April 17, 2014, 11:53:18 pm
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email
News: Arturia's webmaster is glad to offer you these brand new forums ! Have fun using it and feel free to email any encountered problem at webmaster@arturia.com.

Arturia Forums



Author Topic: Arturia synths as Rack Extensions... any plans on this ?  (Read 2194 times)

Koshdukai

  • Beta-testers
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 416
  • Karma: 17
Arturia synths as Rack Extensions... any plans on this ?
« on: March 21, 2012, 01:08:37 pm »
As a Reason and Arturia user, I just had to come here and post something like this, right? ;)

So, the question to Arturia is:
Are there any plans about supporting
Propellerhead's Rack Extensions Technology ?

...and, to the users:
Are you interested in seeing Arturia's synths in your Reason rack?

More details about this at http://www.propellerheads.se/news/rackextensions/

Well... as anyone may suspect, I'm interested, of course  ;D

jasefos

  • Beta-testers
  • Apprentice
  • *
  • Posts: 6
  • Karma: 0
Re: Arturia synths as Rack Extensions... any plans on this ?
« Reply #1 on: March 27, 2012, 04:37:22 pm »
Who cares !!!!

Arturia makes PLUGINS which work with EVERY DAW on the planet with the exception of Reason. If Propellerhead considers their product a DAW now it should support plugins like the rest of the DAW world does.

Perhaps the problem could be solved by Propellerhead simply making a Rack Extension which hosts plugins? Don't you think that would be a far more elegant solution?

Sorry for the rant, but really ... standards are great! We do not need more standards. I have doubts 3rd parties will warm to Propellerhead's way of thinking.

Why should 3rd parties dilute their development efforts to support a minority DAW?

Propellerhead, WAKE UP!!!!

Koshdukai

  • Beta-testers
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 416
  • Karma: 17
Re: Arturia synths as Rack Extensions... any plans on this ?
« Reply #2 on: March 27, 2012, 07:26:08 pm »
Who cares !!!!

Arturia makes PLUGINS which work with EVERY DAW on the planet with the exception of Reason. If Propellerhead considers their product a DAW now it should support plugins like the rest of the DAW world does.

Perhaps the problem could be solved by Propellerhead simply making a Rack Extension which hosts plugins? Don't you think that would be a far more elegant solution?

Sorry for the rant, but really ... standards are great! We do not need more standards. I have doubts 3rd parties will warm to Propellerhead's way of thinking.

Why should 3rd parties dilute their development efforts to support a minority DAW?

Propellerhead, WAKE UP!!!!

1) I care :)

2) Arturia makes virtual synths that work on established DAWs, yes. They had to... to keep the market wide enough to get the needed financial return. Something that was closed until recently in case of Reason. I know of many soft-synth/fx developers that love Reason and wished they could get into that market too. At least one of those are in the first group supporting Rack Extensions :)

3) Propellerhead have shown time and time again that they know how to make things work the way they think they should. That's why they made Reason like it is and that's also why they came up with ReWire prior to Steinberg's VST. If you get your history right and dig deep, you'll see why VSTs (then AUs and RTAS) are "the standard" today. That doesn't mean those are the best ways to achieve a virtual studio.

Ask Arturia or any other "plug-in" developer or even the users the headaches they have trying to develop to this "standard" where each DAW "talks" its own dialect of VST. This is why the same plug-in works great on some DAWs and has issues on others.

Becoming a "de facto" standard doesn't turn Steinberg as the best standard setter. Just check the initial VST specs and documentations. It left so many developers scratching their heads and going into trial'n'error mode until their stuff worked...

Speaking of early standards done right... you know the REX format, don't you? That's a  Propellerhead "standard". Others hang to whatever is there to hang to. Sometimes because it just works other times because there's really nothing else around so they stick to that even if has issues (here thinking of the VST specs).

4) Yes, Propellerhead could make Reason a ReWire Master and/or could do a VST wrapper device that allowed VST parameters to be mapped to CV in/out (at the back of that wrapper Combinator-like device) but... the truth is, Propellerhead have always considered VST as a very badly spec'ed standard and prefered to take their time to design what they think is a better one.

From the little info that's been leaking, it looks like, from a developer perspective, this first version of the Rack Extensions SDK is a very good step in the right direction, technically speaking.
I'm sure you can understand why there's already some established developers supporting the Rack Extensions as soon as they realize that all they need to care about is the DSP code, workflow and some GUI (re)designing.

So why wouldn't established plug-in developers jump in and extend the life of their already developed DSP work with a couple of weeks (depending on the plug-in, of course) of workflow code adaptation and GUI work.

This is all my own speculation, since that's the only thing we can do at this point and only those with access to the SDK can confirm what I said. And from the comments of those that have, I'm convinced I'm not that far from what I said here.
http://www.sonicstate.com/news/2012/03/26/messe12-rack-extensions-developer-perspective/
http://www.sonicstate.com/news/2012/03/22/messe12-new-prototypes-from-u-he/
http://www.musicradar.com/news/tech/musikmesse-2012-video-u-he-demos-reason-rack-extensions-535972

5) You can rant what you want ;) You're entitled to that, more so when done in a civil manner like you did :)
I've suggested, requested, ranted and almost gave up, begging for a solution to the "closeness" of the Reason virtual Rack.
I complained about the lack of Audio input on such a good rewiring platform and finally got that.
Complained about the lack of sampling capabilities on Reason "samplers" and got that also.
Lack of audio tracks. Got that.
MIDI output and some other missing stuff ? erm... still waiting ;)
Now, Reason users will finally get 3rd party devices inside "The Rack", like a true (virtual) rack should.
and... 3rd party developers, finally, get the chance to sell their virtual devices to a once closed market, at least those that wanted that opportunity.

6) Standards are good... but if there's a better and easier way to do things, I'm all for that to become the new de-facto standard.

7) 3rd party developers can decide for themselves if it's worth the time spent on porting their existing plug-ins versus the access to a once closed market.

The AppStore model might scare most of the establish developers but you know what this type of eco-system will do to indie-devs that have no eShop and just want to keep doing what they do best: DSP coding while knowing that their plug-ins don't get copied and used illegally and can actually start getting some income through this passion of theirs.


Let's wait and see :)

I for one, am very happy with this technology, even though I'm sure it's very limiting in this first incarnation, where some stuff isn't allowed yet (GUI-wise) but it can only get better with time.

I would love to mix'n'match (and finally get some decent virtual wires in) the Arturia ARP2600V, Arturia Moog Modular V, Korg MS-20 and even the Arturia Oberheim V and connect audio and CV how I want, just like in real-life.

But I'm sure others could care less about these possibilites and the current DAWs are just fine for what they do.
« Last Edit: March 27, 2012, 08:30:23 pm by Koshdukai »

abod

  • Apprentice
  • *
  • Posts: 3
  • Karma: 0
Re: Arturia synths as Rack Extensions... any plans on this ?
« Reply #3 on: April 21, 2012, 12:29:15 pm »
I'm a Reason user  :) , and rack extensions will take Reason to the text level.
It's a very stable musicprogram, with huge capability, if you say otherwise
You don't know what Reason is about !
Yes I Do miss the fact that there is still no midi out.
But rack extensions will open up a new world of sound possibilities!
The fact that Korg has jumped on the train means that this is a serious
Strategy from propellerheads to set a new standard for plugins, and to make
Reason the optimal musicsoftware !
If Arturia decide to convert already made softsynths ,for Reason rack extensions
Then they would rock my world  ;D

stuey

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 200
  • Karma: 9
Re: Arturia synths as Rack Extensions... any plans on this ?
« Reply #4 on: July 17, 2012, 09:54:39 am »
I'm also a reason user and their rack extensions are a great idea. I'd love to see Arturia in there although maybe a conflict of interest as Reason already has synths and as far as I can see, the external companies make RE's are only doing FX and studio tools, compressors and stuff like that.

However, to see Arturia in Reason would rock.

The Props guys are doing things different and I really think that's great. Just because they are a DAW doesn't mean they need to open up their API in order for it to fall down under Vst and RTAS.
The point is, that they have developed the whole rack extension thing to make reason as stable as possible while still opening up their dev channels for other guys to create new and fun
sounding 'plug ins'

Stuart
Mac 10.7.5
2.3Ghz Quad Core 'Clovertown'
8 Gb 667 RAM
SSD Boot Drive
Lynx Aurora 8
Lynx AES16
UAD LA 610 Mk 2
UAD 2 Duo
Arturia Spark
Arturia Analog Laboratory 61
Pro Tools 10.3.7
Arturia V Collection
Arturia Analog Laboratory
Arturia Brass 2
Ableton Live 8
Reason 6.5
Melodyne Studio 3

stuey

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 200
  • Karma: 9
Re: Arturia synths as Rack Extensions... any plans on this ?
« Reply #5 on: July 17, 2012, 10:12:00 am »
Among other things Im involved with software development and user experience and I do know a few dev guys that are a bit disgruntled with the way reason have rolled RE out.

I understand what they mean, why open up the channel if they have written the code already?
But then that's what coders will always say isn't it, that's their job already done for the most part.

But the fact that the DSP code just sits in an ready Props written wrapper is great, means just writing the interesting bit right? The audio. 

Stuart
Mac 10.7.5
2.3Ghz Quad Core 'Clovertown'
8 Gb 667 RAM
SSD Boot Drive
Lynx Aurora 8
Lynx AES16
UAD LA 610 Mk 2
UAD 2 Duo
Arturia Spark
Arturia Analog Laboratory 61
Pro Tools 10.3.7
Arturia V Collection
Arturia Analog Laboratory
Arturia Brass 2
Ableton Live 8
Reason 6.5
Melodyne Studio 3

stuey

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 200
  • Karma: 9
Re: Arturia synths as Rack Extensions... any plans on this ?
« Reply #6 on: July 17, 2012, 10:20:28 am »
However, it's all about how you plan your workflow.

Personally I rarely use reason as a stand alone product, only when I want to sculpt sounds.
for the most part I use it as a rewire slave in pro tools, I chuck away all the submix stuff in reason and just plug in the sound modules into specific pro tools channels, therefore I just mix in Pro tools and have reason as a huge great sounding soundbank.

Meaning I also add in RTAS, TDM and UAD giving me them all from one mix point.

But it's horses for courses as they say

Stuart
Mac 10.7.5
2.3Ghz Quad Core 'Clovertown'
8 Gb 667 RAM
SSD Boot Drive
Lynx Aurora 8
Lynx AES16
UAD LA 610 Mk 2
UAD 2 Duo
Arturia Spark
Arturia Analog Laboratory 61
Pro Tools 10.3.7
Arturia V Collection
Arturia Analog Laboratory
Arturia Brass 2
Ableton Live 8
Reason 6.5
Melodyne Studio 3

Koshdukai

  • Beta-testers
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 416
  • Karma: 17
Re: Arturia synths as Rack Extensions... any plans on this ?
« Reply #7 on: July 17, 2012, 10:39:45 am »
I do know a few dev guys that are a bit disgruntled with the way reason have rolled RE out.

I understand what they mean, why open up the channel if they have written the code already?
Could you explain this last sentence, please?

Who are "they" here? PH or the RE devs? I'm trying to understand the 3rd party RE dev issue.

I know that the big advantage of REs to devs is the extremely easy (depending on how the DSP code was structured) "conversion" of the existing DSP code to run as RE.

The other advantage is that is a write-once, build-for-any-platform kinda environment, meaning, your RE will "automagically" support 32/64bit architectures... including non-intel  (maybe ;D).

Automation, MIDI control (Remote) and patch management are all dealt by the "host" (Reason).

So, this is a DSP coder dream come true, really, IMHO.

The only current disadvantage is the amount of effort to redo the GUI and some natural and expected limitations of Version 1.0 of the SDK that everyone keeps wishing it will evolve and allow more complex stuff, GUI-wise.

Most RE devs deal with this like an old-school hardware manufacturer would deal with building a device. Some knobs, sliders, buttons, LEDs and small text LCD displays and that's the GUI of the device, even though, as a VST it may have all fancy and advanced GUI that ease the interaction, the audio "engine" of their virtual device will always be the same, inside (with some smart source code management, it can even be kept in the same codebase tree).

PS: oh, and there are RE instruments right now, btw: Korg Polysix (polysynth), GForce Re-Tron (sample based), Radical Piano (hybrid sample+fx), ABL2 (monosynth), ...
« Last Edit: July 17, 2012, 10:44:56 am by Koshdukai »

stuey

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 200
  • Karma: 9
Re: Arturia synths as Rack Extensions... any plans on this ?
« Reply #8 on: July 17, 2012, 11:31:44 am »
I do know a few dev guys that are a bit disgruntled with the way reason have rolled RE out.

I understand what they mean, why open up the channel if they have written the code already?

Could you explain this last sentence, please?


Yeah sure. I talking about external devs that are being asked to dev for the RE's. The guys I know are frustrated that the work has been done for them, coders like to code, that's what they do, so
when the 'best bit', as far as a coder is concerned is already done for them, they feel like they are being hand held somewhat, y'know, told what to do, which goes against everything a coder is about.

It has loads of plus points for the user which is the main thing, coders forget that they are actually coding for a product and not for themselves. It's almost like 'preset' coding, they give you a wrapper with in and out points and you just have to write the cool stuff in between. It makes perfect sense from a user standpoint. 

PS: oh, and there are RE instruments right now, btw: Korg Polysix (polysynth), GForce Re-Tron (sample based), Radical Piano (hybrid sample+fx), ABL2 (monosynth), ...

Yeah i saw this, I stand corrected :) Korg Poly Six, nice !! The G Force stuff is nice, although I used the minimonsta for a project the other week, I did a side by side comparison with the Mini V. Still prefer the Mini V


Stuart
Mac 10.7.5
2.3Ghz Quad Core 'Clovertown'
8 Gb 667 RAM
SSD Boot Drive
Lynx Aurora 8
Lynx AES16
UAD LA 610 Mk 2
UAD 2 Duo
Arturia Spark
Arturia Analog Laboratory 61
Pro Tools 10.3.7
Arturia V Collection
Arturia Analog Laboratory
Arturia Brass 2
Ableton Live 8
Reason 6.5
Melodyne Studio 3

Koshdukai

  • Beta-testers
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 416
  • Karma: 17
Re: Arturia synths as Rack Extensions... any plans on this ?
« Reply #9 on: July 17, 2012, 02:44:29 pm »
external devs that are being asked to dev for the RE's. The guys I know are frustrated that the work has been done for them, coders like to code, that's what they do, so when the 'best bit', as far as a coder is concerned is already done for them, they feel like they are being hand held somewhat, y'know, told what to do, which goes against everything a coder is about.

It has loads of plus points for the user which is the main thing, coders forget that they are actually coding for a product and not for themselves. It's almost like 'preset' coding, they give you a wrapper with in and out points and you just have to write the cool stuff in between. It makes perfect sense from a user standpoint.
Hmmm... that's extremely odd.

Maybe you're talking about app/GUI coders and not DSP coders, because RE is really what every DSP coder whishes: to focus on the audio processing algorithms and let every other non-audio related boring stuff out of the way.

Many of the existing bugs, usually happen with that "other stuff" too (GUI, functionality implementation, patch saving/loading, etc), so even that is a bonus, because that's done and working.

If you're talking about GUI coders, then yeah, there's really no GUI to "code" (only to... hmmm... "(re)design'n'build" ::) ) since that already exists and is taken care by the host. To be honest, that's how it should be, because the graphical environment is already thought out and made and that's the only correct way to keep the same surprise-free behavior on all the rack devices, independently of the manufacturer (i.e. developer).

On a virtual work environment like Reason, expected behavior of devices and UI integrity and consistency is very important and exactly one of the differences when comparing, for instance, with a VST host, where each VST has its own rules of how to save/load/browse a patch, how to reset parameters, how to MIDI learn (when available), how to even rotate a knob (some use vertical drag, others use circular dragging), etc...

Allowing 3rd party devs to implement those behaviors by following a set of rules would be a time waster for them and would never work, because some devs have different interpretations when faced with the same set of rules.

Even with all these restrictions and "things made for them", you can clearly see still, differences between each Rack Extension's developers. Some forgot to add a Note On LED on the front panel (Re-Tron) others did it but very small and forgot to add it to the collapsed front (Polysix). Some FX devices don't have audio input/output LEDs like every other Reason devices, etc... so clearly, letting the 3rd party devs do themselves some of the expected standards doesn't work ;)
« Last Edit: July 17, 2012, 03:20:28 pm by Koshdukai »

stuey

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 200
  • Karma: 9
Re: Arturia synths as Rack Extensions... any plans on this ?
« Reply #10 on: July 17, 2012, 03:01:36 pm »
Sorry, yeah GUI coders. For the DSP guys I imagine it's a perfect scenario. I code, it works and I don't have to deal with tying things together.

I've been trying to get together with some people to think of ideas. I'm not a coder by any stretch, I tend to look at more user functionally, ideas and workflow

Stuart   
Mac 10.7.5
2.3Ghz Quad Core 'Clovertown'
8 Gb 667 RAM
SSD Boot Drive
Lynx Aurora 8
Lynx AES16
UAD LA 610 Mk 2
UAD 2 Duo
Arturia Spark
Arturia Analog Laboratory 61
Pro Tools 10.3.7
Arturia V Collection
Arturia Analog Laboratory
Arturia Brass 2
Ableton Live 8
Reason 6.5
Melodyne Studio 3

 

Carbonate design by Bloc
SMF 2.0.2 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines