Any news?

[Karim]

I've just finished designing the rear panel of something... quite special... which we'll be announcing shortly.

A new synth in the pipeline? [emoji1]

It does seem extremely slow on the RE front. It feels like we're ever so gradually grinding to a complete halt. There used to be a thread 'RE's released this month' or something along that line. I think it has stopped now. I can't remember the last time I saw that thread & it's not surprising given the release rate of RE's. Quite sad really Still, at least we've got Alihoopa!!

Sorry that synth is not possible - SDK limits us to rectangular devices...

Inviato dal mio GT-I9301I utilizzando Tapatalk

[eXode]

I agree at how cheap and useless the IDT "synth" market has become. I also hate that when you sort the rack extension shop by "synth", the IDTs are mixed into the results. they are two different leagues of devices, but for uninformed consumer, they look like equals. there is nothing about the labeling that says "THIS IS A GLORIFIED SAMPLER". I would be enraged if I was a real synth RE developer.

Sorry, I find these kind of statements to be bull shit to be honest. There are several instruments that are labelled as synths and that are based on digital waveforms in the hardware world.

If we start with the 'hybrids' there are PPG Wave, Prophet VS, Kawai K3, Waldorf Wave, Microwave, and the Korg DW6000/8000. Modern hybrids include DSI Evolver, Prophet 12, and Pro-2 to mention a few.

Then there are the purely digital synths such as the Korg Waveststion, Roland D50 and JD800, Waldorf Microwave 2/XT etc.

Quite frankly I think that this elitistic behavior needs to stop. A single user cannot speak for every customer in the shop, and as long as the customer is happy, inspired, and thinks the product sounds good - who are you (or I) to say that they are wrong?

However, I agree with Jiggery Pokery that price dumping/ridiculously low prices only hurts the market in the long run.

[PadShifta]

I agree at how cheap and useless the IDT "synth" market has become. I also hate that when you sort the rack extension shop by "synth", the IDTs are mixed into the results. they are two different leagues of devices, but for uninformed consumer, they look like equals. there is nothing about the labeling that says "THIS IS A GLORIFIED SAMPLER". I would be enraged if I was a real synth RE developer.

Sorry, I find these kind of statements to be bull shit to be honest. There are several instruments that are labelled as synths and that are based on digital waveforms in the hardware world.

If we start with the 'hybrids' there are PPG Wave, Prophet VS, Kawai K3, Waldorf Wave, Microwave, and the Korg DW6000/8000. Modern hybrids include DSI Evolver, Prophet 12, and Pro-2 to mention a few.

Then there are the purely digital synths such as the Korg Waveststion, Roland D50 and JD800, Waldorf Microwave 2/XT etc.

Quite frankly I think that this elitistic behavior needs to stop. You are not spesking for every customer in the shop, and as long as the customer is happy, inspired, and thinks the product sounds good - who are you (or anyone else) to say that they are wrong?

However, I agree with Jiggery Pokery that price dumping/ridiculously low prices only hurts the market in the long run.

Well spoken, sir!

[Lrbatiste]

[

Predator is my very First Re with Reason Essential 1.5. really hi class synth and I love it. also other synths too. because all of the developers putting there hard effort to make them. i respect that, coz i can't make them or I'm not rich enough to buy a real synthesizer. ( like mini moog or DX 7).
reason only i mention Antidote, it is the only one Re Like Sylenth1(one of top 5 vst).
i like to see native instruments, fabfiler, waves, like pro works in PH shop

Propellerheads strategy has led this platform to become sort of "hobbyistic". But that's OK, I like indie stuff. it has a different appeal and at least it works a lot more pleasant than an obnoxious VST system.

Some interesting comments there.

I think there are plenty of very high-end synthesizers in Reason now, providing different tools for different genres, and different methods of usage. Yes, there are still some gaps: something like Serum is definitely on many people's wish-list, but that's still not possible. But there's no such thing as "pro" or "amateur". Plenty of pro photographers have used Polaroid. Everything is a tool for someone, somewhere.

However, that's a really interesting point above about the "hobbyistic" nature of Reason.

A growing problem that Reason now has is that the preponderance of cheaply-sold IDT sample players posing as synths (typically named by picking a random element from the Periodic Table), which as one of my esteemed fellow-devs pointed out to me, seriously risks devaluing the RE marketplace, for a very small, and generally short-term gain. Now, someone else pointed out that of course not everyone can afford the more expensive synths, and that a $9 "synth" still offers something useful at the lower end of the market. That's a valid point and I cannot disagree with it from a consumer standpoint. But from a developer standpoint it's incredibly naive. There are diminishing returns there. A $9 synth can't be put on sale. So when the initial 6-week sales period is over, that device is pretty much dead in the water from an income perspective, so the dev has to repackage it in a new format and pretend it's a new thing for another nine bucks. But all those $9–19 synths stack up and take money out the market that some people might have saved for a better, dedicated synth with all the advantages that confers. People complain there are not enough high-end synths, yet in VST land, people happily pay £200 for an Arturia product; our own HS, for example, is easily a match in terms of quality for any softsynth Arturia ever produced, but try to charge that amount in Reason and it would be like getting pubic hairs ripped off, one curl at a time! So the net result is that it becomes even harder to make a return on the kind of synths people actually want, as devs find they can't sell, and do a runner. Really, it's only RP who's stuck around from the wider DAW world, and at least tried to do some Reason-exclusive stuff as well.

So while IDT "synths" are tolerated—and not unexpected—it really wasn't what IDT was created for: it was devised primarily for sampled instruments, but particularly to encourage Kontakt instrument conversions. The problem is that those who have done Kontakt>IDT conversions have all been flawed by being rushed or through a general lack of understanding of the Reason format (just as I suspect I'd have the same issue going IDT>Kontakt ), got their pubes scorched on the forums and in the PropShop, and then seem to have done a runner. ProjectSAM's failure, for example, to set the correct graphic size (resulting in blurred text), then altering the instrument order, is a good case study.

edit: I must appreciate the amusing and remarkable irony of another being announced in the time it took me to write that missive!

Awesome response and explanation. I think the synths are great in the hand of a talented and knowledgeable user. I constantly get oohs and aahs from users of othe platforms when I go to work in reason. I think the real issue is we're all waiting for and hoping reason 9 comes soon and has the requested features we've all asked for.

[joeyluck]

Nicely said, eXode.

Further more, on the topic of synths...
Here are a couple of definitions as a reminder to folks of the meaning:

Synthesize
[sin-thuh-sahyz]
verb (used with object), synthesized, synthesizing.
to form (a material or abstract entity) by combining parts or elements

Synthesizer
[sin-thuh-sahy-zer]
any of various electronic, sometimes portable consoles or modules, usually computerized, for creating, modifying, and combining tones or reproducing the sounds of musical instruments by controlling voltage patterns, operated by means of keyboards, joysticks, sliders, or knobs.

[riemac]

I've just finished designing the rear panel of something... quite special... which we'll be announcing shortly.

A new synth in the pipeline?

It seems, that it isn't a synth, look at the Picture from the AirRaid Audio Twitter page.

For me it looks like a filter with self-oscillation. But a synth from AirRaid would be also very welcome. I think they got already a lot of moduls which are required for a synth (lfo, filter, fx etc.).

[DLDTech]

I think the real issue is we're all waiting for and hoping reason 9 comes soon and has the requested features we've all asked for.

There's certainly a few features that most devs would like to see.. SDK2 was a bit disappointing to be honest - yes we got graphical screens, but done in a somewhat strange way that limits performance. There's a couple of features that PH could open up that would allow us to create some new interesting stuff.

[spacefarmer]

First thank You Noel and all the others for actual informations.

Very interesting to read all these different statements and views.
For the musician in me Reason is a great tool for composing and there are enough synths, "rompler", a sampler, effects etc. to create well sounding tracks if You know how to do.
Thor, Parsec, Oberon, Zero and the wonderful JPS Harmonic, to name my favorites, are great synths.
But I'm a addicted and interesred in sounddesign since the late seventies and so I am angry about the limitations for developers of RE.
It seems to be impossible to create instruments like iris2, alchemy...
And where are physical modelling synths (I know that Kong is able to...) and granularsynthesizers?
Where is a sampler with features like RCM, FDSP, Transformmultiplication?
Something like "Realrick" or "RealLPC" would be great for me - ok, these are not synthesizers,
but maybe a new IDT-project for Matt from JP?
And maybe, that I'm the only one, who is interested in these things.
And again: I love Reason, but as an amateur I can't understand the actual limitations
and why it is so difficult for PH to change that.

[lowpryo]

I agree at how cheap and useless the IDT "synth" market has become. I also hate that when you sort the rack extension shop by "synth", the IDTs are mixed into the results. they are two different leagues of devices, but for uninformed consumer, they look like equals. there is nothing about the labeling that says "THIS IS A GLORIFIED SAMPLER". I would be enraged if I was a real synth RE developer.

Sorry, I find these kind of statements to be bull shit to be honest. There are several instruments that are labelled as synths and that are based on digital waveforms in the hardware world.

If we start with the 'hybrids' there are PPG Wave, Prophet VS, Kawai K3, Waldorf Wave, Microwave, and the Korg DW6000/8000. Modern hybrids include DSI Evolver, Prophet 12, and Pro-2 to mention a few.

Then there are the purely digital synths such as the Korg Waveststion, Roland D50 and JD800, Waldorf Microwave 2/XT etc.

Quite frankly I think that this elitistic behavior needs to stop. A single user cannot speak for every customer in the shop, and as long as the customer is happy, inspired, and thinks the product sounds good - who are you (or I) to say that they are wrong?

However, I agree with Jiggery Pokery that price dumping/ridiculously low prices only hurts the market in the long run.

I'm sorry, was there something in my post that made you think I was trying to "speak for every customer in the shop"? I was pretty explicitly speaking in the first person. I don't know how I could have made it more clear besides littering it with the phrase "in my opinion", which is just redundant. sorry you so vehemently disagree, but it feels like you're speaking as if my opinion is invalid because other people have theirs. let's agree to disagree.

but besides that, all I'm asking for is a better way in the shop to differentiate the two products, because regardless of how blurry the lines are with the "synth" market in general, there is a very clear line between IDT and non-IDT rack extensions. and more clear information is always better for the customer, no?

[eXode]

and in regards to the discussion, I think it's a stretch to make a 1:1 comparison between IDT instruments and hardware wavetable synths. a hardware equivalent for the IDT would be like a generic sampler modules that companies buy, load their samples onto, and re-sell by marketing them as synths, and I would feel the same way about that.

Many hardware devices in the past shared the same chips (some were integrated filter, mix and VCA). The CEM and SSM IC's in particular were used for many different synthesizers and samplers. Some were purely analog while others were hybrid variants. Here's a list of CEM and SSM chips in synthesizers. The Emulator II, for instance, used the same filter as the Korg Mono/Poly, PolySix and the PPG Wave. So basically, many hardware companies have in some shape or form done exactly what you talk about. They bought a "generic" synthesizer module (chip) and then added their own analog, digital, or sample based oscillators.

For what it's worth, a sampler, esp when it offers filters and various modulators, falls under the definition of a synthesizer, a sample based synthesizer.

[eXode]

But besides that, all I'm asking for is a better way in the shop to differentiate the two products, because regardless of how blurry the lines are with the "synth" market in general, there is a very clear line between IDT and non-IDT rack extensions. and more clear information is always better for the customer, no?

We have 30 days of trial, and to reiterate what I wrote previously: The customer is happy, inspired, and thinks the product sounds good. Why would, or should anyone care about the means to that end (really)?

Also I'd like to point out that I have an inquisitive mind and am very driven by (my) logic. If you feel targeted in some way, it's not because I want to say that you're wrong, it's because I want to know how you came to your conclusions, regardless if we agree or not.

[lowpryo]

and in regards to the discussion, I think it's a stretch to make a 1:1 comparison between IDT instruments and hardware wavetable synths. a hardware equivalent for the IDT would be like a generic sampler modules that companies buy, load their samples onto, and re-sell by marketing them as synths, and I would feel the same way about that.

Many hardware devices in the past shared the same chips (some were integrated filter, mix and VCA). The CEM and SSM IC's in particular were used for many different synthesizers and samplers. Some were purely analog while others were hybrid variants. Here's a list of CEM and SSM chips in synthesizers. The Emulator II, for instance, used the same filter as the Korg Mono/Poly, PolySix and the PPG Wave. So basically, many hardware companies have in some shape or form done exactly what you talk about. They bought a "generic" synthesizer module (chip) and then added their own analog, digital, or sample based oscillators.

For what it's worth, a sampler, esp when it offers filters and various modulators, falls under the definition of a synthesizer, a sample based synthesizer.

yeah I actually thought about that after I posted it which is why I edited it out haha. I work in electronics hardware and I know how incestuous the supply chains can be. I still think there's a significant difference that makes them not very analogous, but I get what you mean

But besides that, all I'm asking for is a better way in the shop to differentiate the two products, because regardless of how blurry the lines are with the "synth" market in general, there is a very clear line between IDT and non-IDT rack extensions. and more clear information is always better for the customer, no?

We have 30 days of trial, and to reiterate what I wrote previously: The customer is happy, inspired, and thinks the product sounds good. Why would, or should anyone care about the means to that end (really)?

Also I'd like to point out that I have an inquisitive mind and am very driven by (my) logic. If you feel targeted in some way, it's not because I want to say that you're wrong, it's because I want to know how you came to your conclusions, regardless if we agree or not.

even before the trial process, an IDT-sorting option in the shop would improve navigation. IMO, in any online shop, the more options you can be given to reduce the amount of results available, the better. and non-IDT synths are typically (yes, not always) more expensive and have wider feature-sets. I can imagine some customers wanting these two types of devices differentiated before delving into descriptions and trials. at the very least, I would personally use it.

this can go back and forth with you asking "why?" and me asking "why not?", but there's a very clear logic behind my opinion.

[eXode]

Fair enough.

[Benedict]

I would be opposed to segregating the shop aside from anything but function as otherwise we are making statements analogous to people of a certain color or race being less capable or deserving. The results are all that count. I don't believe anyone could identify even half of the IDT we currently have in any mix where they aren't specified.

Besides common sense says that Props would be unlikely to put black marks against their own technology.

[Faastwalker]

I would be opposed to segregating the shop.

Agreed. An RE Apartheid is a ridiculous idea. What I'd like to see is the IDT tools be made more capable so that IDT RE's can have the same Audio / CV IO as regular RE's. Maybe this isn't possible? I don't know but it feels like a handicap on IDT RE's currently. Nothing wrong with them being sample based instruments. In any case people can TRY & BUY, or not, depending on what they think of them. Nothing wrong with IDT as far as I'm concerned apart from the CV I/O thing.

[joeyluck]

@lowpryo Maybe what you want is categories for synths? Because noting whether it was made with the IDT or not does not define or differentiate what it is.

There are sample-based instruments not made with the IDT. There are instruments made with the IDT that simply seek to be sample library players. Others made with or without the IDT can be sample-based synths. And if you read the description, you can reach that conclusion. The search function in the shop also works pretty well; such as searching for "fm."

But I do think more categories would be helpful, just no need to segregate things based on what was used to make them. Just the same as I don't need to know whether or not the developer created his/her GUI with 3D or 2D assets. 3D can look 2D and 2D can look 3D. And it's all the same once it's in the rack. I base my opinion of the GUI by looking at it.

Sample-based synthesis is synthesis and they all say whether or not they are sample-based in the descriptions.

[challism]

I think we should separate the REs in the shop based on the race of the developer. If an RE has more than one developer, and they are different races, then they shouldn't even be allowed in the shop. There will be no drinking from the same fountain, people, it's 1950!

colored-only-fountain-350.png (48.82 KiB) Viewed 1527 times

[Aquila]

I keep seeing the term IDT thrown about but I have no idea what it is. Can someone please clarify for me?

[rcbuse]

I keep seeing the term IDT thrown about but I have no idea what it is. Can someone please clarify for me?

Here is a quote from the IDT press release:

"The new Instrument Development Toolkit makes it possible for developers to easily build professional sample-based instruments without writing C++ code. Current Kontakt and NN-XT instrument designers can import their libraries into IDT, greatly accelerating the process of developing instruments. IDT’s vast built-in effect library, full-featured sampler engine, flexibility and powerful scripting language facilitate the creation of one-of-a-kind instruments."

[Aquila]

I keep seeing the term IDT thrown about but I have no idea what it is. Can someone please clarify for me?

Here is a quote from the IDT press release:

"The new Instrument Development Toolkit makes it possible for developers to easily build professional sample-based instruments without writing C++ code. Current Kontakt and NN-XT instrument designers can import their libraries into IDT, greatly accelerating the process of developing instruments. IDT’s vast built-in effect library, full-featured sampler engine, flexibility and powerful scripting language facilitate the creation of one-of-a-kind instruments."

Thankyou. That helps me understand what's going on now.

[lowpryo]

I would be opposed to segregating the shop aside from anything but function as otherwise we are making statements analogous to people of a certain color or race being less capable or deserving. The results are all that count. I don't believe anyone could identify even half of the IDT we currently have in any mix where they aren't specified.

Besides common sense says that Props would be unlikely to put black marks against their own technology.

okay then, function it is. let's sort them by devices that do not have CV input/output or extra audio input capability. and let's sort them by devices that do not have unique FX or features besides the stock IDT effect library. not surprisingly, this would include every IDT device.

can you really compare it to racism when there are objective limitations to IDT's features? or maybe I'm wrong and they are capable of more, but for some reason every IDT developer doesn't feel the need to implement them? if that's the case then you're right, let's sort by feature. otherwise I don't see a difference, it's just semantics.

[joeyluck]

I would be opposed to segregating the shop aside from anything but function as otherwise we are making statements analogous to people of a certain color or race being less capable or deserving. The results are all that count. I don't believe anyone could identify even half of the IDT we currently have in any mix where they aren't specified.

Besides common sense says that Props would be unlikely to put black marks against their own technology.

okay then, function it is. let's sort them by devices that do not have CV input/output or extra audio input capability. and let's sort them by devices that do not have unique FX or features besides the stock IDT effect library. not surprisingly, this would include every IDT device.
...
otherwise I don't see a difference, it's just semantics.

Several Softube devices don't incorporate ANY CV. So would those fall under IDT?
Several synths don't incorporate audio-in. So would those fall under IDT?

If you would rather search by categories of 'numerous CV connections' and 'synth with audio-input,' then yes—making categories for those makes more sense than categories to isolate devices made with the IDT. There is plenty of information provided via descriptions (which is searchable). And you can look at images in the shop to see connectivity; such as seeing that the FET has absolutely no CV inputs or outputs:

[challism]

The shop definitely needs to have more "sort by" options, among other things (complete my bundle.....ehem!)

[lowpryo]

Several Softube devices don't incorporate ANY CV. So would those fall under IDT?
Several synths don't incorporate audio-in. So would those fall under IDT?

If you would rather search by categories of 'numerous CV connections' and 'synth with audio-input,' then yes—making categories for those makes more sense than categories to isolate devices made with the IDT. There is plenty of information provided via descriptions (which is searchable). And you can look at images in the shop to see connectivity; such as seeing that the FET has absolutely no CV inputs or outputs:

my issue is that there's no deeper sorting options beyond the "synth" option, so Softube's or other FX units aren't really relevant to that point.

and as far as going into descriptions and pictures, that is exactly what sorting options are supposed to avoid. I think if a customer knows they want a powerhouse synth with a wide range of features, there should be an option to sort for that specific thing (i.e. Antidote, Predator, Zero etc), without the smaller and simpler instruments getting in the way.

do you agree with that point? beyond that, whether it's "IDT/non-IDT" or sorting by features is just semantics to me. IDT's objectively have less features due to their limitations, no? maybe i'm wrong. i just feel like there's a very clear line between the two types of instruments so there has to be some way to draw that line, and IDT is the strongest differentiating factor to me

[avasopht]

Being able to find what you're looking for is certainly important, but you can't expect options that are based on misconception about what IDT is capable of and instead just focus on functionality.

By not allowing users to search properly it can actually do developers a disservice should a user conclude the store doesn't have what it in fact does have because the user couldn't find it among the sea of undesired plugins.

How though do you rate a devices "complexity," or any other measure for that matter? Is there an example of this working elsewhere?