PROPELLERHEAD RECORD

[Anderton]

PROLOGUE

It may seem inappropriate to start this Pro Review with a story about Ableton Live, but please bear with me.

Many years ago I was at the Frankfurt Messe when Gerhard Behles, one of the driving forces behind Ableton, confided in me that the next version of Live was going to include MIDI. I was skeptical, to say the least. "But then you'll add notation, and all these MIDI filters and plug-ins, and your elegant program will become just another bloated DAW. That's not what I want for live performance."

He could tell I was pretty upset. But he just looked at me, put his hand on my shoulder, and said "Don't worry, Craig. We do MIDI the Ableton way."

And they did, incorporating it in an intelligent way that worked smoothly with Live, but didn't overextend itself to the point where it became a hindrance instead of a cool feature.

So what does this have to do with Record? Well, we have the inverse situation here. Propellerhead produced the ultimate MIDI studio - Reason - so when I heard they were adding audio recording capabilities in some new program, I was again skeptical.

But, they did it in "the Propellerhead way." And what exactly is the Propellerhead way? Well, here's what it looks like to me.

In 1994, while everyone else was trying to get ornery digital audio algorithms to stretch audio, Propellerheads decided instead to cut digital audio into little pieces, and trigger those pieces with MIDI. Thus the REX file format was born, which paradoxically, is far more popular now - 15 years later - than it was when it was invented. If a loop library these days doesn't include REX format files, it's in trouble from a commercial standpoint.

Then in 1997, they basically started the "let's emulate vintage instruments" craze with ReBirth, which virtualized the Roland TR-808 and TB-303, then later added a TR-909 in an update. (And, major props to Roland for taking ReBirth as the tribute/homage it was meant to be, and not sending in a team of lawyers to mess everything up.)

A year later, ReWire appeared as a way to get ReBirth (and later Reason) into other programs. But it was adopted by a zillion other manufacturers, and few among us have not ReWired something into something else at some point.

Then in 1999, as the world started retiring their ADATs and diving deep into digital recording and plug-ins, Propellerheads went in the opposite direction and produced Reason, a brilliant implementation of a MIDI studio with no VST/AU/DX plug-in support, and no digital audio. It didn't matter: This laptop-friendly, rock-solid, highly cost-effective program took the music world by storm. And, more than one DAW owner bought Reason solely as a "super virtual instrument rack" to ReWire into their host DAW of choice.

Over the years ReCycle has gone through revisions, the REX format became stereo, Reason is now up to version 4, and Propellerheads also found the time to produce expansion sound packs of peerless quality (Reason Drums is still one of my favorite ways to do drum tracks).

My point? We're dealing with a company that's an innovator, that follows its own muse, and has a passion for creating exceptional music software. Of course, they're definitely not the only company that fits that description, but few would dispute that Propellerheads has occupied an important position in the music software industry.

Okay, by now you're saying..."c'mon Craig, shut up with the encomiums and start reviewing Record!" But here's why this intro is important.

I recently read a review of Record in a magazine that shall go nameless. It listed the various features - sequencer, mixer, processors, instruments, Reason integration, time-stretching, and so on. It was accurate, and it was definitely favorable, as it should have been. But with all due respect to a fellow author, I think it missed the point.

This Pro Review is (hopefully) about not missing the point. Record isn't another DAW, and it isn't just a way to add audio recording to Reason so Reason fanatics would stop complaining that they weren't able to record digital audio. Record is all about emulating not just a studio, but the workflow of a traditional hardware studio - which is not always the same as a DAW, as we'll find out over the course of this review.

But wait a minute - aren't Pro Reviews supposed to start when the reviewer opens the box? And doesn't it seem like I already know a bit about the program?

Well, yes, I have to point out that this time around, I had already written up a one-page review of Record for the December issue of EQ magazine as part of a roundup. In the process, I learned quite a bit about the program - mostly about how easy it is to get a project off the ground. But this Pro Review affords an opportunity to go deeper into the software, and if it goes the way I hope, it will also serve as a place where people can contribute tips and opinions about this innovative - yet curiously retro - program.

If you want to follow along, you can download a demo version of Record from http://www.propellerheads.se/download/. Now, sometimes having a downloadable demo available is the kiss of death for a Pro Review - after all, what do you need a review for if you can check the program out for yourself? But that's one reason (no pun intended!) I want to bend this more into the direction of a "Record user group," where we all contribute our own little nuggets on how to use this software. Of course, we'll point out the limitations (yes, it has definite limitations) and strengths, because it is a review. But like all Pro Reviews, it's an "open source" review that's open to comments from all, including the manufacturer. In fact, I've invited representatives from Propellerheads to check in from time to time and give us any unique insights they might have.

So, let's investigate Record. After all, it does digital audio "in the Propellerhead way." And it's an interesting way indeed.

[moonlight.mile.]

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.

[Anderton]

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.

Well, I don't like to bash the people who do marketing because it's a tough gig, but I have to say that while I didn't find the marketing insulting, I don't think it communicated what the program was about, or who it was for. I think the biggest aspect of Record is that it virtualizes a traditional hardware studio, not just a multittrack recorder with a virtual studio added on. The difference is subtle, but it has a great effect on workflow.

Propellerheads have made a conscious decision to limit options in Record, and that's part of what makes it different from the norm. One of the objectives of this review is to point out those differences compared to the traditional way of doing things.

[Anderton]

Like any hardware studio, Record has a multitrack recorder (i.e., a MIDI and digital audio sequencer, with plenty of editing options), rack o' outboard gear, and a big mixer, modeled after an SSL.

Each of these sections plays a crucial role within Record, as (with a few exceptions) they're pretty much the only windows you'll use most of the time. If any program ever cried for a triple monitor setup, it's this one - rack in one monitor, sequencer in another, and mixer in a third. The software encourages it, to: The main mixer and rack and detachable, and can be floated as separate windows. You can also jump between function keys F5, F6, and F7 to fill the screen with the mixer, rack, and sequencer respectively.

Then again, you can also show all three in one window, then vary their widths and on-screen proportions. I've been trying to figure out how to show screen shots of these various elements, but it's not easy - especially given our 900 x 700 pixel limit. So, the first attached image shows the mixer filling up a 1280 x 1024 screen, but reduced so it will fit within our current limits. Don't worry about the lack of detail; we'll have "close-ups" when we cover each section individually. For example, the mixer shows only a few of its modules (there are show/hide options if you want to trim the size).

Look carefully: There's one knob/switch, one function. Yup, the analog paradigm - no menus, hidden functions - everything is within reach. Now, this is probably hell with a laptop, but on my dual-screen monitor setup it's pretty cool. (By the way, I've loaded a demo project that comes with Record to take these shots because I haven't finished anything myself yet using Record.)

The second attached image shows the sequencer section, which won't be much of a shock to Reason users. In fact it's worth mentioning that if you know Reason, you've already reached a plateau in Record's learning curve without even trying.

The third attached image brings us to the rack, which clearly builds on Reason's rack concept and include quite a few Reason modules. However, there are a few additions, perhaps the most important being the audio track (which we'll be discussing soon enough). And yes, those are Line 6 guitar amp processors (there's also a Line 6 bass amp).

If you own Reason, it integrates with Record and you don't have to use ReWire or anything else - it's just there, once you register Reason for use with Record. Of course, you can still use Reason by itself.

Speaking of registration, Record is the first Propellerhead program to use a CodeMeter USB dongle, which they call the "ignition key." This works like a dongle but with one huge difference: If you don't have it on you (attention, laptop jockeys), as long as you can connect to the internet the Propellerhead server will give registered users the authorization to run Record. Even if you don't have an internet connection, you can save what you do (but you can't load projects you create).

And that's the 10,000 foot view. Next, we'll zoom in a little closer.

[Gus Lozada]

Noise! :thu:

[Anderton]

(Indeed, Gus, and it gets nicer :))

So where to start...after all, there's a lot going on. It seems to me the mixer is as good a place as any, because it will be something new to Reason users as well as those checking out Record. Besides, no matter what you do, it's going to end up in the mixer - and this also gives us a chance to introduce the concept of audio tracks in Record.

As an overview, there are two types of mixer channels - one for devices like soft synths, the other for audio tracks. Conceptually, audio tracks are represented by a "single rack space" device in the rack (in addition, of course, to having a track in the sequencer).

Think of Record in terms of a hardware paradigm. In the rack, you see tone modules and signal processors - what we're used to seeing in hardware racks. For a hardware analogy of the audio tracks, think of each audio track in the mixer as a one-track "sampler" with pretty much unlimited memory, and you record audio into one of these samplers.

In the attached image, you can see various Audio Tracks, as well as Mix tracks for a couple of devices, in the rack. Note the Line 6 guitar amp; it's serving as an insert effect for the Rhythm Guitar audio track (second down from the top).

If you look at things this way, the mixer might seem more like a control surface for all these devices sitting in the rack rather than a traditional mixer. Nonetheless, the layout and functionality are that of big console, and relating to the mixer interface is like relating to a physical console as every function is brought to a single control.

[Anderton]

A key concept in Record is getting around windows with the Navigator. Obviously, you can’t fit a mixer with a huge number of tracks into a monitor made by mortals, so you need to scroll around. Nor can you see all elements of a channel strip if you elect to show them all. So, Record includes a zoomed-out thumbnail of your entire setup, and you can move a little rectangle around on the thumbnail to indicate which part will be presented at full size.

I figured the easiest way to get this across would be with a video. Both MP4 (640 x 480 for iPod compatibility) and WMV versions are attached. In the video, you’ll see the channel strip thumbnail on the right side; note how moving over it changes what’s visible in the main mixer view. You can also scroll vertically with a mouse scroll wheel.

In the next part of the video, the cursor moves up to the Navigator that scrolls horizontally through the various mixer channels. The same type of Navigator protocol is used in other windows, for example, when finding a specific portion of the rack, or moving up and down through a lot of sequencer tracks. You can use a touchpad to do the scrolling, which is pretty cool.

Before going too much further, I have a question: Do you like these kinds of video examples? If so, I’ll try to include them wherever appropriate. Otherwise, I’ll stick to screen shots, which are somewhat faster to download. Also, if you have any trouble playing these, let me know.

[lonotes]

Do you like these kinds of video examples?

+1 on the video.

[stilwel]

Keep it up Craig. I think the videos will add clarity to concepts that may be hard to explain in words.

BTW...I sent you a PM ages ago, did you get that? :)

[Anderton]

Haven't checked PMs since AES, was working around the clock on getting the AES videos done. Am catching up on Pro Reviews, and will get to PMs early next week. Busy busy busy...

[Eddie]

Before going too much further, I have a question: Do you like these kinds of video examples?

:phil:

[Anderton]

I thought I'd record some tracks so I could actually show something in the mixer as we discussed it, but got sidetracked: I wondered what would happen if I brought in an Acidized WAV file. Obviously, Record has the REX playback stretching thing down by including the Dr. Rex player for Rex files (the NN-19 sampler can also play back Rex files). However, digital audio stretching is a different kind of thing.

Well, Record doesn't seem to recognize the Acidization metadata in WAV files, but has its own way of doing stretching that's somewhat tedious but sounds really good, as the attached audio examples show.

If you import an audio file you want to time-stretch, you first need to disable stretching in the file, then match the tempo to the loop. Once you've matched the tempo, you bounce the clip to a new "recording." This embeds the original tempo information you just determined into the file. Now when you enable stretching for the clip, it follows tempo changes.

Stretching is a two-step process, where first you hear a lower-quality preview pretty much instantly, but then a flurry of calculations goes on in the background and when done, you hear the "rendered" version. I'm used to this because I work a lot with Sonar, where you hear real-time previews, but then its necessary to render a stretched file as a separate, non-real-time operation for maximum fidelity. I know of Sonar users who never realized they needed to render to get high quality, and therefore thought the quality wasn't very good; that's not an issue with Record, as the transition from preview to rendered file occurs automatically.

What is an issue is I can't find any way to transpose a non-Rex file to a different key. I looked in the Help under transpose, pitch, stretch, audio...and drew a blank. Am I missing something, or can you not easily transpose digital audio?

Now, about the audio examples (MP3, 320kbps). Each plays back the same 8 bars, but at a different tempo. The drums and guitar are audio (the guitar is processed through an AdrenaLinn, and is a loop from my AdrenaLinn Guitars sample library), whereas the bass is a MIDI part (which of course, stretches pitch or rhythm pretty much effortlessly).

You may not be able to tell which is the original and which is the stretched, so I'll tell you: For the drums, it's 140BPM and for the guitar, 100BPM. You can decide for yourself about the stretching quality, but I'm very impressed.

[U&I]

Been eagerly awaiting this review.
Very interesting so far and many thanks for your efforts. :)

[Anderton]

You're very welcome! This is a fun review - more to come.

[Anderton]

The mixer is conventional, in that it has channel strips for each channel, and sends that go to buses. The channel strip modules are, from "top" to "bottom," Input, Dynamics, EQ, Inserts, FX (sends), and Faders.

As no standard monitor can accommodate showing all channel strip modules at one time, you have two options:

* Use the Navigator as described previously to focus on particular sections of the mixer.
* Show/hide various mixer elements.

When you hide mixer elements, they nonetheless display small labels above the faders. The attached image shows all channel strip modules minimized other than the faders (the show/hide buttons are circled in red). Note the labels for the hidden modules; a red "LED" to the right of the module means that something's happening with that module - EQ is active instead of bypassed, sends are enabled, etc.

Now let's check out the modules.

[Anderton]

The input module is fairly basic, but in addition to the expected controls for gain and phase invert, there are also signal path buttons.

In the attached image, the two leftmost channels show how EQ can be before or after dynamics (this doesn't change the graphical mixer layout, though, just the signal path). The next channel to the right shows the insert before the EQ and Dynanics, and the Filter Sidechain is activated for the compressor (yes, the compressor allows for sidechaining, and you can use the filters to narrow the sidechain response). The next channel to the right shows the insert after EQ and dynamics.

Before proceeding any further: Does anyone want a basic explanation of what sidechaining is, and why it's useful? Let me know.

Next, let's listen to the dynamics and EQ modules.

[Anderton]

The EQ module shown in the attached image is very SSL. It starts with a highpass filter (100Hz to 20kHz and lowpass filter (20Hz to 4kHz). You can also enable filtering in the dynamics sidechain with a button. After the filters comes a 4-stage EQ:

* Hi shelf, with "bell" option to add a peak; it goes from 1.5 to 22kHz.
*There are two midrange parametrics. One covers 600Hz to 7kHz, the other 200Hz to 2kHz.
* Low shelf similar to the high shelf, including the bell. The range is 40Hz to 600Hz.
* A button ("E") to disable Constant Q filter operation.

It's actually very much like the Duende channel strip, including some of its "character." But, compared to modern DAW software, there are three definite limitations.

The first is an inability to bypass individual stages - it's either the entire EQ, or nothing. I find individual bypassing a helpful diagnostic test for EQ, so you can hear exactly what each stage contributes.

The second is that the filter type and range of each filter section is fixed. You can't, for example, turn the low or high shelf into a parametric stage, or have the lower midrange parametric add a notch at, say, 2.5kHz.

The final limitation is not being able to store presets for the individual modules. For example, if you come up with an EQ curve that really works well with a particular singer's voice, I don't see any way you could save that out separately.

As to the sound, it's quite like Duende. As a Duende convert (after doing a Pro Review on it and getting to check it out in depth), I've come to appreciate that it creates its own "sound" and adds its own character. If you like that sound, you'll be very happy with the mixer in Record as the character translates well into final mixes and masters.

To give a quick example of the EQ in action, the first audio example is of the riff I used in a previous example but with drums mixed higher. The second audio example shows how I used the EQ to "hype" the sound of the drums (these are the settings shown in the screen shot, by the way).

[U&I]

I thought I'd record some tracks so I could actually show something in the mixer as we discussed it, but got sidetracked: I wondered what would happen if I brought in an Acidized WAV file. Obviously, Record has the REX playback stretching thing down by including the Dr. Rex player for Rex files (the NN-19 sampler can also play back Rex files). However, digital audio stretching is a different kind of thing.

Well, Record doesn't seem to recognize the Acidization metadata in WAV files, but has its own way of doing stretching that's somewhat tedious but sounds really good, as the attached audio examples show.

If you import an audio file you want to time-stretch, you first need to disable stretching in the file, then match the tempo to the loop. Once you've matched the tempo, you bounce the clip to a new "recording." This embeds the original tempo information you just determined into the file. Now when you enable stretching for the clip, it follows tempo changes.

Stretching is a two-step process, where first you hear a lower-quality preview pretty much instantly, but then a flurry of calculations goes on in the background and when done, you hear the "rendered" version. I'm used to this because I work a lot with Sonar, where you hear real-time previews, but then its necessary to render a stretched file as a separate, non-real-time operation for maximum fidelity. I know of Sonar users who never realized they needed to render to get high quality, and therefore thought the quality wasn't very good; that's not an issue with Record, as the transition from preview to rendered file occurs automatically.

What is an issue is I can't find any way to transpose a non-Rex file to a different key. I looked in the Help under transpose, pitch, stretch, audio...and drew a blank. Am I missing something, or can you not easily transpose digital audio?

Now, about the audio examples (MP3, 320kbps). Each plays back the same 8 bars, but at a different tempo. The drums and guitar are audio (the guitar is processed through an AdrenaLinn, and is a loop from my AdrenaLinn Guitars sample library), whereas the bass is a MIDI part (which of course, stretches pitch or rhythm pretty much effortlessly).

You may not be able to tell which is the original and which is the stretched, so I'll tell you: For the drums, it's 140BPM and for the guitar, 100BPM. You can decide for yourself about the stretching quality, but I'm very impressed.



Very good stretch quality indeed. I'm rather impressed also.
The drums have more thwack and depth in Record compared to Reason on it's own also IMHO.
Nice.

[U&I]

The EQ module shown in the attached image is very SSL. It starts with a highpass filter (100Hz to 20kHz and lowpass filter (20Hz to 4kHz). You can also enable filtering in the dynamics sidechain with a button. After the filters comes a 4-stage EQ:

* Hi shelf, with "bell" option to add a peak; it goes from 1.5 to 22kHz.
*There are two midrange parametrics. One covers 600Hz to 7kHz, the other 200Hz to 2kHz.
* Low shelf similar to the high shelf, including the bell. The range is 40Hz to 600Hz.
* A button ("E") to disable Constant Q filter operation.

It's actually very much like the Duende channel strip, including some of its "character." But, compared to modern DAW software, there are three definite limitations.

The first is an inability to bypass individual stages - it's either the entire EQ, or nothing. I find individual bypassing a helpful diagnostic test for EQ, so you can hear exactly what each stage contributes.

The second is that the filter type and range of each filter section is fixed. You can't, for example, turn the low or high shelf into a parametric stage, or have the lower midrange parametric add a notch at, say, 2.5kHz.

The final limitation is not being able to store presets for the individual modules. For example, if you come up with an EQ curve that really works well with a particular singer's voice, I don't see any way you could save that out separately.

As to the sound, it's quite like Duende. As a Duende convert (after doing a Pro Review on it and getting to check it out in depth), I've come to appreciate that it creates its own "sound" and adds its own character. If you like that sound, you'll be very happy with the mixer in Record as the character translates well into final mixes and masters.

To give a quick example of the EQ in action, the first audio example is of the riff I used in a previous example but with drums mixed higher. The second audio example shows how I used the EQ to "hype" the sound of the drums (these are the settings shown in the screen shot, by the way).


I much prefer this set up also in many respects.
It means the MClass devices can be kept as channel inserts and not part of existing Combinator devices also. This is to my way of thinking a much better way to work as I must confess my biggest grievance with Reason 4 is when mixing down using the old mixer and having to go back into Combi patches to tweak MClass eq's and comps from within the appropriate instrument combi itself.
Also makes gating/ducking much easier now also and I prefer having all the dynamics processing kept on a per channel basis within the mixing console paradigm than separate from it myself.
I can feel a 27" iMac coming on myself ;).
On a side note - I haven't purchased Record yet but I did Beta test it.
There are some very clever tricks to be had with the multiple take/comping feature using multiple variations of the same rex loop per audio take or multiple rex files imported, expanding the files and using the razor tool to comp some very glitched up and freaked out breaks, vocal stutters and other clever bits and pieces also.

[U&I]

As you can tell I am enjoying this review immensely :)

[tradivoro1]

You know Craig, I always enjoy your reviews, but that prologue is so good, you should doctor it up as a flash animation, with the background showing the progress of all these program over times while the text flows upward over the background, sort like what they did in 30s movies, like Casablanca, or the Star Wars movies... :)

[Anderton]

You know Craig, I always enjoy your reviews, but that prologue is so good, you should doctor it up as a flash animation, with the background showing the progress of all these program over times while the text flows upward over the background, sort like what they did in 30s movies, like Casablanca, or the Star Wars movies... :)

LOL!! You're more creative about this stuff than I am :)

Great to see some other viewpoints and comments in here. Please turn your friends on to this review, the more the merrier...

[MikeRivers]

Well, you almost had me hooked there for a minute when you said that it emulated the workflow of a traditional studio. But now I see that Record hasn't yet come up with a really great solution to the limitation of the size of a monitor vs. the size of a hardware console. The scrolling console idea seems like it might be better than the show-and-hide paradigm, but I'd have to play with it a bit before I was convinced.

The video, by the way, was a good illustration of that, but what would have been more effective would be if I had downloaded the demo, set it up, and messed with it as I read that paragraph describing the console view. But that would be more like a tutorial than a review (don't forget to tell me where to click to get one vieew or the other) - something that I really encourage, but others may not have the patience for it.

I didn't quite get the concept of a track being like a processing rack, but hopefully that will become clearer later. Perhaps it's more obvious to those to whom a track is a recording of a virtual instrument rather than a recording of what comes out of a microphone.

I'll tune in again in a couple of days to see what transpires.

[panthalassa]

Great review! I'm happy as a clam; I've used Reason and made many good friends as a member of the San Francisco Bay Area Reason User's Group, or SFBARUG. My good friend and "Power Tools For Reason" author Kurt Kurasaki is a member as well. Look for his next PTR/Record book in the spring, as both programs can be insanely complicated.
Anyway, enough "plugs" for now...
Personally, I love the timestretch function; I even got used to the fold-down
track edit function pretty quickly. But regarding tracks, I'm used to the Ableton /Melodyne waveform nudging, and while this is somewhat possible in Record, it's nowhere near as flexible. I believe the next version should have this function as well.
I'll cut it a lot of slack; It is, after all, only 1.0 (hey, even fanboys are realistic). And I'm a LOT farther along in my projects with everything integrated into one program.

[panthalassa]

One thing I learned from the Producer's Conference - and this is suitable for any DAW, by the way - is that hard disk recording does not benefit from recording with a real hot signal, or "hitting the tape hard" as it were. Presenters there pointed out that changing the default input sensitivity in Record from -12 to -18db is a real help. I've included a screenshot of the Big Meter - located directly above the Master Section - with the VU knob held down to illustrate how to do this.

You do have to watch your levels, and the resultant project will not be as loud, but it underscores the difference between tape and digital audio. Of course, all these years I knew that digital distortion sounds pretty horrible, but for some reason I never made the connection as I maxed the inputs in my own little projects while thinking the sound would be warmer. And, hey, if you want to warm it up, that's what the Scream4 module is for.

[MikeRivers]

One thing I learned from the Producer's Conference - and this is suitable for any DAW, by the way - is that hard disk recording does not benefit from recording with a real hot signal, or "hitting the tape hard" as it were. Presenters there pointed out that changing the default input sensitivity in Record from -12 to -18db is a real help.
It's a perception thing. People look at the wimpy waveform graphic and think their tracks aren't "hot enough." I've always thought that it would be a good idea to have the waveform display always normalize (in the graphic only, of course) so people would get over their low level track fears. You'd still be able to tell if something clipped, and you can (and should) use your ears to determine the level in the mix.

I've found that more than one program has the mixer's default channel gains at -6 dB, so if you have a calibrated system (0 dBFS equals the same analog level in and out) and play back one track with the default mixer gain, it will play back 6 dB lower than when it went in. Another cause for a perceived worry.

[jgirv]

...looking forward to this review... the greatest difference in a pro review (other than the obvious experience) is the writing style... Craig's clarity is unsurpassed, been reading him for years.

As for Record, I have been able to get my modest recordings done so much easier than using a full blown DAW... number one reason? The stability of the program. I have spent so much wasted time on trouble shooting other music programs rather than recording. I'm very interested in reading here about the positives and the negatives in using Record instead of one of the big boys. thanks, jgirv

[moonlight.mile.]

Before proceeding any further: Does anyone want a basic explanation of what sidechaining is, and why it's useful? Let me know.

Yes, please.

Thanks!

[Anderton]

First, thanks to Panthalassa for the tip on how to adjust default levels :thu:

Second, about sidechaining. There's actually a good explanation on the Cakewalk site:

http://www.cakewalk.com/Tips/SONAR7_sidechaining.asp

The short form is that the sidechain input for a processor allows a separate signal to the affect the sound. For example, consider a noise gate. Normally it monitors the input signal, and if the signal is above a certain level, the gate opens and lets the signal through. If the signal is below a certain level, the gate closes and the signal is muted.

However, suppose the noise gate is processing a bass track, and there's a sidechain input. If we drive the sidechain input with a kick drum instead of the bass, then the bass will be "chopped" by the kick - when the kick hits, the bass audio is let through the gate, but if there's no kick, the bass is muted.

A very common sidechain application is de-essing. The sidechain input is filtered so that only high frequencies are compressed. and other frequencies don't affect the compressor.

Okay?

[Anderton]

Well, you almost had me hooked there for a minute when you said that it emulated the workflow of a traditional studio. But now I see that Record hasn't yet come up with a really great solution to the limitation of the size of a monitor vs. the size of a hardware console. The scrolling console idea seems like it might be better than the show-and-hide paradigm, but I'd have to play with it a bit before I was convinced.

I think the answer to a lot of these kinds of issues is the Microscope mode you can enable in Sonar for MIDI editing. Imagine having the entire Record console in front of you, and when you pass over a section with the mouse, it becomes magnified...I think that might work well.

[Anderton]

The Dynamics module, shown in the first attached image, has an independent compressor and expander/gate. As we've already noted you have some options as to where this goes in the signal path, e.g., before or after EQ.

The compressor controls are familiar: Ratio, Threshold, and Release, and the meter shows gain reduction. So where's the Attack control? There isn't one, but there's a Fast button that fixes the attack at 3ms for 20dB of gain reduction. There's also no Auto setting for the Release time, which is something I would probably use if it was there, but the MClass compressor has this feature if you really need it, and you can patch the MClass compressor into the inserts (which we'll get to soon enough). There's a Peak button for determining whether the compressor responds to peak or average levels - handy. As to an output control, it's not really necessary as makeup gain is automatic.

After playing with the compressor for a bit, I've found two main uses for it. One is a utility "signal smoother," like you'd use on bass. Leave Peak off, and go for a fair amount of compression with an average response. With Peak and the Fast button enabled, the compressor does a good job on clamping peaks. Yes, I'd like to see a "soft saturation" button on there, but I'll give Record a break - this is a dynamics module in a mixer, not a be-all and end-all compressor.

The Gate becomes an expander if you enable the EXP button, but is otherwise pretty straightforward. However, check out the Key input: So how do you key it?!? Well, check out the second attached image, which shows the back of a Mix channel in the rack. When you flip around to the back of the rack with the Tab key, you'll see the sidechain audio inputs, along with a CV input and the Key on/off button. This seems a bit awkward to have to flip the rack around to set up the key input, but it's not something you have to do often, and I don't really see an easy way around this - for example, if you wanted to just flip the mixer module around, how would you have the rack flipped around at the same time so you could make the connections?

Which underscores something important I'm starting to notice about Record: It sure seems like Propellerheads spent a great deal of time analyzing which functions would be used most often, and which were "once in a session" kind of things. They then prioritized workflow based around that, so that common, basic operations could be done very simply, and more complex workflows were reserved for more complex operations.

[Anderton]

This definitely departs from a conventional hardware mixer, here's why.

Each channel has an insert for adding effects, and as noted, this can go various places in the signal path. The inserts tie in with the rack, where you can create your own effects setups, or call up preset effects, including Combinator setups

If you're not familiar with Reason, a Combinator is a "container/programmer" for multiple effects, instruments, combinations of effects and instruments, etc. Its basic interface consists of four knobs, four buttons, and a section that allows programming "macros" for the knobs by letting you route them to target parameters, as well as set minimum and maximum values.

One example of a Combinator might be combining two layered synths, which feed a mixer that goes through a reverb. You could have one knob change pitch positively on one synth and negatively on the other to create detuning effects, with another knob crossfading between the two synths. One of Reason's "poster boy" Combinators is a mastering suite composed of MClass proecessors. Of course, you can save Combinator presets and call them up as desired.

Anyway, check out the attached image. The highlighted part of the mixer is the insert part of the channel strip. Below it is the rear view of the rack containing the Combinator patch used as the insert effect. Note how the four knobs and buttons control particular parameters in the insert effect Combinator.

You'll also note the Audio Track making another appearance...we're going to have to get to that whole recording audio aspect of things, and we will after we're done with the mixer.

[Anderton]

FYI - I may have to put this review on hold until later in the week. I am out of the country and don't have Record installed on my laptop. If I can get a decent internet connection and a few spare hours, I'll download the demo and see if I can add some more info to the review...like how well it works with a laptop!

[k2500x]

If you import an audio file you want to time-stretch, you first need to disable stretching in the file, then match the tempo to the loop. Once you've matched the tempo, you bounce the clip to a new "recording." This embeds the original tempo information you just determined into the file. Now when you enable stretching for the clip, it follows tempo changes.



For me, most of the time I know the tempo of the clip I'm importing, so I just set the tempo of the project to that and then imported the audio and switched the tempo back to what it was before the import. Works great !

I'm still unclear on why you need to "bounce the clip to a new audio file" though. I've never done that. Even if you don't know the tempo. You disable stretch, find the tempo, and then right click and enable it again and reset the tempo to what you want. That should work without bouncing the clip, don't you think?

[k2500x]

...but on my dual-screen monitor setup it's pretty cool.

I'm currently running it on a 27" 1920 x 1200 setup and it's a pretty smooth workflow with F5-F6-F7. But I'd be very interested to see how this looks with two monitors! Can you provide an 'external' shot of your two monitors, Craig? :thu:

[Inazone]

This is the Pro Review I've been waiting for! A friend of mine seems to change DAWs every six months, and when I asked for his advice for my own purchase, he said I should read some Record reviews. Being a guitar guy with lots of rack toys, and a fair bit of experience with traditional mixers, Record looks like it would make far more sense to me than anything else I've looked at.

I'm noticing a lot of Line 6 references. Does Record include some sub-set of the GearBox/POD Farm product?

[panthalassa]

I'm noticing a lot of Line 6 references. Does Record include some sub-set of the GearBox/POD Farm product?

On the Propellerhead's website, (http://www.propellerheads.se/company/crew/index.cfm?Rows=10&Start=40&CountTotal=527&fuseaction=dsp_plan&PID=4) Dan Engelbrecht's .plan post from this past May mentioned "Rob Rampley, Software Architect from Line 6, who flew in from Japan to help finish up the Line 6 integration. The Line 6 stuff is actual Line 6 code with a Propellerheads front end, so you get their exact models. And if you have bought models for you Line 6 hardware you can use them in Record."

The best part of it is, if you already own Reason, you can hook up all the different models. I've never had such a flexible guitar/bass setup. As soon as I can afford a faster machine (probably when fully-buffered DIMMS are common in the MacBook Pros - but that's asking WAY too much right now), I'll be using a computer as part of my live rig - along with a good solid backup amp, of course.

There are currently a lot of feature requests and such, but I can't help thinking they got most of it right, and it's only 1.0! Not bad.

[Anderton]

Well this is cool: I downloaded the demo (almost 1GB) and surprise, the internet connection authorization deal worked! Apparently it authorizes YOU, not the specific instance of the program. Very, very cool!!!

[Inazone]

Too bad about the lack of VST support. That seems like a major strike against Record, and for me personally, I don't think that the included Line 6 features are enough to make up for it.

[moonlight.mile.]

Thanks for explaining sidechaining, Craig.

[Anderton]

Too bad about the lack of VST support. That seems like a major strike against Record, and for me personally, I don't think that the included Line 6 features are enough to make up for it.

Well, Reason doesn't have VST support, either. Are you concerned about effects, instruments, or both? I'll list the effects and such that included with it shortly, but Reason include a lot of instruments and effects, and works directly with Record. Also, if you have a host program, you can ReWire Record into it, and process tracks with VST plug-ins.

Now, this won't help you if you have some favorite VST instrument (e.g., Rapture, Moog Modular, or whatever) and don't want to deal with inserting it into a host program. But AFAIC, if you put Record and Reason together, you have an extremely powerful setup and I'm not sure what you couldn't do with it that would require VST support.

[panthalassa]

Well, Reason doesn't have VST support, either. Are you concerned about effects, instruments, or both? I'll list the effects and such that included with it shortly, but Reason include a lot of instruments and effects, and works directly with Record. Also, if you have a host program, you can ReWire Record into it, and process tracks with VST plug-ins.

Now, this won't help you if you have some favorite VST instrument (e.g., Rapture, Moog Modular, or whatever) and don't want to deal with inserting it into a host program. But AFAIC, if you put Record and Reason together, you have an extremely powerful setup and I'm not sure what you couldn't do with it that would require VST support.
Again, not to sound too fanboy-ish, but there's not a single VST or AU that I miss. Reason did it all, and if there was something it didn't do (like audio-in) I would just use ReWire.
Even for standalone VSTs, a program like Plogue Bidule will work with, say, Redline's Monitor (brought to our attention by Lee Knight). I have yet to try this setup myself, but it looks workable (here it is mentioned in another thread (http://acapella.harmony-central.com/showthread.php?t=2468228&page=5)).

[Anderton]

Here's what comes with Record. I wasn't exactly sure because I have Reason installed on the same desktop computer as Record, and all the Reason stuff showed up. But after installing Record on my 64-bit Vista laptop, it was a "pure" install so the only things that showed up are part of Record. Here's the list:

ID8 Instrument Device - this is the only instrument included with Record, and it hardly has any editing at all (two parameters per sound). The sounds are useful, but really, think of this as a sort of General MIDI module designed to get you recording fast.

As to effects, the four main ones are the MClass effects:

MClass Equalizer
MClass Compressor
MClass Stereo Imager
MClass Maximizer

These are all great effects and a good addition to Record. You also get six more "standard" processors:

Line 6 Guitar Amp
Line 6 Bass Amp
RV7000 Advanced Reverb
Scream4 Distortion
DDL-1 Digital Delay Line
CF-101 Chorus/Flanger

I haven't tried it yet, but from what I understand if you own the various Line 6 model packs they will load into the amp modules. These are all fine effects, although the DDL-1 and CF-101 are quite basic. The Scream4 has always been one of my favorites when using Reason, and the RV7000 is a quality reverb.

There are also several "utility" devices from Reason. These don't make any sound but are designed for routing.

Mixer 14:2
Line Mixer 6:2
Spider Audio Merger & Splitter
Spider CV Merger & Splitter

There's also the Combinator module for putting mutiple combinations of devices together, then controlling them with a single "shell" interface.

While this is a good selection, it's basic. If you want to do any serious virtual instrument work you just about have to get Reason. Typical street price for Reason is $400, or $500 if you buy Reason and Record together.

However, if you think about it, $400 is a really good deal. You get the SubTractor analog synth, NN-19 simple sampler, NN-XT full-function sampler, Malstrom graintable synth, Thor semi-modular synth, Dr. Rex REX file player, and ReDrum drum machine. At about $60/instrument, you have quite a selection. The only synth I would really miss from my VST collection is Cakewalk's Rapture, which I use for a lot of sounds and for which I've developed several sets of patches. So just ReWire it, you say? Well, I don't think I can with Vista-64. although it's possible with 32-bit Windows operating systems and Mac OS X.

You also get quite a few extra effects with Reason, so it's a felicitous combination, especially when you consider you get the whole virtual studio for $500.

Still, as you evaluate the cost-effectiveness of Record for your own needs, take into account that you don't really get a lot of "plug-ins," particularly in terms of virtual instruments. If you're using Record just to record, say, a rock band, this probably won't make any difference. But if you're heavily into virtual instruments and MIDI, given that you can't use VST or AU devices, you'll have to factor Reason into the overall cost.


So let's b

[poserp]

Hello -- nice review so far; I'm looking forward to more. I've been using Record since beta testing back in July or August (can't remember when exactly now)... One quibble with your intro post:

Besides, no matter what you do, it's going to end up in the mixer...

Actually, just like Reason, you can bypass the built-in mixer and go straight to your DA's via the "Hardware Interface" device. Nice if you want to mix outboard or don't like the "sound" of the built-in mixer.

I really dig the studio emulation vibe in Record -- I've been playing with emulating how sources are actually recorded. For instance, if you have a guitar, bass, and drums then these instruments are mic'ed: run the instrument into an RV7000 in mono (with suitable room ambience) into a Scream 4 with very small amounts of distortion into a channel on the mixer. You can also do "bleed" using instances of the 6x2 mixer to send audio to different "mics", pre-reverb. I use the combinator to split out the ID8 drum kit into different sections depending on how I want it mic'ed -- snare and kick each get a mic, then everything else into a stereo overhead mic. Here are links to a quick demo track and a refill that demonstrates how this can be set up and what it sounds like:

demo track: http://www.silo3d.com/Music/Real_Drums_Demo.mp3

refill: http://www.silo3d.com/Music/Rock_Band_Refill.rfl

The refill includes a demo "song" that has everything wired up. Of course you could do this in any DAW, but Record a.) makes it easier because everything is at-hand, and b.) you can trade setups using refills and know that it'll work correctly on every system and across platforms.

[poserp]

I haven't tried it yet, but from what I understand if you own the various Line 6 model packs they will load into the amp modules...


I can confirm this works, with some limitations. If you have a long processing chain set up then most of the knobs on the Record Line 6 interface device won't do anything, and afaik there's no way to map them. I've been using POD Farm with Reaper to audition and save presets (I'm running the plugin-only version of POD Farm -- they were giving it away for free in September to iLok owners and it doesn't have a stand-alone mode) so I can set up patches so I know they'll load with everything set correctly. This is kind of a shame because POD Farm comes with API-ish and Neve-ish preamp emulations that would benefit from having the knobs mapped (and could be useful for more than guitar and bass...).

The other limitation is that "dual" tones have to be loaded into two Line 6 interface devices; not that big of a deal, but a bit annoying if you just want to load a "dual" patch and play straightaway.

While I'm at it, another neat trick I found is the RV-7000 has a delay that you can use 100% wet with no dry signal. Since its delay time can go down to 1 ms, you can use it when mixing an "amped" (i.e., routed through a Scream 4, the Line 6 device, etc) and "direct" guitar sound to adjust phase offset.

[panthalassa]

While I'm at it, another neat trick I found is the RV-7000 has a delay that you can use 100% wet with no dry signal. Since its delay time can go down to 1 ms, you can use it when mixing an "amped" (i.e., routed through a Scream 4, the Line 6 device, etc) and "direct" guitar sound to adjust phase offset.
Thanks for the trick! It's an interesting way of doing things for sure.

BTW I too have the free PodFarm from back in September, but I can't remember if you can actually run it in standalone; You simply tell the program that you have a UX-1 or something on the drop-down list, and the thing opens up. But quite honestly I haven't felt the need to tweak too much yet, as the out-of-the box tones are pretty good. I'll try it when I get off work tonight.

[panthalassa]

UPDATE: Apologies to all; I did indeed use my borrowed UX2 to process PodFarm's audio. If you have an iLok, editing presets outside of Record simply will not work. Let's have better integration of the two programs in the future, howsabouts?

[Anderton]

Referring to the attached image, Record's mixer has eight send controls per channel, each of which can be pre- or post-fader. Like the rest of the mixer, this is fixed; it's not configurable for more or fewer sends, although you can show/hide the sends. When hidden (actually, a better term would be "minimized"), there's a small red indicator (which you can see in the screen shot) that shows whether any sends are enabled.

Returns are toward the right, and each return has a level control, pan, three-step meter, edit button for the return effect (along with a label for same), and a Mute button (but no solo). I assume the lack of a solo is because if you solo the effect return, you'll be muting the signals feeding the individual mixer channels, which would make hearing the results of any FX a moot point. But I don't see a reason why you couldn't have solo within the returns affect only the return channels.

The fader section is below the sends, and it's pretty typical: Fader, meter, mute, solo, and panpot. Each channel can be mono or stereo; if stereo, there's an additional width control to widen or narrow the image, with the panpot "weighting" it more to the left or right. A cool touch here is that there's an "LED ring" around the panpot that shows the effect of the width control, with either more or less of the ring illuminated to indicate the stereo spread.

We'll cover the bus compressor next, and that will pretty much take care of the mixer.

[poserp]

UPDATE: Apologies to all; I did indeed use my borrowed UX2 to process PodFarm's audio. If you have an iLok, editing presets outside of Record simply will not work. Let's have better integration of the two programs in the future, howsabouts?


I suggest using Reaper -- it runs on windows, linux, and mac and it's free to "try", but there are no feature limitations (just a short nag screen). Not an ideal solution, but it works for these purposes. Also, it helps reduce micro-managing of guitar sounds during tracking.

[panthalassa]

I suggest using Reaper -- it runs on windows, linux, and mac and it's free to "try", but there are no feature limitations (just a short nag screen). Not an ideal solution, but it works for these purposes. Also, it helps reduce micro-managing of guitar sounds during tracking.
Absolutely, thanks. I already have Live, Pro Tools, and even Logic Pro (yes, it pays to live near Cupertino). Right now this is how I edit patches in VST/AU mode. I guess I was bellyaching because there's no way (yet) to edit patches inside Record. But my friends in our little users group who have Reaper really like it; before Record came along that was a good way to get audio "through" Reason.

[Anderton]

The mixer's master section has what you'd expect: Disable all mutes, disable all solos, dim -20dB, control room out, and four inserts (like the main channels). The Master Section is also where you'll find master FX sends and the FX return section, as well as buttons to choose whether to monitor the master, FX send, or FX return buses (you can specify and monitor one bus at a time, as specified by eight "radio" buttons). There are also two "convenience" buttons that display the associated sequencer track or rack module.

But there's also the unexpected: A bus master compressor (with external sidechain) modeled after SSL's famous bus compressor.

The first attached image shows the bus compressor and master fader section in action. The meter can switch between VU, peak, and PPM responses, which is a nice touch. Meanwhile, the compressor has the standard controls - Threshold, Ratio, Attack, Release, and Make-Up. However, it also has the same limitations as the compressor being modeled - only three ratios (2:1, 4:1, and 10:1), and you can't get release times faster than 100ms. But, those elements are part of the sound. If you want a more standard compressor, use the MClass one included in Record.

Speaking of sound, the first audio example is playing back three tracks: ReDrum, and two tracks of Dr. Rex modules playing loops from my AdrenaLinn Guitars sample library. There's no processing other than some light MClass Processing; all audio examples are normalized to 0dB for purposes of comparison.

The second audio example is the same, except now the bus compressor is in play with a 2:1 compression ratio. The effect "glues" the tracks together a bit more, and increases the overall level.

Now check out the third audio example , which takes compression to excess with a 10:1 compression ratio and low threshold. Of course I don't recommend these settings, but it gives you an idea of just how far the compressor can go.

Propellerhead was smart to include the bus compressor, just as they were smart to include the MClass modules. A lot of "early adopters" complained that Reason had a thin sound, but that's because the instruments weren't "produced" with a variety of processors, as they are in the studio. Letting users add compression, EQ, maximization, and stereo image helped beef up the sound tremendously, and Record's bus compressor is another step in that direction.

[Anderton]

Before moving on from the mixer to the next topic, as mentioned previously Record is designed to integrate with Reason. For Reason owners who want to record audio, the price is certainly right, as is the convenience of not having to ReWire into a DAW and manage two sets of files. But if you don't have Reason and want to get the Record/Reason combination, you're looking at the same street price range as DAWs like Logic Pro, Sonar Producer Edition, Cubase 5, Ableton Live (but not the "Suite" version, with the added virtual instruments), Digital Performer 7, and Samplitude...and you can get Acid Pro 7 for $200 less. So, what does Record offer that the others don't?

Well, first let's look at what traditional DAWs offer. Most include features that Record does not:

* 3rd party plug-in support
* Video window support
* Surround (on some level)
* Ability to edit files so they "stretch"
* Format translation
* Notation
* Track Freeze

For many users, the lack of plug-in support will be Record's biggest limitation and for some, the lack of video might be a problem. But, it's important to remember that Record is not a DAW, but a virtualized studio (with Reason providing the virtual instruments and effects to accessorize that studio). Because it's not an "open" system, it's rock-solid. With all the DAWs I use, the x.0 version always has some problems that aren't resolved until an x.0.1 version appears, but that's not the case with Record. I'm sure there must be some bugs in there, but I haven't found them yet, and the program is still on Version 1.0. Even Reason 4.0, which has been out for quite some time, just released a 4.0.1 version with mostly relatively minor bug fixes.

Also, the "plug-ins" are optimized to work in this closed system, you so can really pile on the plugs without killing your CPU. Another consideration is that Reason's plug-ins are really, really good. The plug-ins that come with a DAW may or may not rock, or may be lite versions that require more $$$ to upgrade to the "adult" version.

There's also the issue of workflow. Because Record has pared down its functionality to the essentials needed to record music, it's very efficient, clean, and easy to use.

Whether these advantages are enough to get you to drop your DAW...well, only you would know that. But they might be enough to convince you to supplement your DAW with a laptop-compatible portable studio, or for that matter, an alternate way to record with your desktop.

Fortunately there are plenty of demos available online for the various DAWs as well as for Record, so it's easy to discover the tradeoffs, advantages, and disadvantages of the various programs for yourself.

Enough opinions...back to the review.

[U&I]

Before moving on from the mixer to the next topic, as mentioned previously Record is designed to integrate with Reason. For Reason owners who want to record audio, the price is certainly right, as is the convenience of not having to ReWire into a DAW and manage two sets of files. But if you don't have Reason and want to get the Record/Reason combination, you're looking at the same street price range as DAWs like Logic Pro, Sonar Producer Edition, Cubase 5, Ableton Live (but not the "Suite" version, with the added virtual instruments), Digital Performer 7, and Samplitude...and you can get Acid Pro 7 for $200 less. So, what does Record offer that the others don't?

Well, first let's look at what traditional DAWs offer. Most include features that Record does not:

* 3rd party plug-in support
* Video window support
* Surround (on some level)
* Ability to edit files so they "stretch"
* Format translation
* Notation
* Track Freeze

For many users, the lack of plug-in support will be Record's biggest limitation and for some, the lack of video might be a problem. But, it's important to remember that Record is not a DAW, but a virtualized studio (with Reason providing the virtual instruments and effects to accessorize that studio). Because it's not an "open" system, it's rock-solid. With all the DAWs I use, the x.0 version always has some problems that aren't resolved until an x.0.1 version appears, but that's not the case with Record. I'm sure there must be some bugs in there, but I haven't found them yet, and the program is still on Version 1.0. Even Reason 4.0, which has been out for quite some time, just released a 4.0.1 version with mostly relatively minor bug fixes.

Also, the "plug-ins" are optimized to work in this closed system, you so can really pile on the plugs without killing your CPU. Another consideration is that Reason's plug-ins are really, really good. The plug-ins that come with a DAW may or may not rock, or may be lite versions that require more $$$ to upgrade to the "adult" version.

There's also the issue of workflow. Because Record has pared down its functionality to the essentials needed to record music, it's very efficient, clean, and easy to use.

Whether these advantages are enough to get you to drop your DAW...well, only you would know that. But they might be enough to convince you to supplement your DAW with a laptop-compatible portable studio, or for that matter, an alternate way to record with your desktop.

Fortunately there are plenty of demos available online for the various DAWs as well as for Record, so it's easy to discover the tradeoffs, advantages, and disadvantages of the various programs for yourself.

Enough opinions...back to the review.


It may be fare to add that whilst apps like Energy XT etc allow one to chain VST effects in a modular fashion, that they do not allow the CV/GATE patching or modulation matrix of a Combinator either.
If you view Record + Reason as a package, you pretty much get quite a comprehensive modular FX package that is far greater than the sum total of it's parts.
Thor & Maelstrom can both process Audio for example and there are some very unique ways of processing audio signals in Reason alone that Record benefits from also.
So whilst the tool set may look initially "limited" when you add in the CV/GATE patching, Spider Audio + CV/GATE splitters and mergers and the fact that anything from LFO's to EG's, too CV signals, To Redrum Triggers and so on and so forth can be used to modulate effects and the like you do end up with a fairly comprehensive set of tools at your disposal.
So you could for example create your own ducking delay or reverb, have a multitap delay via the REV7000 with lfo's modulating the tap rate, signal flows being amplitude modulated, comb or formant filtered and all other sorts of fancy tricks thanks to THOR for example.
One could even route a guitar track into Thor and use Frequency Modulation with an inbuilt synth oscillator that is triggered by the step sequencer for some interesting pitched ring mod type effects you couldn't get elsewhere either.
I do feel that one needs to address the Reason/Record modular paradigm when looking at it's feature set.
It is far more powerful than the sum total of it's parts and allows one to use Record as a rather extensive Modular composing environment if you are so inclined.
This is what I like about the concept.
I can use it as a straight up recording tool.
I can use it as a recording tool with samplers, synths and drum machines.
I can take a somewhat Eno-esque approach and view it as a holistic modular composing environment if you will also.
Doing stuff like getting looped droning guitar fed back loops, vocoded against custom field recordings and the like as one example.
So it can do many things at once depending on how I choose to work at any given time.
It is also far more fun to experiment with than say Logic.
But I digress.
Not saying one approach is better than the other or that Record+reason is the be all and all of recording life, but I must confess the more I dig into the tool set as a combined and constructive creative environment the more surprised I am at what can be achieved with a bit of lateral thinking and a willingness to experiment.