Harmony Central Forums
Announcement Announcement Module
Collapse
No announcement yet.

25085168

Page Title Module
Move Remove Collapse







X
Conversation Detail Module
Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #91
    Can you completely use it all the time without the dongle?


    You can create projects and save them without the dongle, but you can't open projects.

    I don't mind if I need it to register once, but not if it's gonna ask for it randomly like Reason asked for the CD.


    For optimum results, you need to have it plugged in all the time, with the following exception...

    And also once you are validated on line without the dongel, can u then go off line and stay off line? And can you then stay that way or will you need to validate every time you open the program?


    I was taking my laptop to a movie set a couple months ago and planned to use Record. I validated Record online before leaving, and put the computer into sleep mode. But I forgot the dongle! So imagine my surprise when I woke up the laptop, and Record was ready to go. I don't think the authorization would survive if you turned off the power, though.

    And is there external midi? Seems to not be but I want 2 b sure. If not that is a HUGE limitations and really unacceptable that they would miss it.


    What exactly do you mean by "external MIDI"? Sync? Ability to accept external MIDI control? Ability to output MIDI? Please elaborate, and I'll answer.

    Gerry, if you'd care to elaborate on the dongle, or correct anything I've said, please do.
    _____________________________________________
    There are now 14 music videos posted on my YouTube channel, including four songs by Mark Longworth. Watch the music video playlist, subscribe, and spread the links! Check back often, because there's more to come...

    Comment


    • #92


      What exactly do you mean by "external MIDI"? Sync? Ability to accept external MIDI control? Ability to output MIDI? Please elaborate, and I'll answer.

      Gerry, if you'd care to elaborate on the dongle, or correct anything I've said, please do.



      Output Midi.


      What I've been searching for is a program that I could use live. Reason would have almost been it, but there was no audio input, and no control of external synths.

      But with this combo, I could see myself just bringing a laptop, and a sound card with enough inputs for a couple of mics, a guitar and bass.

      I would like to process the guitarist, bassist and vocalist through reason's fx while I play keys and have some sequenced hardware playing.

      Would this scenario work? I know I can do it with other programs, but its cumbersome and not as stable/cpu friendly.

      But I would not want to bring a dongle and possibly lose it. There may be a situation where i forget the dongle ( like you did!) or there is no wifi....what happens then? SOS?

      What a bummer that Reason went with a dongle. In my set up, I have a 3 usb ports available. Mouse, midi controller, and sound card.

      Comment


      • #93
        Hi, Gerry Basserman from Propellerheads here. I noticed some talk about ReWiring Record and that someone said that Reason was better to ReWire because it was 'way less memory hungry.' That's really not true. In every way, Record was coded from the bottom up to be a light, fleet app on multicore systems (which is one reason it took so long) - and that's just as true with Record/Reason running. In every way it is lighter on the system than Reason alone and so ReWiring the Duo is always going to give better performance. This may seem counter intuitive since there's apparently WAY more going on, but that's the fact by design. In many ways, the Record is the best upgrade Reason ever had.


        How can you say that's really not true, when Record "eats" 400 Mb Ram from scratch (without instruments loaded)?

        I was in the beta testers run and talked with the support team about this and they acknowledged that, but it was an architectural option, a "It is as It is" statement...

        The truth is that if you work with big projects, if the reason version loads more than 1,5 GB Ram (perfectly doable with the Reason Refills), you won't be able to load it in Record. I did the test myself.

        "In every way it is lighter on the system than Reason alone and so ReWiring the Duo is always going to give better performance. "

        What?
        How come then, the minimum system specs for Record are WAY Higher than Reasons? Just for the sake of laptop companies pockets?

        The only situation i can agree with that is if you add the multi processor variable, since reason does not support it. But, in the end, i am getting the "no more ram" warning more often than having 1 of my cores loaded at 100% with reason, so in the end it is invalid for what we're talking about.

        This WOULD not be an issue, IF, as i stated before, here and in other forums, Reason/Record, woult be a 64 bit program and/or streamed the samples from HDD.

        Don't confuse people. Record IS more efficient in Multi Core systems, but memory wise is way more heavier than Reason.

        Just pick a Reason project, check the memory it loads, then test it i record.

        Comment


        • #94
          How can you say that's really not true, when Record "eats" 400 Mb Ram from scratch (without instruments loaded)?

          I was in the beta testers run and talked with the support team about this and they acknowledged that, but it was an architectural option, a "It is as It is" statement...

          The truth is that if you work with big projects, if the reason version loads more than 1,5 GB Ram (perfectly doable with the Reason Refills), you won't be able to load it in Record. I did the test myself.

          "In every way it is lighter on the system than Reason alone and so ReWiring the Duo is always going to give better performance. "

          What?
          How come then, the minimum system specs for Record are WAY Higher than Reasons? Just for the sake of laptop companies pockets?

          The only situation i can agree with that is if you add the multi processor variable, since reason does not support it. But, in the end, i am getting the "no more ram" warning more often than having 1 of my cores loaded at 100% with reason, so in the end it is invalid for what we're talking about.

          This WOULD not be an issue, IF, as i stated before, here and in other forums, Reason/Record, woult be a 64 bit program and/or streamed the samples from HDD.

          Don't confuse people. Record IS more efficient in Multi Core systems, but memory wise is way more heavier than Reason.

          Just pick a Reason project, check the memory it loads, then test it i record.


          Well my bad for smushing two issues together there - I was primarily speaking to the performance issue, which is as you say makes Record completely advantageous in multi-core mode - so whether alone or in Rewire mode, it's going to give way more tracks, instruments, effects. Try Rewiring Record into a DAW and then create a dozen or more Thor synths on an average multicore computer - no problem.

          Now, regarding issue two: memory. It's been some years since I had less than two gigs of RAM on a computer, having learned that lesson well as a user of other DAWs, and it seems hard to buy a computer now that doesn't have it, so the 400MB that Record preloads is not an issue for me. I usually leave windows open in Safari and it's sitting there with about 400 MB as well. The fact is, I just loaded a blues tune into Reason 4 that used three of Propellerheads Hypersampled refills and waited about three minutes for all those many samples to load, finally having Reason consume over 900 mB. Then I loaded the same rns file into Record. It loaded over 5 times faster (courtesy of the RAM reserve) and then equally consumed over 900 MB. Maybe you have some concerns which regards your particular setup or workflow, but the upgrade to Record will make sense to every Reason user, whether they need audio recording or not. I don't know anyone who HAS gotten Record to boot just Reason much anymore. Even without all the extra functionality and performance, the fact is that your rns songs just sound way better thru the new Mixer.

          And will all apps and OS eventually be in a 64 bit world? - of course.

          Comment


          • #95
            Craig was asking for some"use of dongle" elaboration - like other posts, I'm coming from my user perspective as much as possible. Here's how I use the ignition key, or not: truth is, in my studio, it's internet auth 100% of the time, my key sits in the laptop bag for travel only. In that case, I boot in demo mode and only use the key temporarily for some function not available in demo mode (open file, export audio, bounce mixer channels). Then it goes back in my pocket or bag. To see how seemlessly you can switch between auth modes, try recording on a track while the key is IN and just pull it out while recording. No drama, you'll just see the AUTHORIZED LED go from green to red but the recording process is untouched, then put the key back in. LED changes back to green but again no interruption of any kind. This is also true of internet auth mode. IF connection is lost, which concerns some people, the AUTH LED will simply go from yellow (internet mode) to red (demo mode) without interrupting anything. It's not a PERFECT system, but IS very easygoing. For example, if I boot in demo mode and then want to switch to internet auth, I can't do it while the program is running. I need to save, close and reboot in internet auth mode. Oh well.

            Comment


            • #96


              Now, regarding issue two: memory. It's been some years since I had less than two gigs of RAM on a computer, having learned that lesson well as a user of other DAWs, and it seems hard to buy a computer now that doesn't have it, so the 400MB that Record preloads is not an issue for me. I usually leave windows open in Safari and it's sitting there with about 400 MB as well. The fact is, I just loaded a blues tune into Reason 4 that used three of Propellerheads Hypersampled refills and waited about three minutes for all those many samples to load, finally having Reason consume over 900 mB. Then I loaded the same rns file into Record. It loaded over 5 times faster (courtesy of the RAM reserve) and then equally consumed over 900 MB. Maybe you have some concerns which regards your particular setup or workflow, but the upgrade to Record will make sense to every Reason user, whether they need audio recording or not. I don't know anyone who HAS gotten Record to boot just Reason much anymore. Even without all the extra functionality and performance, the fact is that your rns songs just sound way better thru the new Mixer.

              And will all apps and OS eventually be in a 64 bit world? - of course.



              Well, first of all i don't know what os you are using, but just fyi i'm using Windos 32 and 64 bit. The issue at stake here is that in either os you can only address up to 2 GB with record or reason without hacking the executable long address flag, thing that i believe propellerheads does not support.

              Secondly, and for what you said in your last post, usually i don't state something without being pretty sure about what i am saying. In attachment there's the example i stated before whit a smaller project (+- 600 MB in reason wich loads faster in Record as you stated) BUT loads 1016 MB in record (i'd say around 400 mb more).

              The fact you are using safari, indicates me you are using a mac, and we might be facin an issue that happens only in Windows, but still memory allocation inside the software shouldn't be much different. On other hand in a 64 bit environment i can load up many more applications and each has it's owns memory allocation (not only a 64 bit application can address more memory, but also the os reversve more memory for applications). In your case safary alocated 400 mb, record 900, and so on.

              Finally, as you can see we are talking about a fairly small project (6 or 7 tracks). Of these only a couple are Studio Combo instruments. This supports my complaining that it's easy to overload the 2 GB max allocation on 32 bit applications.

              Finally, Gerry... With all due respect, i am not picking any fight with you or propellerheads. The things i stated here, i stated them in propellerheads forum, and they are the truth, in the ways i have experienced it. On other hand, since i have Propellerheads record, i rarely use reason, unless for older projects, or projects that i have to rewire (and i still prefer to rewire reason to cubase rathed than record).

              But, from a user standpoint, there are still some things and i stated the already, i would just be repeating, that i would like to see available in record.

              Cheers,

              mcatalao (same user in the propellerheads forum)

              Comment


              • #97

                And will all apps and OS eventually be in a 64 bit world? - of course.


                Hopefully this will be true for Record, too. Actually, the lack of 64bit memory adressing and/or missing discstreaming of sample programs is the only thing preventing me - and other people I know - from upgrading to Record.

                Everything is improved compared to Reason. The sequencer, the workflow and the mixer is a killer. However this is useless with not enough memory adressing.

                I would love to work in one environment (Record) only. With the new mixer this is the way to go. I know you can rewire and stem back and forth but frankly this is a real pain. Without 64bit/streaming you can't work with big orchestral sample sets or large drums samples. I started converting my samples but you'll be stuck with not enough ram.

                Look at your own Refills: As far as I read some Propellerheads Refills may easily use 1 gig or more Ram for one sound. This means you can load only two or three large patches. This is a real limitation.

                There is also no 64bit rewire making it impossible to rewire to the latest Logic version on Snowleopard. You have to run Logic in 32bit mode in order to use Reason/Record what limits the use of Logic, too.

                Well, to make it short I would love to hear a clear Propellerheads statement if and when we get a 64 bit version (including Rewire).

                Being vague about this issue does not help the company and looking at the latest marketing activities it seems to me that users are not upgrading in the expected numbers.

                Comment


                • #98
                  Hi, Gerry Basserman from Propellerheads here. I noticed some talk about ReWiring Record and that someone said that Reason was better to ReWire because it was 'way less memory hungry.' That's really not true. In every way, Record was coded from the bottom up to be a light, fleet app on multicore systems (which is one reason it took so long) - and that's just as true with Record/Reason running. In every way it is lighter on the system than Reason alone and so ReWiring the Duo is always going to give better performance. This may seem counter intuitive since there's apparently WAY more going on, but that's the fact by design. In many ways, the Record is the best upgrade Reason ever had.

                  Record uses up way more resources on my computer than Reason. Especially RAM. The Application itself is well over a gig in size.

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Record uses up way more resources on my computer than Reason. Especially RAM. The Application itself is well over a gig in size.



                    With all due respect a bit of a reality check is needed here.
                    Using more RAM is not using more "resources".
                    RECORD is a Multithread capable application, so even if you just use it with the Reason 4 devices and NO Audio recording you get far less CPU overhead on a Core 2 Duo, i5 or i7 based computing system.
                    If you just connect the Reason devices in Record straight to the rewire out channels and use it in slave mode with say, Ableton Live (like you would have without record) you also get lower CPU overhead as it effectively turns RECORD into a multithread capable rewire slave device.
                    In all honest I don't own a single PC/Mac with less than 4 gig of RAM and many of these newer machines come with 4 gig as standard.
                    I haven't noted a substantially huge difference in RAM useage with any of my old Reason songs brought into Record.
                    Considering one gets fully dynamics processing of every input channel, audio recording, the SSL modeled desk, great buss compression, the substantial number of inserts and so many instrument devices combined in one Record project on a Core 2 Duo iMac, tells me that this is a very processor and resource efficient tool overall.
                    In no way could I have over 100+ Devices and the levels of polyphony + processing power I get with Record using any other host.
                    As it stands I use Reaktor on a dedicated PC notebook for good reason in my current set up.
                    There's a lot going on under the hood in Record and whilst it's not perfect it is a pretty damn solid product at V1.0 release.
                    <div class="signaturecontainer"><a target="_blank" href="http://venndiagram.virb.com">Venn Diagram - Artist Website</a><br><br>Machinedrum, Monomachine, Analog Four, Octatrack, NordModular, Moog SubPhatty, Novation Nova, Korg MS20 Mini, Maschine, Tassman, Aalto, Absynth, Uhe's ACE &amp; Audulus<br><br><a href="mailto:faxorgy.productions@gmail.com">Contac t </a></div>

                    Comment


                    • With all due respect a bit of a reality check is needed here.
                      Using more RAM is not using more "resources".


                      Saying ram isn't resources, is at least disrespectful for one of the most important item under the hood of your computer (and for Von Neumann). From where i come, cpu, Ram and HDD, is the trinity of resources of a computer. If one of this items fails you have no daw.

                      If your knowledge of computing doesn't allow you to see what i'm talking about then please, check again my previous message, or do your math and see that you cannot have more than 3 GB ram in a 32 bit environment, AND a 32 bit application cannot address more than 3 GB ram and in fact in windows you wont be able to address more than 2 GB for each application.

                      Record is stable has a horse but i'm getting a bit tired of the "no memory" error on and on. I have Windows XP 32 and 64 (studio), windows Vista and Windows 7 (Home and work), and i have the same error every time. My studio PC, has 8 GB Ram and even under win 64 i have the same error.

                      "In no way could I have over 100+ Devices and the levels of polyphony + processing power I get with Record using any other host."

                      True. But if you use NN-XT's with big samples you cannot say that. And if you go for some nice instruments from the reason refills, then your problem won't be processor, or poliphoy, but ram. Test it.

                      Comment


                      • With all due respect a bit of a reality check is needed here.
                        Using more RAM is not using more "resources".
                        RECORD is a Multithread capable application, so even if you just use it with the Reason 4 devices and NO Audio recording you get far less CPU overhead on a Core 2 Duo, i5 or i7 based computing system.
                        If you just connect the Reason devices in Record straight to the rewire out channels and use it in slave mode with say, Ableton Live (like you would have without record) you also get lower CPU overhead as it effectively turns RECORD into a multithread capable rewire slave device.
                        In all honest I don't own a single PC/Mac with less than 4 gig of RAM and many of these newer machines come with 4 gig as standard.
                        I haven't noted a substantially huge difference in RAM useage with any of my old Reason songs brought into Record.
                        Considering one gets fully dynamics processing of every input channel, audio recording, the SSL modeled desk, great buss compression, the substantial number of inserts and so many instrument devices combined in one Record project on a Core 2 Duo iMac, tells me that this is a very processor and resource efficient tool overall.
                        In no way could I have over 100+ Devices and the levels of polyphony + processing power I get with Record using any other host.
                        As it stands I use Reaktor on a dedicated PC notebook for good reason in my current set up.
                        There's a lot going on under the hood in Record and whilst it's not perfect it is a pretty damn solid product at V1.0 release.


                        RAM is in fact a 'resource'. The more Ram used by an application - the more system resources required naturally. And Record cannot recognise more than 3Gb of RAM (being 32bit). The Record app on its own consumes a whole gig. So you can quite easily run out of RAM on a project with large audio files and NNXTs using large samples. My own finding is that Record uses approximately ten times more RAM than Reason does on an empty project.

                        Next. Record uses more CPU clock-for-clock than Reason even on an empty rack with nothing in it. Really the only difference with Record is that it's multi-threaded - whilst Reason runs on a single hardware thread. But its not more efficient. Its no good to simply rely on brute force power (and expecting all your user-base to be running the very latest hardware), you must code an app to make efficient use of all available power. Reason was known for being an extremely tight and elegant piece of code -> using next no resources.

                        I was on the Record beta program and I wasn't the only one complaining about CPU usage. I can run over 50 tracks in Logic without chocking my CPU. And far more than that in Reason. In fact Reason's never maxed out my CPU and I see no need to upgrade as of now.

                        Comment


                        • RAM is in fact a 'resource'. The more Ram used by an application - the more system resources required naturally. And Record cannot recognise more than 3Gb of RAM (being 32bit). The Record app on its own consumes a whole gig. So you can quite easily run out of RAM on a project with large audio files and NNXTs using large samples. My own finding is that Record uses approximately ten times more RAM than Reason does on an empty project.

                          Next. Record uses more CPU clock-for-clock than Reason even on an empty rack with nothing in it. Really the only difference with Record is that it's multi-threaded - whilst Reason runs on a single hardware thread. But its not more efficient. Its no good to simply rely on brute force power (and expecting all your user-base to be running the very latest hardware), you must code an app to make efficient use of all available power. Reason was known for being an extremely tight and elegant piece of code -> using next no resources.

                          I was on the Record beta program and I wasn't the only one complaining about CPU usage. I can run over 50 tracks in Logic without chocking my CPU. And far more than that in Reason. In fact Reason's never maxed out my CPU and I see no need to upgrade as of now.


                          You should stick to facts, record beta and the final version are different on some aspects. First of all, the record beta was working with a bunch of other applications that hogged the cpu and ram just for debugging purposes.

                          Secondly, record beta had some issues related to processor scheduling, and memory allocation (more on the De-Allocation side of things actually).
                          Just FYI, if talking about a simple audio project, record can be very strong, actually. I made some tests in the times of the beta and i could load up to 100 + tracks on record, and play them with no problem. On other hand the scratch folder is a pain for big programs, but, generally speaking, hdd is a pain for big projects, no matter the application.

                          Anyway, you can run 50 or more tracks without hogging your cpu. I'm working on a project with 38 and it's a no brainer. A lot of processing over it ,loads of dynamics all over the place, a reason bass from the REB, a main vox, and a chorus with 6 male vocals, a mandolin, 2 flutes, a stereo tracked guitar (3 tracks). And Record doesn't get more than 20 % of my CPU even in the parts where the tracks are all playing.

                          There's another thing you should consider if you are not aware. I'm picky about natural sounding refills, and i love the reason Refills (i own the combi). You must understand, that when you work with this refills the often are not only multi timbered on each NN-XT, but also, each patch is made of layers of NN-XT's. Really, there aren't much software's like this allowing you to alter this a tweak all the components of an instrument. So, a RDPi piano can load up to 500 MB in 16 bit mode. I even don't dare to load them in 24 bit...
                          This is were ram comes up, because reason and record don't stream from the hdd (as far as sample devices are concerned).

                          But you digress, or at least are not entirely correct saying record loads 1 GB with an empty project. But it's dreadful that reason loads around 60 or so mb, and record loads 400.

                          This technicalities don't make the application unusable, but on some aspects are drawbacks that were "inherited" from reason. You often have to create fake Bounces of the recorded tracks like those big rdp pianos, and delete the track. Or using light versions of those pianos, wich imho simply don't cut it...

                          Comment


                          • You should stick to facts, record beta and the final version are different on some aspects. First of all, the record beta was working with a bunch of other applications that hogged the cpu and ram just for debugging purposes.

                            Secondly, record beta had some issues related to processor scheduling, and memory allocation (more on the De-Allocation side of things actually).
                            Just FYI, if talking about a simple audio project, record can be very strong, actually. I made some tests in the times of the beta and i could load up to 100 + tracks on record, and play them with no problem. On other hand the scratch folder is a pain for big programs, but, generally speaking, hdd is a pain for big projects, no matter the application.

                            Anyway, you can run 50 or more tracks without hogging your cpu. I'm working on a project with 38 and it's a no brainer. A lot of processing over it ,loads of dynamics all over the place, a reason bass from the REB, a main vox, and a chorus with 6 male vocals, a mandolin, 2 flutes, a stereo tracked guitar (3 tracks). And Record doesn't get more than 20 % of my CPU even in the parts where the tracks are all playing.

                            There's another thing you should consider if you are not aware. I'm picky about natural sounding refills, and i love the reason Refills (i own the combi). You must understand, that when you work with this refills the often are not only multi timbered on each NN-XT, but also, each patch is made of layers of NN-XT's. Really, there aren't much software's like this allowing you to alter this a tweak all the components of an instrument. So, a RDPi piano can load up to 500 MB in 16 bit mode. I even don't dare to load them in 24 bit...
                            This is were ram comes up, because reason and record don't stream from the hdd (as far as sample devices are concerned).

                            But you digress, or at least are not entirely correct saying record loads 1 GB with an empty project. But it's dreadful that reason loads around 60 or so mb, and record loads 400.

                            This technicalities don't make the application unusable, but on some aspects are drawbacks that were "inherited" from reason. You often have to create fake Bounces of the recorded tracks like those big rdp pianos, and delete the track. Or using light versions of those pianos, wich imho simply don't cut it...


                            I am factually correct. I'm obviously talking about the final version of Record. I was obviously testing all the way through to the release candidates and final version. Performance didn't change much for me from the Betas(with debug code) to the release version. Its still slow on a 2Ghz processor.

                            Comment


                            • Thanks, Tom.

                              For me, a Reason user since 1.0, Record was the answer to most of my prayers.

                              But I still had to get past the atrocious marketing of Record, which was equal parts intelligence-insulting and doomed-to-be-a-disappointment hyperbolic.

                              The marketing for Record was so bad that it put me off it for like a week or so.

                              But then I came to my senses, saw what it could do for me, and I bought it.

                              And I'm very happy that I did.

                              But no matter what gets written here, and how many pages deep this thread goes, I think that, at the end of the day, it comes down to this . . .

                              If you're a Reason user, it's damn near inexcusable not to have Record, and if you're not a Reason user, but are using a DAW of some sort, there's very little reason to pick up Record (unless you're REALLY into time-stretching).

                              But if you're new to making music on the computer, you could probably do worse than the Reason/Record combo.

                              You could also probably do better.

                              P.S. I know your name's "Craig" . . . I'm just being daffy. It's from that old Letterman bit, where he'd have a fake NBC/GE executive come out. The fake exec would always start out whatever he said with a "Thanks, Tom" . . . "mistaking" Letterman for Tom Brokaw.



                              I agree completely. I think they totally lost sight of what the music was supposed to be about and either brought in the wrong crowds or drove the fans further away!

                              Comment


                              • I am factually correct. I'm obviously talking about the final version of Record. I was obviously testing all the way through to the release candidates and final version. Performance didn't change much for me from the Betas(with debug code) to the release version. Its still slow on a 2Ghz processor.


                                You were not correct when saying record allocated 1 GB ram completely empty. It allocates 400 mb.
                                You are not correct saying there weren't performance changes from the beta releases to the final, or at least, that must be your experience.

                                From my experience, record is much lighter with the final release than the betas.

                                Anyway, a single core 2GHz processor is slow, but still usable. I ran 2 of the 4 demo songs in my 1,7 GHz asus laptop with 2 GB ram (and those songs were heavy!). I never used it with record again though because that laptop died on me sometime ago.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X