of that ever being rectified. Dude's straight up disappeared. Now maybe there are reasons for that; maybe REs just aren't profitable enough to warrant a smaller developer continuing to support their product. But my point is that I've had to like it or lump it because, until now, there's been no competition and no alternative, outside of whatever else the RE dev community decides to release next.

I love the RE format, and I've made some great music with the devices we have. But I have also felt like I'm being held hostage by the format to an extent. I can't just go out there and find a great new sound. I have to take what I'm given. And I'm not attacking devs for that btw. Like I said, I appreciate that for some it's probably just not cost effective.

So IMO things can go one of two ways. Either RE as a format stagnates and people veer more towards VST. Or, the user base for Reason becomes that much bigger that suddenly there's some real good money in coding for Reason again, and the challenge will be to create something that all these new users want to buy over and above the VSTs they already have. I think that kind of competition and impetus is healthy. But, that's just my opinion. Obviously!

[ezelkow1]

Anyone else more excited about PDC than VST support? I remember it was not too long ago when someone from their team claimed it would be impossible to implement PDC. v9.5 is truly a case of the impossible coming to reality!

I remember all that talk too how it couldn't be done.

It still can't be done in various scenario's because of the free routing. Say if you had 8 devices with different processing latency times going into for example a bunch of audio combiner/splitters or a line mixer, how would you compensate for that when the resultant end to end signal path varies at its origin? That's just one example. I reckon it would be impossible to implement it to deal with every routing setup you can do in Reason.

I wouldn't worry though as it will be taken care of where the routing is more like a conventional DAW. i.e most scenarios where PDC will be useful, according to the blurb I've read about it so far anyway. The way it is being implemented will save a lot of time AFAICT.

Don't forget you can still use Normen's VMG-01 (which is now free) if the PDC doesn't cut it for you somewhere back down a tangled line that you have setup.

In that case you find max delay at the combiner/splitter and adjust at that point, delaying inputs up to the max, basically exactly what props stated in their press release:
Some effects in a signal chain will introduce delay in the timing. With the delay compensation on, Reason will calculate the total delay in each signal path and adjust the timing of each discrete signal path accordingly, to assure perfectly timed, phase correct playback

The only place you cannot account for PDC is the same in every daw, feedback loops. Its the same reason ableton warns you that if you setup a feedback path say from track1->send->track1 then you will lose PDC

So anywhere that a max total can be reliably arrived at sure PDC will work fine.

Sign up for the beta if you want to learn how it's going to be implemented, as there's a post by the Dev's which explains how it is going to work, and why it won't in some cases.

Exactly, that was my point. There are some instances in which you cannot get a total, such as feedback loops and a few others. In those instances you will lose PDC. In any normal instance you're just totalling up delay time through a signal path and keeping track of a delay adjusted tempo value to feed to tempo synced events along the way.

Reason is not some special flower in this regard, many daws can come up with the exact same crazy routing setups that you can do in reason by splitting, combining, pulling signals from different parts of the audio path at will, automating devices on/off. Ableton can do all that stuff just as easy as reason can albeit with a different interface. They all have the same pitfalls that you cannot compensate for and those that you can

[Goriila Texas]

Anyone else more excited about PDC than VST support? I remember it was not too long ago when someone from their team claimed it would be impossible to implement PDC. v9.5 is truly a case of the impossible coming to reality!

I remember all that talk too how it couldn't be done.

It still can't be done in various scenario's because of the free routing. Say if you had 8 devices with different processing latency times going into for example a bunch of audio combiner/splitters or a line mixer, how would you compensate for that when the resultant end to end signal path varies at its origin? That's just one example. I reckon it would be impossible to implement it to deal with every routing setup you can do in Reason.

I wouldn't worry though as it will be taken care of where the routing is more like a conventional DAW. i.e most scenarios where PDC will be useful, according to the blurb I've read about it so far anyway. The way it is being implemented will save a lot of time AFAICT.

Don't forget you can still use Normen's VMG-01 (which is now free) if the PDC doesn't cut it for you somewhere back down a tangled line that you have setup.

Cool

[Kalm]

They answered my concerns with this. Its still bae. It looks so SLICK

[Oquasec]

It might have been mentioned in this sea of emotion we call a thread, but can we drop VSTs into combinators? That's the make or break detail for me.

Yes They work inside Combinators, and with player devices also.

...Must resume my reason 5 drilling for when I get 9.

Whoops the emi module is for external devices and EXE plugins whoops.

[Ostermilk]

The way I see it now (And keep in mind that I don't fully have a clear picture of all this VST in REASON stuff) VST's in REASON Will almost KILL if not kill the RE market. The Hype over VST devices is real in the VST world...and the VST influence is not to be underestimated, just ask Propellerheads

....and when ever there's a trade show or a place where dev gather to announce there up coming VST devices, that Hype will over shadow many,many RE that can't get peoples eyes to open wide with excitement. Also what's to stop a VST developer to create a utilities device that can compete if not surpass what ever utilities Rack Extension SDK built device can?

Again I'm not clear on what this VST in REASON thing will mean but....there are good free VST devices that might now compete with any 9$ dollars RE SDK built devices.
And Why would any developer bother developing with the limited REASON SDK? Why not build with a VST SDK and OPEN it in REASON.

Sure I understand that an RE dev can integrate there devices to go deeper into the modulation aspect of REASON...but that will still have to compete against possible other devices that can get close to those built RE devices with the added benefit of WHAT THEY CAN DO WITH VST SDK.

For example OchenK Glitch has all the CV you might need to glitch a sound and it's well integrated with REASON since it was built for REASON....I bought it and loved it...but If a new REASON user sees OchenK Built for Reason Glitch devices against Izotopes Studder Edit...why in gods name would you go for OchenK glitch? just for the few added CV abilities? because it's cheaper? why not wait for Studder Edit to go on sale.

Sure there might be a few RE devs left but to me I don't need every single parameters on a VST device to be CV controlled...if they are cool, if not...then not a deal beaker. I think that REASON users expect that there devices can be controlled by CV at a 100% but with the older and curent VST we shouldn't expect that...maybe in the future that can be changed ..But we now have Studder Edit,WAVES Plugins in REASON ...and maybe even FABFILTER...yea..REASON users will quickly adjust to limited CV options with those device once they get there hands on plugins like Fabfilter Pro-q ..that PRO-Q will kill my long time RE favorite Synapse GQ-7. Good day for Musicians Not so good for Rack Extension only developers.

Having said all that there's still some RE's I want and certainly a few that you couldn't prise from my cold dead hands.

I'll just say Jiggery Pokery at this point, he's got a killer chorus that nothing in the VST realm quite cuts it for me in the same way and it's sensibly priced, same for his delay line, lots of couldn't do without utilities and some pocket money priced IDT organs which are fantastic. JP is just one example of the indie developers that for me have made the RE format very appealing aside from the glare of the bewildering rake of VST 'fabulators' that come out every week.

The little gizmo's and gadgets that are not that much in themselves but make the whole Reason ecosystem flow with ideas and possibilities that I wouldn't have even thought without the existence of such things, this stuff drives me deeper into the music making rather than being some uber shiny chattel that I covet one week and toss aside the next.

This aspect of Rack Extensions is the one that I hope endures, I also hope that the VST thing purges the store of the opportunistic that would cash in on Reason's previously closed format and 'captive' audience, I shall not name names here but save to say I just picked up a premium convolution reverb with a matching 5 Gb library for the princely sum of $24, and a DAW bundle style set of perfectly adequate mxing tools including a 6 band EQ and 7 other tasty bread and butter tools from ToneBoosters for €20. I'm looking forward to putting those to good use in the Rack.

The RE format is dead, long live the RE format!!!

[miscend]

I reckon (please send us your reckons)

I reckon, VST support must have been overwhelmingly the biggest feature request for Reason, for YEARS. For that reason alone, this step makes sense.

With regard to REs, I reckon: Maybe this IS a bit of an admission of failure, insomuch as maybe the RE feature hasn't turned out to be what PH needed it to be (money-spinner? Closed-garden utopia to appease those clamouring for plugin support? Other?)
But that's okay. It's totally fine to try out an idea and then move on if it doesn't work out. It's more than fine, in fact - it's the correct thing to do. (If you've invested heavily in REs, as I have, I can understand you might feel angry, but it's basically irrational ape anger - we've been using a program that we enjoy for years, and we made that decision based on what it was then.)

Maybe this isn't an admission of the failure of the RE format, but only an admission that the scope of REs isn't as broad as the VST world and never will be. I'll always prefer to have a device as a RE because of neatness, speed and routing. I can totally see them working side-by-side, and I think the "Come for the VST support, stay for the REs" point above is important - PH are going to get a LOT of new customers out of this. (We hope!)

I'm guessing they probably did a business study or some extensive market research. And found out the biggest reasons they were not gaining anymore market share (by gaining new users) and why some older users were not upgrading was the lack of VST plugin support. They were boxed into a corner, they had to open up and support industry standards in order to expand and grow.

I dunno if anyone has noticed but as of recently Propellerhead's have changed direction. They abandoned the closed garden wall philosophy and have started supporting open standards like Ableton link and opening up Allihoopa to other music applications. They are also now trying to port Reason to iOS.