Propellerhead Software
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Old 2004-12-28, 14:58
WarpIV WarpIV is offline
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 0
Sequencer woes not addressed in 3.0

Based on everything I've read, here are my thoughts about 3.0. Overall, I'm a bit dissapointed, especially with the sequencer...

First, I really like the idea of having better mastering tools. I use REASON as a standalone application and need something to help me generate louder 24-bit output files that take advantage of the digital audio's full dynamic range. I hope these tools will help me accomplish this. In 2.5, the output audio files sound a bit dull and there is no good way to know how loud to make the master output because the saturation indicator goes into the red when the music is still too soft. For me, the new mastering tools are worth the upgrade (I hope).

I don't really see where the combinator will help me. I basically have my favorite rack of instruments already set up. I don't have the compute power in my 500 Mhz PowerBook G3 laptop to add individual effects to each of my NNXT, redrum, or malstrom components. I chain (very carefully) my mixers and drum machines so that I only need 2 or 3 effects (usually reverb, chorus, and delay) in my whole rack. I may have as many as three or four mixers chained together, so I have lots of tracks and I have to be extremely frugal in how I use effects.

I am EXTREMELY dissapointed that the sequencer has not been upgraded. This alone may cause me to abandon REASON at some point and move onto somthing with more capability. I simply MUST have the ability to dynamically change tempo and time signatures during the song. I am having a hard time understanding why this capability is not supported! It's unbelievable to me. I know that at least tempo can be addressed through rewire, but if I upgrade to a better sequencer that works with rewire, I might as well use Cubase and VST instruments. I don't want to complicate my life with multiple system using rewire. Plus, I don't have the compute power to run multiple sequencers through rewire anyway. Props, you guys ought to be ashamed of yourselves for not addressing this glaring deficiency in the sequencer! It's embarassing... You need to listen to your users, or else they will leave you for better products.

I don't need audio right now, so the fact that it is not supported in 3.0 is not a big deal for me. It would be nice to have that later on however, so I am interested in where REASON goes with audio.

Finally, there ought to be a better way to do drum parts. I like redrum because you can individually control up to two effects per sample. That's enough for me right now. I'll typically have 2-4 redrum machines in my rack. (Note, I always put the redrum machines in my last chained mixer, so I can use the chained effects that are provided in the master mixer (I figured out a nice way to set this up). This saves lots of processing power.) I don't see how you can individually control effects for drum samples using drum samples in NN-XT. Plus, all you have is a keyboard to differentiate the samples, so you have to memorize which notes on the keyboard represent which drum samples - ugh.

So here is my big beef with redrum and the sequencer. We ought to be able to edit all redrum machines in the sequencer in one window. If I have 4 redrum machines, then I should see 40 (four groups of 10) percussion sounds indicated on the left for me to edit in the sequencer. I really hate having to switch back and forth between the different redrum tracks to edit my percussion parts, especially when I have a single logical drumset that actually spans across two redrum machines.

Here is my last beef. Some time ago, I wrote a letter to the Propellerhead technical support to find out what the status was on tempo and time signature features in REASON. I wanted to know if this capability would be supported in the next version. I was told that their policy was to not provide this kind of information about new features. I think this tight-lipped approach has offended a lot of REASON users who simply feel that their inputs are being ignored. I thought that this capability would certainly be provided in 3.0 since there were LOTS of users asking for this feature. There doesn't seem to be any real dialog with the user base. I've read messages from others with the same frustration. I'm really dissapointed with this.

Ok, those are my thoughts. I hope the props guys are listening...

Jeff Steinman


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

All times are GMT +2. The time now is 15:29.