 |
|
You are not logged in! F.A.Q Log in Register |
 |
|
 |
 Now online (3)recycle Roger Wilco big ...and 96 guests Last 5 registered Oplandisks nothingstar N_loop yipe foxtrotromeo Browse members... |
 |
Members 8025Messages 2614154 Today 6 Topics 127544 |
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
You mean for you that is what it's good for, i have never had any problems trying to get what i want. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i think reason simply sounds bad.. having just 3 synths is stupidly limiting , unless you are talking analogue goodness. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Does the word creativity mean anything to you??? Having limitations makes you use your imagination, makes you work harder. Therefore is more rewarding. IMO. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
yes maybe if you are just using the presets on the synths and the ready made .rex loops and the included samples it just seems like a glorified dance ejay, but if you actually took the time to use it properly..... i 70%-80% of my music within reason, and its all quite diverse. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Amen |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
You can make anything rock if you put the time into it. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Why are you guys attacking other people for expressing their oppinion about a piece of software? I am sorry, but reality check; two synths and three samplers is a massive limitation. You can make things in absynth that you can't make with reaktor. You can make things in reaktor that you can't make in camelion. You can make things in camelion that you can't make with kontakt. You can make things in kontakt that you can't make with moog modular. You can make things in moog modular that you can't make in discovery... Insert into this chain; Arp 2600, FM7, Kompakt, Minimoog, Oddity, Symptohm, EVE, elephant, Terra , Phantom, Cube, Battery, Vanguard, Texture, Synful Orchestra, Garriton Personal Orchestra, Impakt, Z3ta+, Crystal, Angelina Choir Synth, Vokator, CrusherX, Albino, Elektrik Piano, CR80v... I could go on. These are all programs that are accessible to anybody, given a minor resource tapping. Reason has its uses, and its a good tool to do a few things, but it is not an adequite music making environment (as far as I can see, and I have used it to make full songs). Cubase, Ableton, Fruityloops, etc can be, given that they are used to their fullest potential. Other limitations that reason has; no recording from external sources. If you want to play an instrument with your reason music, you have to sample and rearrange. Very limited effect selection. Sure they cover most of the basics, but only that. I guess if you are afraid of a more than a couple knobs thats ok, but if you really like to tweak and automate, then you are fucked. I never use the effects in reason, cause they sound awful. Anyways, hope I didn't piss anybody off with this rant. Reason debates are like mac debates. It really comes down to personal preferance in the end. I feel claustrophobic and uncomfortable when using reason, cause I feel the roof over my head is really low (if you know what I mean). By all means, do whatever you have a passion for, and whatever tools you feel comfortable with. Never let anyone tell you othe |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I think everyone seems to be arguing the same point. Every program has it's place. It only depends on how each person desides to use it. THE FORCE! |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Hmm, well i wasn't attacking i was challenging. I am wondering if people will stop being lazy. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I hightly doubt that. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
What that people will stop being lazy, or that i am not attacking people? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
People will never stop being lazy. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Ok : ) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Sorry. I guess attacking is a strong word. I just don't like people saying that someone is being less creative because they say a program is limited. In the end, its all about the art... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Yes it is BUT i am a little fed up with mediocrity. However this is no comment on anyone in particular. I am playing devil's advocate in a way. I honestly think that having limitations pushes you to be more creative. I find the fact that everyone wants the fun part taken out everything a little ridiclous. But it is just my opinion. Does that make sense??? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Yeah, that makes sence, and to a certain extent, I feel the same way. But if I get bored of the environment I make music in, I make boring music. My attention span is massively small. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
That is something we have in common i think. But i am thinking about getting a for track at the moment. Getting away from computers and using some instruments. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Yeah... I am going to be getting a guitar and a mixer, and making some actual industrial music with glitchy beats. IDM is pretty much killed for me by now. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Spot on- I never heard anyone criticise the TR-909 for being "limiting". I quite like using things like Hammerhead for percussion loops, it makes you work harder to get good sounds out of it. Then, when you go back to more versatile software/gear, you can make a good basic loop, then tart it up with the extra features/effects of the superior gear. I also like the challenge of getting absynth quality sounds out of Reason's Malstorm (yes, if you use 2/3 of them linked and CV and know what you're doing, you can) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I the main point here is not to use 1 piece of software only. I love Reason but I only used that. That's a bad thing as you get stuck into a "loop" as it were. I'll be getting Reason 3.0 but I'm determined to use it WITH other software as opposed to by itself. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Yeah, I like using other things to make loops (which I then load into recycle) for use in Reason's "Dr. Rex". |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i mean reason is great, the last Prodigy album was done mostly using reason and that was... oh wait that was shit. damn. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
no lazy about it , if i want a granular cloud of destruction i can't do it on reason , simple as that. or integrate my 303 and various hardware very well. . so no it serves me no purpose at all , but at the same time that does not make it a bad program per se. just limited. the difference w/909 is that you are not supposed to write, record and mix entire tracks with it. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
"makes you use your imagination" surely programs like cycling 74 etc do that alot more than reason... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
BAM! |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
My music is still going to suck.... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Nah, you stuff is great mate. Really good danceable stuff. You got anything new for us to listen to? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Nope, just tons of unfinished tracks...heh ;) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
my two cents....... whatever i make on reason sounds shit, because i am shit at making music. whatever my mate (decadnids) makes on reason sounds ace, because he is great at making music. while i agree to a certain pont about it being 'limited', but like what has been said, use your head. one thing that i do is sample a long middle c from a vst synth that i like, and play it through the sampler. not ideal, but its workable. all you moaning fucks should try using your noggin a bit more, stop being snobby about software, because at the end of the day, how many of us actually paid for version 2.5? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
you obviously dont understand that its entirely reasonable to bitch about something worth hundreds that you got for free. i mean people have to give up their 'time' to download and use it. dont be so unfair |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Yep, I regularly do that and for lots of pad type synths, it works perfectly well. Reason's processing efficiency is fantastic too. I've made insanely complex patches that'd put some Reaktor ensembles to shame and my CPU doesn't break a sweat. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
even with tracks with 20/30 units going on, the little green bar hardly moves.... it is very good for that yeh. you still moving to gloucester btw? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Ceri you can't make insanely complex patches in Reason. Reaktor let you make what you want to make...Reason lets you alter what they have made (the synths are pretty good though, malstrom is very good). Plus your 909 arguement is rubbish because as mentioned elsewhere the 909 is an instrument not a music making package. Skink all your music is straight beat driven stuff, which is probably why you have never had any problems with it. I stand by what I said, which wasn't even all that negative. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Yeah. When I think about people dissing reaktor, and the ammount of time and thought it usually takes to make something workable in it, then going on and on and gushing about how flexable reason is, I kind of start to wonder about people. Reaktor can be a full music making environment, and it sounds great. Reason sounds muddy. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Maybe, maybe not it depends if you want to spend a year learning how to use it. You also bring up some valid points. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I would like to point out that you haven't heard all of my music. : ) I know you are not being negative, did no-one read the post where i sadi i was playing devils advocate??? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
"... if I get bored of the environment I make music in, I make boring music." exactamundo my friend. "I think about people dissing reaktor, and the ammount of time and thought it usually takes to make something workable in it" So why bother yourself with that when you can achieve similar results with a straight-forward and intuitive program that doesn't require you to work your way through either encyclopedia britannica-sized manuals, or a series of complex procedures before you can even begin to create your very first sound? Sounds like a proper way to lose the fun element and develop a contempt for the more easy-to-understand musicmaking software. In a way this also works for music itself here, whereas straightforward music is almost always automatically held in contempt and only "complex music" seems to be worthy of praise and appreciation. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
pretty cool track there nigel, wish I knew how to program drums like that |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I understand what you are saying about loosing the fun, but in high school, my favorite subject was math. I was really good at it (at the time, forgot it all now), and I used to love the feeling I got when I would spend all day trying to solve something, and when I finally arrived at an answer, nothing would feel better. I get this same feeling off of accomplishing an interesting reaktor ensemble. Plus, it allows me to get really rich, pure tones that I can't get anywhere else. Its like, if I want to create an instrument that gates itself off, then on (instead of the other way around), and then design a reverb effect that uses the midi-pitch signal to control the resonance of the filter instead of the frequency of the ocilator, then I can do that, in less than a minute (given that I am using a few of my own predesigned modules). I am never bored with reaktor, because every single time I open it, there is always something new to discover. By making a few of my own addaptions to standard synthesis designs, I am able to create a fresh sound that (I hope) is interesting, non-contribed, and listenable. I make minimal music, but a lot of the things I need to use programs like reaktor for are more ways of saving time, and mouse life. I would rather spend the first hour or so of working on music designing a system for my needs, so I don't spend the rest of the song doing way more programming than I want to. Thats where I get bored. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Ceri you can't make insanely complex patches in Reason. No, you can make insanely complex patches. You can wire a couple of synth together with one modulating the other, with v slight delay between them to get very rich sounds. Throw in some cross wiring of the CVs and maybe gating to some parts, via a redrum or two (one with shuffle on, one without) AND running some parts (in parallel) through slightly different effects (IE same effects, but with slight tweaks). Think about it; it's basically hardware emulation. If you had 4 synths crosstalking, with lots of effects and gating going on, all wired up in hardware, it'd look (and sound) fairly complex. I agree, you don't have as much "total control" as something like Reaktor or Max, but believe me, if you're prepared to put the work in on reason and know what you're doing, the sounds you can get out are not a million miles apart. The new Combinator in Reason 3 capitilises on this. Plus your 909 arguement is rubbish because as mentioned elsewhere the 909 is an instrument not a music making package. There are plenty of good tracks where the 909 is the "backbone" with a few other things and simple fx going on. It bothers me that people seem to slate Reason because it has "All in one" aspirations, but really, as with almost any software/gear, it's going to be used with other stuff, even if it is only multisampling a vst and loading it into the samplers. At the other end of the spectrum you can (and I regularly do), render off each instrument seperately, then multitrack those and EQ/VST fx them in a "real" mastering program. I think the groovebox (which I think Reason is probably closest too, albeit with a better than average sequencer) is a good analogy- plenty of artists use them, but they seldom use them as intended- as an all in one- they use them with other things and/or with outboard fx. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
"So why bother yourself with that when you can achieve similar results with a straight-forward and intuitive program that doesn't require you to work your way through either encyclopedia britannica-sized manuals, or a series of complex procedures before you can even begin to create your very first sound? " That's the single biggest reason (no pun intended) I've largely abandoned using Reaktor. Actually making something that makes sounds/fx you can't get elsewhere (even if it is through combining a particular VSTi with a VST effect chain), takes a long time and to be honest, few people seem to do that. You talk with people about their tracks and say, how did you do that, they beam proudly "Oh that's a custom reaktor synth I made, took me hours of work". You grimace and think, "I could do that in 2 minutes with a pair of Subtractors and some fx/signal routing" :-S I'm not too stupid or lazy to use/understand Reaktor- I can and have made my own synths. The only thing I regularly use though is my own synth "Sonorous" which specialises in metallic/industrial noises. It's nice to have something to call my own and that I know exactly how it works, and the cpu usage is pretty good (it's intentionally streamlined). However, if I'm completely honest, I can get the same sounds using absynth and some ring modulation... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Yours is a good reason to use Reaktor. It's people who are not naturally mathematical/technical, who spend hours struggling (and probably not enjoying it) with reaktor, only to get mediocre results. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
but even if you use some synths like the photone or carbon b you can get insanely lush sounds , not possible on reason's synths.. thats before even modifying them or building yr own.. plus a user bank of 1000s of ensembles is online, you simply cant argue that reaktor does not represent more musical possibilites than reason does, could you do ultravisitor on reason? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Vibert uses Reason a lot and most of his stuff is better than 95% of the stuff people here using Reaktor make IMO. And, if you ask me, better than most Richard Devine, etc. too. I tend to use reason because I'm not a massive fan of glitchy sounds that those sort of programs excel at. I do concede however that things like photone are v. good and can make some sounds you'd be really hard pushed to make in Reason. Even so, I'd say 80%+ of photone sounds I've heard, you can get out of something a lot simpler/cheaper/easier to use (Vanguard VST, for example). K.I.S.S. - Keep it simple, stupid. ;-) I would agree those sort of programs offer more control, but a lot of the time it's not neccessary and slows things down. I'm not a reason fanboy and I use other software (pretty rare for me to do a track 100% in Reason), but I get the impression a lot of people use "The big names" like Logic, Max, Reaktor, etc. because their musical heroes use them, rather than it makes their music better (a lot of amateur Max stuff I've heard sounds worse than a lot of amateur Floops stuff IMO!). |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I dissagree. Where vibert is a master, Devine is a god. I found out about programs like Reaktor and such because of the DSP-gods use them, but found myself attach to them because of what they do. I am not about to go and network 9 computers together just because Richard Devine does (I will leave that up to Ten and Tracer). |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
vibert uses hardware for most of his synth sounds fool!! in his words - "my hardware is infinitley preferable" over propellerhead soft synths , so there . reaktor does not have to equal spazmo glitches either. . but im not sure why im sticking up for any soft synths, i've just been using samplers and a 303+korg ms 20 recentley ... i agree on people going too far on the technical side of things, in the sense that you hear "tunes" with lots of max/reaktor addled madness but no real melodies and so forth, all about a balance really. in any case good music is good music regardless, i just dont find reason very conductive for that. but the vst thing is retarded.. why use a PH compressor when i have a psp vintage warmer for example? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
and vibert is 100% better than anyone here. he rules. i want more acid from him. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
"vibert uses hardware for most of his synth sounds fool!! in his words - "my hardware is infinitley preferable" over propellerhead soft synths , so there . " I'd not heard that, I just read in an interview he said he uses it for most of his recent stuff, didn't realise he didn't use the included softsynths (I'd assumed he'd sampled his hardware and played it back through nnxt/whatever). " but the vst thing is retarded.. why use a PH compressor when i have a psp vintage warmer for example? " I'm a bit confused by that statement, PSP Vintage warmer is a VST?! (one I like) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i mean that having no access to vsts in reason is a bit daft , as you are limited to the included compressors,reverb etc, , which is made all the worse when one considers the quality vsts out there. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Get ur ass on MSN |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
Messageboard index
|
|||||||||
