Reason or FL?

[AngelCityOutlaw]

No cubase or audacity? *leaves thread

Well the thread is about FL Vs Reason mainly.....

[ShrackAttack]

Reaper is incredibly stable for me. Honestly, it is probably the most stable DAW I've ever used. The MIDI options still need some work, but it a great tool and is still very usable for midi work. Though I find myself using it a lot for SFX work. And you can't beat the 40 dollar price tag.

[liquid wind]

Reason on the other hand... It's not even a DAW. It's a tracker that thinks very highly of itself, with a broken GUI and a piano roll thrown in as an afterthought. No recording, no external plugins, terrible automation... Poor Propellerhead. So steadfast. So stalwart. It's a shame really. They know no better

reason actually would be incredible if they replaced the horrible sequencing interface with an impulse tracker clone

I haven't really used reaper for any significant amount of time but I'd also recommend it if you're looking for something on the cheap, it seems to get nothing but praise from everyone that uses it and it's free. I'm in kinda the same boat as suzu in regards to FL actually, it does everything I need it to and it's hard to move to something else with how invested in it I am, but if I could start over I'd probably be using another program and this sentiment seems to be growing with every new release(the auto zoom piano roll that won't stay on the non-auto zoom mode in FL10 is awful, what was gol thinking?)

[avaris]

THIS.Reason on the other hand... It's not even a DAW. It's a tracker that thinks very highly of itself, with a broken GUI and a piano roll thrown in as an afterthought. No recording, no external plugins, terrible automation... Poor Propellerhead. So steadfast. So stalwart. It's a shame really. They know no better.

Reason has audio recording. Are you referring to the piano roll and automation from v3 and below? That piano roll was horrendous. The piano roll in v4 and above is basically a clone of Cubase's piano roll. Automation is also drastically improved.

IMO FL's piano roll is still faster than Reason's for quick sequencing. Also ghost notes in FL are an amazing feature not found in Reason.

Also with soundflower on Mac (there are windows equivalents) you can't route audio in and out of Reason to another DAW. This way you can use VST FX plugins on Reason instruments and then route the VST FX back into Reason. Or vice versa you can route a VST plugin into Reason and then route it back out through rewire.

[SonicThHedgog]

Well the thread is about FL Vs Reason mainly.....

good point

[theshaggyfreak]

These days, their are really only two big factors that one would stay away from Reason:

1: The interface is set up more like a piece of real world hardware. In other words, you can do some seriously cool stuff with patching various pieces together. It's quite modular in that respect but some find it cumbersome. I personally find this a lot more comfortable than looking at a screen filled with just numbers but I'm kind of old school.

2: You have a deep love for your VST and VSTi plugins. Granted, you can always Rewire Reason to another DAW to use plugins or use one of the various programs that our out there to route things in your computer. I for one like sticking to one program, though. Things like Rewire tend to break my own personal work flow.

If any of those two things are of a concern to you, then go with FL Studio.

[Nabeel Ansari]

Also ghost notes in FL are an amazing feature not found in Reason.

You can't compare this to DAW's that don't know what it is to have two channels in one track.

[suzumebachi]

What's all this I'm hearing about Reason being able to record? Wouldn't that require Propellerheads changing their minds about something? Impossible. That's like the Pope converting to Judaism.

Next you'll be telling me Reason can host VSTs now. Hohoho I make joke! That will never happen.

As for Reaper being "suck" and "so fucking buggy" and "NOT free" I'm afraid, Metal Man, you're the one that's misinformed. Have you even used Reaper? Maybe you're just doing it wrong.

[Nabeel Ansari]

Reason 6 now includes audio recording. (They're also nuking the Record brand)

Also, if you're into recording a lot, don't use FL Studio. It's not a crappy recording system like Cubase/Pro Tools fanboys say it is, but there are more straightforward methods found in other DAW's. FL's recording system is different, if you're used to some other DAW's recording system it'll be a crappy transition.

[avaris]

You can't compare this to DAW's that don't know what it is to have two channels in one track.

This is a very ambiguous statement. By a channel are you referring to midi note or automation data? Therefore an instrument's ability to accept more than one channel of midi note data at a time?

Are you saying Reason can't support having two separate midi channels or tracks feeding an instrument at once? (which is incorrect) Or are you saying FL is the only one where this is possible? (which is also incorrect) Also other DAW's can display "ghost notes" like Cubase and Logic for example. It is an excellent feature when composing very complex parts with multiple instruments.

[SenPi]

I enjoy how people who prefer one daw tend to spout a whole bunch of misinformed dribble about daws they have either never used, or barely used.

If you actually want to contribute, talk about why the daw you use is good for you, instead of pretending you know stuff about other daws and trying to shoot them down.

and by enjoy I meant that it's annoying.

[Nabeel Ansari]

This is a very ambiguous statement. By a channel are you referring to midi note or automation data? Therefore an instrument's ability to accept more than one channel of midi note data at a time?

Are you saying Reason can't support having two separate midi channels or tracks feeding an instrument at once? (which is incorrect) Or are you saying FL is the only one where this is possible? (which is also incorrect) Also other DAW's can display "ghost notes" like Cubase and Logic for example. It is an excellent feature when composing very complex parts with multiple instruments.

I'm not talking about any of that, so no, I'm not incorrect.

[SenPi]

I'm not talking about any of that, so no, I'm not incorrect.

This is the part where you actually explain what you were talking about.

[avaris]

I'm not talking about any of that, so no, I'm not incorrect.

Then is what are you talking about?

An ambiguous comment with no clarification doesn't really add anything to conversation...It derails the conversation in a needless manner.

[Nabeel Ansari]

FL Studio can have an unlimited number of synths/samplers/audio clips/automation data/what have you in a pattern. You can not in what I have tried, which is Cubase, Pro Tools and Reason. You can select your tracks and display the ghost notes manually, but it's not quite the same thing.

It is an excellent feature when composing very complex parts with multiple instruments.

[liquid wind]

ghost notes are nice but if you want to see everything it pales in comparison to trackers. the flexibility of FL's patterns are great though, I've even written entire songs in one pattern

[Frederic Petitpas]

[........]

[Nabeel Ansari]

it's unlimited in Reason too

In Reason, you can only have one.

[avaris]

In Reason, you can only have one.

Here is the link the Reason 5 Manual:

http://www.propellerheads.se/download/files/reason/version5docs/English/Reason%205%20Operation%20Manual.zip

In which is states:

"Devices that can receive MIDI notes, such as the Combinator device, will automatically be assigned a record enabled track when created. On an instrument track you can create a number of separate note lanes that can incorporate clips containing a combination of note and performance controller events. Multiple lanes are perfect if you, for example, are recording a drum track and want to record each drum sound on a separate lane. An instrument track can also have a number of parameter automation lanes that can contain clips with instrument parameter automation events."

Reason can have as many tracks as you want. And say for example you wanted to send 50 clips with different automation data to the same parameter on an EQ at the same time you can do that. I could add as many midi note clips with embedded automation data feeding a track that I want.

In all seriousness dude please learn how to respectfully talk to people. It is fun to debate and talk about these kind of topics. But your behavior, bias, and general disregard for other people's ideas really ruins the experience. Your blind faith in your own opinions and the need to push those opinions onto others does not really add anything beneficial to these conversations.

[Nabeel Ansari]

Your blind faith in your own opinions and the need to push those opinions onto others does not really add anything beneficial to these conversations.

I apologize that I favor a more transparent solution than one that requires some fancy routing.

"I know, I'm a jerk because I'm definitely attacking you because you like Reason. I hate Reason users, they can go die because they don't use FL Studio."

^^^ Is that what you want me to say? Stop attacking people. This thread is about DAW's.

I will admit I knew nothing of the combinator. But if I hadn't brought that issue up, you wouldn't have told me otherwise. You now changed my mind (a small bit) about Reason, so I don't think this conversation is totally as pointless as you say it is. Who knows? There could've been others that shared my opinion and also knew nothing of the combinator. You should look at it through other perspectives than just your own "he likes FL Studio and I like Reason so I have to call him an idiot because he's not a Reason expert".

(by the way, I'm not a Reason hater. I'm actually planning on getting it for ReWire. So no, I'm not biased.)

Back on topic, are you allowed to route combinators to a combinator and have that combinator on the MIDI/instrument track? (combiception)

[avaris]

Back on topic, are you allowed to route combinators to a combinator and have that combinator on the MIDI/instrument track? (combiception)

Yes. You can route the midi note data and audio send to any combinator to any other device. Thor, Neptune, or RPG8 device will allow midi note data to be entered into the sequencer and then routed anywhere to be used for anything. Embedding one of these two devices into a combinator will allow a user to gain access to the ability to route midi note data send to anywhere. Also with Thor you can convert Audio signals into CV signals (which is the type of signal midi note data is in Reason) and vice-versa.

BTW I am not attacking you. If I intended to attack you I would have used a very different set of words. Your impression of my reasons and motivations behind any of this is 100% wrong. I am merely tying to correct incorrect information of a program. If you don't know something just ask a question. Surely someone around the community would be able to provide clarification. It is easier to clarify a point than it is to correct something. And also doesn't lead petty "internet" arguments that are a waste of everyone's time and energy.

In my opinion I really don't care what software people used. I have mixes on this site made with every notable DAW except Pro Tools, Digital Performer, and Reaper. I have used Pro Tools extensively in graduate school but that was it. Tools are tools. Just go with the one whose features and concept fit your musical brain the best. Therefore miscommunication of features hurts people's ability to find which tool best fits their need.

[Nabeel Ansari]

You can route the midi note data and audio send to any combinator to any other device.

I meant, can you route combinators to a combinator? Unless I'm wrong, the combinator has a limited number of channels, does it not?

[avaris]

I meant, can you route combinators to a combinator? Unless I'm wrong, the combinator has a limited number of channels, does it not?

What's an example in FL Studio?

The word choice is a little confusing for the Reason environment. "Routing" would normally mean to connect the cables on the back of the rack somewhere. In Reason one would route audio or cv cables to another device.

Any combinator can have a track associated with it on the sequencer. A combinator can be used as an instrument, multi-instrument, FX, FX & instrument, a midi data controller/manipulator. You can route the audio or any signal from inside the combinator into another combinator using the cables on the back of the rack. Does that make sense?

[Nabeel Ansari]

Any combinator can have a track associated with it on the sequencer. A combinator can be used as an instrument, multi-instrument, FX, FX & instrument, a midi data controller/manipulator. You can route the audio or any signal from inside the combinator into another combinator using the cables on the back of the rack. Does that make sense?

Yeah.

Asked for an FL Studio example, well the thing is I like FL Studio because you don't need any sort of device to combine things into one track at all.

What I'm asking is, since the combinator has a limited number of things that it can send to, how does the translate to an "unlimited" number of instruments that can be on that track?

Like what if I want to write an entire song in one track with 32 instruments because I am obsessed with ghost notes? Can the combinator accommodate that much, or is there a way to expand it? Also, doesn't that mean all of those instruments will get the same effects?

[avaris]

What I'm asking is, since the combinator has a limited number of things that it can send to, how does the translate to an "unlimited" number of instruments that can be on that track?

Like what if I want to write an entire song in one track with 32 instruments because I am obsessed with ghost notes? Can the combinator accommodate that much, or is there a way to expand it? Also, doesn't that mean all of those instruments will get the same effects?

By "track" I believe you are referring to a "pattern" or "PAT" in FL? Tracks in Reason, along with other DAWs, mean something different.

In Reason the relationship between devices and the sequencer are:

- Device is located in the Rack Window

- There is a Track dedicated to the Device in Sequencer Window

- a Track contains one or many Lanes; and Automation data for any parameter

- a Lane contains multiple clips

- Clips contain midi notes and/or automation data

- you can have unlimited # of Lanes per track

Using Reason's terminology for these features, there is no need to have more than one "track" for a device. Since a track can contain an infinite amount of midi and automation data.

In the Sequencer Window there are Blocks (more a pattern based approach)

http://www.propellerheads.se/products/reason/index.cfm?fuseaction=get_article&article=whatsnew_blocks

If an instrument is located in a combinator both that instrument and the combinator can have a "track" in the Sequencer Window. The instruments in the combinator can have the same FX or different ones. It all depends on how the audio is routed. It is a very relative not fixed concept for the audio signal.

Reason doesn't display ghost notes so the example doesn't really correlate. If you had 32 instruments in one combinator, you could map the filter on each instrument to a Combinator knob with unique values and ranges. Then automate that to move all 32 filters at same time.