COME ON PROPS...IT'S 2016...

[Ahornberg]

One thing I really miss, and I think it could be implemented rather easy, that when I double-click on a knob or slider, a tiny window pops up and I can enter a value by numbers.

[fieldframe]

I've been working on a Medium piece that I want to shop around (maybe to get picked up by a bigger digital music blog) that deals with some of this. The draft is here and I'd appreciate any thoughtful comments you might have.

I think you did a good job outlining where things are at. What I'd like is some more speculation about how Props would integrate VST (or AU) if they chose to do so. The way I see it happening is that Props creates a "rack," into which you could load VSTs. The rack would then be cabled into the main Reason rack, or perhaps slaved using the rewire protocol (which would have to be reimagined so that Reason clock can be the master instead of just the slave). In the former scenario, the VSTs would then run within Reason (as they do in other DAWs). In the latter, the VST rack would instead draw on CPU power and memory as if it were a separate program.

Just some ideas--there would obviously be a lot of issues to work out in either case.

It also occurs to me that someone could create this kind of thing independently of Props. Basically like soundflower but with a rack and optimized to work with Reason as seamlessly as possible.

Thanks. Interesting idea with a second rack - what do you see as the advantage of keeping the plugins separate from the main rack?

I always thought that if Propellerhead ever brought VST/AU to Reason, they would keep it super simple, even if it meant giving up a little bit of power. The External MIDI instrument seems like the perfect model for it: Just have a similar 1U device that has the necessary jacks on the back, and has a button to bring up the plugin's window (like how the spectrum analyzer button on a mix channel brings up the floating analyzer). I have a mockup that I put together around the time Reason 7 came out; I'll have to post it.

[kuhliloach]

No VST support is the only Reason I still use Reason: so I can load Reason and not use VST's. I really love what the screen looks like with no VST plug-ins on it. Sometimes I just close my eyes, because the backs of my eyelids also have NO VST's. Ah the beauty of it. There are other things in life which also have no VST's and these are equally as satisfying to me: such as water. Sometimes when Reason is running, I can't help but to think to myself how lucky I am to live in a world where no VST plug-ins appear, ever. I remember what they look like back from my Logic days: absolutely DISGUSTING. I'm so excited right now I might just have to make some music, without VST's of course.

[mreese80]

One thing I really miss, and I think it could be implemented rather easy, that when I double-click on a knob or slider, a tiny window pops up and I can enter a value by numbers.

Absolutely.

[mreese80]

I've been working on a Medium piece that I want to shop around (maybe to get picked up by a bigger digital music blog) that deals with some of this. The draft is here and I'd appreciate any thoughtful comments you might have.

I think you did a good job outlining where things are at. What I'd like is some more speculation about how Props would integrate VST (or AU) if they chose to do so. The way I see it happening is that Props creates a "rack," into which you could load VSTs. The rack would then be cabled into the main Reason rack, or perhaps slaved using the rewire protocol (which would have to be reimagined so that Reason clock can be the master instead of just the slave). In the former scenario, the VSTs would then run within Reason (as they do in other DAWs). In the latter, the VST rack would instead draw on CPU power and memory as if it were a separate program.

Just some ideas--there would obviously be a lot of issues to work out in either case.

It also occurs to me that someone could create this kind of thing independently of Props. Basically like soundflower but with a rack and optimized to work with Reason as seamlessly as possible.

Thanks. Interesting idea with a second rack - what do you see as the advantage of keeping the plugins separate from the main rack?

I always thought that if Propellerhead ever brought VST/AU to Reason, they would keep it super simple, even if it meant giving up a little bit of power. The External MIDI instrument seems like the perfect model for it: Just have a similar 1U device that has the necessary jacks on the back, and has a button to bring up the plugin's window (like how the spectrum analyzer button on a mix channel brings up the floating analyzer). I have a mockup that I put together around the time Reason 7 came out; I'll have to post it.

If props would make it really simple to use vsts with the EMI & allow us to freeze the midi to audio that would work for me. But it doesn't matter to me no more. Now I just use the mpc software, record wut I want, than I freeze the midi to audio & drag directly into reason. I don't rewire. I just set the tempo to match reasons. Simple solution for me now.

[martynx]

I don't want to see full VST integration but I'm sure Props could easily develop a VST wrapper that remained outside Reason but connected directly to the EMI. That wouldn't compromise Reason's stability and I think should suffice for most users.

[Gulale]

I don't want to see full VST integration but I'm sure Props could easily develop a VST wrapper that remained outside Reason but connected directly to the EMI. That wouldn't compromise Reason's stability and I think should suffice for most users.

Actually, If they support Melodyne ARA, I don't see the reason not supporting VST and AU.

[fieldframe]

I don't want to see full VST integration but I'm sure Props could easily develop a VST wrapper that remained outside Reason but connected directly to the EMI. That wouldn't compromise Reason's stability and I think should suffice for most users.

With modern, multi-threaded application architectures, "outside" is relative, but yes, for all intents and purposes, I think a Reason VST/AU interface would probably be more isolated from the host than it is in some DAWs. In fact, I think the best of both worlds would simply be a VST/AU thread that doesn't even start until you create a host device in the rack. It would probably take a few extra seconds to load each time you create that device in the rack, but it would mean that, in essence, if you never use a VST in Reason, you'd never see any difference in Reason at all.

Also, I found the mockup I put together a couple of years ago:

http://i.imgur.com/zCrF2Js.png

Nice and simple, right? The big button at the right pops up the plugin's own window, which probably floats inside one of those dark gray overlay windows like the spectrum analyzer.

[zakalwe]

I don't want to see full VST integration but I'm sure Props could easily develop a VST wrapper that remained outside Reason but connected directly to the EMI. That wouldn't compromise Reason's stability and I think should suffice for most users.

just don't use VSTs then there's no problem.

arguing that implementing VST plugin hosting in reason causes stability issues is like arguing that EMI causes MIDI congestion.

[martynx]

I don't want to see full VST integration but I'm sure Props could easily develop a VST wrapper that remained outside Reason but connected directly to the EMI. That wouldn't compromise Reason's stability and I think should suffice for most users.

just don't use VSTs then there's no problem.

arguing that implementing VST plugin hosting in reason causes stability issues is like arguing that EMI causes MIDI congestion.

I don't use VST's because I work exclusively in Reason. Neither do I wish to use them, but I understand a lot of users do.

And I'm not arguing that VST plugin hosting in Reason would cause stability issues. Who knows? Not me.

[raccoonboy]

We should all start posting all the Ableton forums requesting support for Rack Extensions

[chk071]

We should all start posting all the Ableton forums requesting support for Rack Extensions

It seems as if many see VST as the superior format, thus don't grow tired of requesting support for it.

[raccoonboy]

We should all start posting all the Ableton forums requesting support for Rack Extensions

It seems as if many see VST as the superior format, thus don't grow tired of requesting support for it.

it's definitely not in my opinion. RE lacks in some ways, but it'll catch up. But the way it integrates is miles better. Although of course, I'm hoping in the future it will be a lot easier to port so that more VSTs come out in RE format.

[chk071]

Well, it probably is also due to all the stuff which is available as VST, and not as RE. Actually, i guess that's even the primary motivation for requesting VST support, not because it is a superior format.

[Ahornberg]

Well, it probably is also due to all the stuff which is available as VST, and not as RE. Actually, i guess that's even the primary motivation for requesting VST support, not because it is a superior format.

that's true

[zakalwe]

yeah it's just a practical thing. also, it doesn't matter if RE are technically better or not when they're functionally poorer and don't even integrate with reason properly in terms of automation selection, sample loading or pattern management.

it's a 4 year old format now, you'd think it would have come along a bit

[fieldframe]

We should all start posting all the Ableton forums requesting support for Rack Extensions

It seems as if many see VST as the superior format, thus don't grow tired of requesting support for it.

Framing this as "VST versus RE" has always been the wrong place to start.

VST/AU will always be better at some things, such as in-depth / multi-page UIs (the NN-XT was already at the limit of what the rack can support ten years ago). But RE will always be better at other things, such as ease of use (global undo, consistent preset browsing), and inter-device communication.

To grow as a product, Reason will eventually have to support VST/AU alongside RE.