TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Production Studio
-- Do i keep using reason 3.0 or get with the times?
Pages (3): « 1 2 [3]

ahhh. I've took over an hour to write a massive post. But it actually isn't worth it. I'd like to say I agree with Sangius though. And now I will go to bed and refrain from posting in this topic.

Post it. EMC^2, stop being an idiot jerk.

What it came down to was the following.
At first sight Sangius seemed to be wrong, but while reading into things I noticed emc^2 taking things out of context quite a few times.

quote:

Originally posted by mysticalninja Post it. EMC^2, stop being an idiot jerk.

Look, you don't agree with me - fine. Yet neither you nor him have posted anything to substantiate your claims.

This has become a pi$$ing match, a name calling practice for n00b trollosaurus and a senseless argument over semantics. Whatever, I'm done with this thread. Say what you like, I couldn't care less.

This is like straight out of the "Arguing On The Internet for Dummies"-book.

Or, well, this:

http://www.somethingawful.com/d/new...gument-lose.php

I know I said I'm done with this thread but I must admit - the "something awful" link made me cry in laughter. Thanks! I can't believe I missed it.

quote:

Originally posted by emc^2 while it would work, certainly latency could be an issue. Recording with Reason, you're only sending midi control messages, hence, no true latency would be very visible. Cubase running several audio tracks could experience SUBSTANTIAL latency if using DirectX and/or crappy sound card. ASIO is definitely a way to go and is offered by "pro" sound cards. Of course you can get an Audigy, which supports ASIO, however, I know nothing about its performance capabilities.

This is where things go wrong, first page.
The first paragraph is wrong. Even though you're only sending midi messages (or something similar) The audio still needs to be calculated. The midi is no problem at all as said, but the synth output is. That sound has to be calculated on the spot. That's where latency comes in. There virtually is no difference in performance on that part when comparing sequencers. That's because the latency is a pre-set value set in the soundcard drivers.

quote:

Originally posted by emc^2 Reason is (for all intents and purposes) a virtual instrument, while Cubase is a multi-track recorder to record said instrument. It is true that reason can be used as a stand-alone app and can be used to create tracks, you are however limited to Reason itself (well +refills).

Reason is a full-grown (closed platform) sequencer, it's synths could be roughly considered Propellerheads own version of vst. Even though Cubase is able to do more versatile things, it can also just be used as a sequencer for vst. In that case the difference in performance would be minimal quite probably.

quote:

Originally posted by emc^2 Page 280, REASON 3 manual: quote: When Reason�s sequencer is playing back a song, the timing between notes is perfect! Once playback of a Reason pattern or song is up and running, latency isn�t a consideration at all. The computer clocks the audio between the steps and does this with perfect quartz accuracy! The timing is immaculate!

Sales talk. A product has to sell. Yes Reason has this feature which minimises latency, or at least makes you think it does. Most likely it reads ahead the notes before you press the music play button which makes it seem everything is playing in sync with what you see no screen, while reason actually reading ahead. This latency minimising feature could be interpreted as read-ahead time (if I'm right). Put your buffer on a rediculously huge value and start playing your keys. Especially while playing a decent track, try playing along with it. If I'm right there should be a proper ammount of very annoying latency. Reason can't read ahead your live played notes. This is the point where it shows latency is a permanent factor which cannot be worked around (unless you change drivers and/or hardware), calculation takes time.

I haven't tried the above yet but I will... I'm quite certain it works as said above though.

quote:

Originally posted by emc^2 There's no comparison between multi-track Cubase project latency with VSTi's and REASON latency you're trying so hard to get me to believe in.

Latency is set in the drivers both Reason and Cubase use. How can the latencies NOT be related?

quote:

Originally posted by emc^2 Really? Please enlighten me as to how the actual Reason works? Let me guess your midi controller is sending audio signals over midi cables and Reason is recording it. right????

He wasn't saying that at all.

quote:

Originally posted by emc^2 Quote: Reason generates and plays back digital audio - a stream of numerical values in the form of ones and zeroes. For you to be able to hear anything, this must be converted to analog audio and sent to some kind of listening equipment (a set of speakers, headphones, etc.). This conversion is most often handled by the audio card installed in your computer (on the Macintosh you can use the built-in audio hardware if you don�t have additional audio hardware installed). To deliver the digital audio to the audio hardware, Reason uses the driver you have selected in the Preferences dialog (see page 13). In the rack on screen, this connection is represented by the Reason Hardware Interface. If you are using ReWire, Reason will instead feed the digital audio to the ReWire master application (typically an audio sequencer program), which in turn handles the communication with the audio hardware Which then lands itself to reason that latency within Reason could be attributed to: a) Rewire b) DAW c) Shitty *cough* ASIO4ALL *cough* driver d) Obsolete and slow computer. Yeah, I'm talking about your 386 16Mhz Tandy PC that your mom got you for $5 at Goodwill store

Very true, however same goes for cubase. Performance differences are system related. So in effect, they would still have the same amount of latency as the drivers indicate.

quote:

Originally posted by emc^2 quote: quote: Originally posted by mysticalninja you're only sending midi messages to vsti's in cubase also... so what?? RUBBISH!!! yes. but those who are not working in VSTi realm ONLY are also sending AUDIO data to tracks... which I am sure you would agree would be SLIGHTLY more taxing on the system than PLAIN MIDI -->>> VSTi. No?

What's this about, I really don't understand this reply on the statement Mysticalninja made. emc^2 said reason is midi only. Mystical says cubase can be midi only as well if you would use vst's only. What does audio have to do with that? You're making an unequal and bad comparison from my perspective.
And for the record, plain audio s mostly a hard disk drive related process while vst's/synths are way more cpu reliant. This is why people bounce synths to audio.

quote:

but those who are not working in VSTi realm ONLY are also sending AUDIO data to tracks...

The above sentence is what made me wonder what you where actually trying to say. It isn't written that well, I tried hard but really am not sure what you meant.
but if you are comparing a VST only and an audio only project the following statement is right:

quote:

Originally posted by Sanguis Mortuum If you have a project with just VSTs (Or Reason with its synths), and a project with just audio, the one with VSTs (Or Reason) will use more CPU. Playing back audio uses very little CPU, its VST/VSTis/Synths/Effects that use CPU. If you dont understand this simple concept then I really feel sorry for you...

Synth require to processor to calculate the sound. While audio can be read and played almost directly from your harddrive.

quote:

Originally posted by emc^2 Cubase running several audio tracks could experience SUBSTANTIAL latency if using DirectX and/or crappy sound card. ASIO is definitely a way to go and is offered by "pro" sound cards.

quote:

Originally posted by Sanguis Mortuum Which is utter shite because latency has absolutely nothing to do with CPU usage and everything to do with soundcard buffers, therefore Reason and Cubase, when using the same drivers, will have similar latency. Im sorry your feeble brain doesnt seem able to understand this.

Let's have a look at this one
Now CPU & Latency are not related...

quote:

Originally posted by Sanguis Mortuum Yes, if you set the buffers lower you'll need a better CPU to feed the buffers fast enough. The also applies EQUALLY to Cubase as it does to Reason, so yet again doesnt in any way whatsoever prove your absolutely meaningless statements that the latency would be worse in Cubase.

Now CPU & Latency are related. Quite funny However I believe the above quite to be correct unlike the one before that one.

quote:

Originally posted by Sanguis Mortuum I dont know why you keep arguing, you just keep quoting completely out-of-context pieces of text from manuals when its clear you have no real clue about how latency and soundcards work...

Exactly.


There it is... My reply in full. My 38945683458 Great British Pounds and 32 cents of thoughts. Completely different from the one I made last night. Way better too if I might add.

I stand by my earlier statement, I think emc^2 is mostly incorrect.

quote:

Originally posted by Storyteller Let's have a look at this one Now CPU & Latency are not related... Now CPU & Latency are related. Quite funny

I guess in the first one I was just saying that using more CPU wont automatically make your latency any worse unless you use so much more that it causes skipping and forces you to increase the latency, so although they are linked there isnt really enough of a direct link between the two to support his argument.

And its a bit irrelevant anyway since there is, as you've said, absolutely no reason that Cubase would use more CPU than Reason when comparing like-for-like (similar synths/effects), and there certainly wont be any difference that is caused by the nonsensical statement of his that "Recording with Reason, you're only sending midi control messages, hence, no true latency would be very visible."

And, thank you for writing out all that, you've put it much better than I could have,

Yea, I figured that was what you meant. I wanted to write that down somewhere too but forgot about it somewhere halfway along the post hehe.

And you're welcome . These kinds of elaborate discussions are most fun imo. It was well worth my time.

ive been using reason for some time now...and i haven't had any complaints on to switch to logic or whatnot but yeah it has full potential and once u master it, you'll know how to make it professional sounding

jerk idiot, you're my new stupid sig quote.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.