Dubstepforum.com

Traditionally, people have disliked the sequencer in Reason for several reasons. (No puns intended)

1. When editing midi notes, it isn't possible to adjust the length of a note from the front. Mainstream DAW's can do this as standard.

2. Reasons quantisation options are less featured than most DAW's.

3. Until vector automation in Reason 4, the smoothest automation lines possible were in 1/64 resolution. For some sounds, this could cause the classic staggered/step effect.

For people who like anal control over their midi notes, Reason's sequencer is clearly sub standard.

For me, excluding the DAW-like sequencer that appeared in Reason 4, I'm happy with the simple Fisherprice, my first sequencer usability of Reason's sequencer.

futures_untold wrote:Traditionally, people have disliked the sequencer in Reason for several reasons. (No puns intended)

1. When editing midi notes, it isn't possible to adjust the length of a note from the front. Mainstream DAW's can do this as standard.

2. Reasons quantisation options are less featured than most DAW's.

3. Until vector automation in Reason 4, the smoothest automation lines possible were in 1/64 resolution. For some sounds, this could cause the classic staggered/step effect.

For people who like anal control over their midi notes, Reason's sequencer is clearly sub standard.

For me, excluding the DAW-like sequencer that appeared in Reason 4, I'm happy with the simple Fisherprice, my first sequencer usability of Reason's sequencer.

to be honest, all these problems can be easily gotten around by investing the smallest amount of time and effort.
1. This isn't really a problem. I dont see how it could affect your ability to actually place a note.
2. reasons regroove mixer is one option of getting around this quickly. Or you can use the tool window to move a large number of similar notes in ticks. Also, disabling the friggin magnet tool might help you here lol...
3. This is the best thing about reason 4 in my opinion, along with the slicer, it is easy and quick to set up automation patterns, just try and keep things obvious by using different colours on different clips.
Now that thor has the ability to control CV out as well, you can pretty much control anything taht you could possibly want to within reason.
as a sequencer i really think its great !

i only use reason - i fucking lvoe the sequencer [now that the automation isn't a bar graph any more!] but....

you can't really be very precise , eg with the filter you get a value out of 126, instead of a value in Hz - instead i use the stereo imager as a filter [except that this can only give you a sharp cut off with no resonance]

the reverb unit sounds shit IMO

and most importantly, when i comes to using a proper sequencer which can handle audio i have NO IDEA WHAT'S GOING ON!



me and my mates actually make sounds in logic and then export them and put them into Reason, a long and confusing process which usually comes up with problems when u get to complicated things. [but this works a TREAT with drums - do it.]

aren't people silly.

No, if you use reason you should kill yourself in the face.

Jubscarz wrote:No, if you use reason you should kill yourself in the face.

with an ice pick!




















seriously dont think reason isn't that bad of a deal

never rely on one tool tho

dont put all of your eggs in one basket

and never count your chickens before they hatch

No, if you use reason you should kill yourself in the face.

Lol

Reason is as good as it gets for an all round program that's easy to use and powerful.

Shame we can't import samples into Malstrom yet though...

Osk wrote:Met Andy Stott and Claro Intelecto at Bloc and they both use only Reason. Enough said really.

serious?!

surely something else too

surely

Ive only just started using reason and learnt the basics through the demo (cant quite affor the full version yet : P). Does anyone think its actually worth paying £260 for? Or should I spend my money on another program?

Spend it on crack

Docwra wrote:Spend it on crack

Hahaha! You're 100% like Mr tnuc...

Smokey wrote:Ive only just started using reason and learnt the basics through the demo (cant quite affor the full version yet : P). Does anyone think its actually worth paying £260 for? Or should I spend my money on another program?

Yes, it is well worth shelling out for.... if you enjoy using the program!

You could stick to Reason 3 which is cheaper and less confusing than Reason 4. (Imho)

elgato wrote:

Osk wrote:Met Andy Stott and Claro Intelecto at Bloc and they both use only Reason. Enough said really.

serious?!

surely something else too

surely

Nah man, I'm serious. I said to both of them, "Come on fellas, let me into a secret, what gear are you using? How do you get that warm sound of yours." They both just looked at each other, laughed and said, "We just use Reason mate. We do everything with it."

Osk wrote:

elgato wrote:

Osk wrote:Met Andy Stott and Claro Intelecto at Bloc and they both use only Reason. Enough said really.

serious?!

surely something else too

surely

Nah man, I'm serious. I said to both of them, "Come on fellas, let me into a secret, what gear are you using? How do you get that warm sound of yours." They both just looked at each other, laughed and said, "We just use Reason mate. We do everything with it."

i simply can't believe it. he must run through outboard gear or something i swear, or at least another programme for some processing

his tracks are probably mastered at some ridiculously expensive studio full of analogue gear.

To me it's just a case of awesome EQing and compression. It can be really hard to get those deep chords (which sound crap with all the low end rolled off) to sit with those kicks and the subs that characterise their tunes. You're right, though, their tunes just sound so thick and plump.

james fox wrote:his tracks are probably mastered at some ridiculously expensive studio full of analogue gear.

I did hear that some of Claro's stuff gets mastered at some legendary Berlin house, yes!

Osk wrote:

james fox wrote:his tracks are probably mastered at some ridiculously expensive studio full of analogue gear.

I did hear that some of Claro's stuff gets mastered at some legendary Berlin house, yes!

yeh its at Dubplates & Mastering isnt it. but i dunno, mastering can do so much, but...

Osk wrote:To me it's just a case of awesome EQing and compression. It can be really hard to get those deep chords (which sound crap with all the low end rolled off) to sit with those kicks and the subs that characterise their tunes. You're right, though, their tunes just sound so thick and plump.

only a year ago or something you couldnt even sidechain in Reason! the synths are sick, but i swear the processing tools and filters just aren't / weren't good enough to give those kind of textures and that kind of fatness. although to be fair i can't do it with anything, so maybe reason can do it :/

Osk wrote:It can be really hard to get those deep chords (which sound crap with all the low end rolled off) to sit with those kicks and the subs that characterise their tunes.

Sidechaining (which is extremely easily in Reason 4) for the win ...

Two things that bother me with Reason:
1) not able to work with audio files
2) no timestretching in the sequencer (but a quick rewire to Live solves that)

Everything else works flawless. Reason does not eat up your CPU for breakfast like other programs do and never, ever (at least with me) crashes.

elgato wrote:

Osk wrote:

james fox wrote:his tracks are probably mastered at some ridiculously expensive studio full of analogue gear.

I did hear that some of Claro's stuff gets mastered at some legendary Berlin house, yes!

yeh its at Dubplates & Mastering isnt it. but i dunno, mastering can do so much, but...

hard to say really innit. his tracks do drip with analogue warmth and fuzz though, and driving it through some vintage pre-amps and compressors etc that cost tens of thousands of pounds would certainly give that effect...