   Finally tried out Reason: Why is it so popular?
  I've been meaning to try out Reason for quite a while, being a big fan of the modular studios and spent an awful lot of time with Jeskola Buzz and Reaktor. I have to say that I was largely dissapointed.The BadMy complaints with Reason mostly have to do with the interface. First off, Reason is essentially unusable to me at 1600x1200, simply because the artwork for the various modules uses an incredibly tiny font. I can drop my resolution down to 1024x768 but when I switch back to my DAW all of the sudden all of the various console controls don't squeeze onto the screen, and it's harder to work with.Additionally, it's annoying not to be able to maximize the main window. Having no MDI parent is reminiscent of the GIMP. At least the sequencer window is maximizable, but I've already invested the time to be efficient in SONAR, so I wouldn't really have a lot of use for Reason's built in sequencer. My final complaint is that the virtual rack paradigm doesn't really do a whole lot for me. Reaktor and Buzz (and numerous Buzz clones, such as Psycle) allow me to conveniently rout all of my virtual gear from one screen. Reason forces me to hit "tab" and not be able to view the face-plates of my gear while routing. There are some cute cable-physics going on, but ultimately I find this very unintuitive. Something that should be as simple as clicking and dragging requires me to 1) hit "tab" 2) click 3) scroll and drag (if the gear isn't close together) 4) click again. In Buzz, routing gear is as simple as shift-dragging; and I can build elaborate signal chains in a matter of seconds.The GoodThere's no question that the sound-quality is great. A lot of the factory presets do a good job, and I've never heard anything quie like the Maelstrom. But it's frustrating that so many great sounds are trapped inside a horrible user-interface. It reminds me of Rebirth's obscenely unintuitive sequencing capabilities; but at least Rebrith had an MDI parent window.More BadBut goddamn; in SONAR I can be viewing the mixing console, five or six DXi synths at once, a couple of effects and my track sequencer. Reason's constrained window shows me very little information at once. Even at 1280x1024 I could be viewing at least twice as much information. ConclusionI won't be buying Reason. I think it's largest failling is that it embraces the hardware paradigm over usability. When working in a virtual environment I expect my software to transcend the difficulties and frustrations of working with rack-based hardware. Instead, it seems like the irritations that go along with it have been faithfully emulated.It's just upsetting, because Reason sounds so damn good.   
  Really, I guess its just a matter of personal tastes. I've tried numerous different software packages to find something I like, and I'm still searching. I really liked reason's layout and stuff (except for how you mentioned you can't really maximize it like you can normal software). But I wouldn't use reason for any real work, unless required to do so. However, the drummer of my band, his father uses reason to no extent, and he does it with skills that make others look like they just bought their software. He does a lot of mastering work and stuff (went to college for it), and he loves reason. So like I said, it really is just about personal tastes.   ;  The are some major flaws with Reason that have yet to be resolved. For example, you cannot modify do tempo changes. amd the program doesn't respond to them. A lot of the people I hear using it come from an electronica background. I have heard a lot of orchestral works as well produced by Reason, but their compositional method and approach is still more similiar to an electronica rooted form of composition.Now there are exceptions obviously, and I have heard a few of them. That being said, Reason is a nice modular self contain program, has a very nice GUI, and is even easy to musically and techonologically inept people to learn to use.Regards,Sean Beeson   ;  I never cared much for Reason. When 3.0 came out, it did sport some nice sounds and features and a price tag that is hard to ignore. I basically use it like one big Plug-in from within Sonar and that makes me happy. I didn't delve into it's sequencing or FX processing much. It's a quick easy way to get scratch tracks and demos out of your head, I've found.I don't know, we have a review of it over at Music4Games.net that I like. It lays it out pretty clean and clear so I suggest you read it!Reason 3.0 ReviewAgain, the price for me is pretty appealing for what it does. The interface makes sense to me coming from an analog background, but it's non-flexibility visuals-wise is a pain in the ass.Tony   ;Quote:Original post by Sean R BeesonThe are some major flaws with Reason that have yet to be resolved. For example, you cannot modify do tempo changes. amd the program doesn't respond to them. Yes, but that is also why Reason comes with rewire (software that allows you to sequence through another application.)I use Digital Performer and Reason at the same time and it does pretty darn well for me.Personally I find that Reason takes a while to learn but it is AN EXTREMELY POWERFUL tool in the right hands.  It just takes a while to learn all the ins and outs of the software.  SKJINEDMJEET, If you are having problems learning things take heed of the tutorials that come with Reason.  Window issues aside, its a great program once you get the basics down.    ;  For me Reason is excelent as a rewired Synth.You can make wonders with its built in synths, etc.If you are planing to make the raw of a new electronic / pop / some Funk / jazz fusion (trackable music) it gives you a simple background to generate some ideias since you can copy/paste everything quite easily with colored blocks.But there is nothing like a piano, pen and sheet music then Sonar to really compose something, imo.   ;Quote:Original post by Rain 7Personally I find that Reason takes a while to learn but it is AN EXTREMELY POWERFUL tool in the right hands.  It just takes a while to learn all the ins and outs of the software.  SKJINEDMJEET, If you are having problems learning things take heed of the tutorials that come with Reason.  Window issues aside, its a great program once you get the basics down.I am not really debating its power. It strikes me as very powerful software in the same way that Blender is very powerful.   ;  I tried Reason once, and TBH I didn't at all get why it's so popular.  I was very unimpressed.  Even the synths and samples were vanilla and uninspiring.   ;  Personally, I think that Reason has been successful BECAUSE of its simulated analogue interface, rather than in spite of it.  All issues of sound aside, I find it extremely intuitive--if you were working with an analogue setup, you wouldn't patch cables while messing with the faceplate at the same time, so why bother?  I think that an interface that echoes real equipment is helpful not only for people who have been brought up on analogue hardware, but for people just learning so that when they come into contact with the real thing, they aren't confused because they've never touched an (simulated) analogue setup.  Frankly, if you want to see an unintuitive interface, try Ableton Live--it's powerful, but the interface is totally ridiculous--there is no way you could possibly just look at it and know what does what, whereas Reason's virtual mixer is just like a standard Mackie.As to sounds--well, I disagree with arglebargle about Reason's sounds.  It's hard to get a sense for Reason's capabilities by just trying it out a few times--and I will agree, in previous versions, the synth libraries have been a little flat; however, with the advent of version 3.0, the libraries of both synths and samples have been extended, and the amount of free ReFills up for download is pretty amazing.  Personally, these days I prefer to create my own patches, and having studied some of the nuts and bolts behind synthesis really helps (if you don't know how synthesis really works, it's hard to edit to get the sounds you want).  I do agree that a slightly more powerful sequencer could be in order--I would like to be able to change tempos within the program itself, without streaming through ReWire.  However, I have managed to work around that in the past, and it may change in a future version.  I can't speak as to the sizeability of the windows--one would hope that a future version would correct that too.  For me, Reason has bee incredibly powerful, and I use it almost exclusively for my electronically rendered music.  As to Sean Beeson's comments--I would have to argue that ANY computer software is learnable by a musical illiterate.  In high school I knew a ten-year-old kid who knew how to use Finale...and so he could write music, and even somehow got someone to perform it, but it was crap.  The only he could even write the music was because he had Finale--pencil and paper would have stumped him.  Similarly, how many morons are there out there that use Groovemaker or Acid to put together a whole bunch of loops, and call it their compositions?  Frankly, the computer has opened up a whole avenue of easy tools for hacks to use.  I personally have used Reason to produce some pretty complex orchestral scores without much difficulty--you're right, it is geared more towards electronica; however, that's no reason to write it off as capable of ONLY that.