Update: check out the new post Reason: How To Use Multiple BCF2000’s.
If anyone’s curious on setting up multiple Behringer BCF2000’s together in Propellerhead Reason (to go from 8 channel banks to 16 channel banks, etc)… from what I can tell it can’t be done and no one has provided real evidence of this. Because…
BCF2000’s are controlled by Reason uniquely
I couldn’t get Reason working with two Behringer BF2000’s, setting everything up as it’s intended (both via direct USB and MIDI cascading). When you look at the BCF2000 remote file, you see references for 8 faders groups at a time and no more. Reason loads in a temporary, on-the-fly preset for BCF2000 and BCR2000’s that other DAW’s don’t. This is where the issue happens. Who wants two or more BCF2000 mixers that are controlling the same exact channel banks? It’s stupid, and if you wanted a control surface, go with a BCR2000 instead of a BCF2000.
Continue reading Reason: Using Multiple BCF2000’s Can’t Be Done (Update)
One thing putting together a physical mixer console has taught me is how capable Reason’s original virtual rack-mounted 14 stereo channel (28 mono channel) mixer, known as the reMIX Virtual Tec MX 28-4-14, was / is. The reMIX has since been replaced by the virtual SSL 9000k mixing console and it, of course, blows the reMIX out of the water in terms of functionality.
But one thing it taught was the power of using what you have wisely. The reason is because you were limited to 14 channels (even if you were using a mono source, such as a subtractor, you still wanted to apply FXs, EQ or panning from the reMIX, which made you use up an entire channel strip). Of course, you could chain multiple reMIXes together without taking up a channel slot (as well as passing on the 4 FX’s to each mixer). But it still taught you a valuable lesson of doing more with less.
Continue reading Reason: I Have A Lot Of Respect For The 14:2 Mixer (reMIX)
There’s a few unspoken rules that have developed on how to name remixes. Let’s start with Nice and Soft and Smooth as an example.
I feel it’s important to give remixes interesting, catchy names when you’re doing the remixing yourself. Normally, remixing takes on the name of the person doing it. So if this song was remixed by Daft Punk, it’d be called “Mixer Jaëxx – Nice and Soft and Smooth (Daft Punk Remix)“. You don’t need, or want, to name the remix individually since the title’s already long enough with the remixer taking credits.
Now, if Daft Punk did mutiple remixes of the same song, then that’s when you’d see need to specifically call out the remixes with their own name or at least description. The first one would likely be called “Mixer Jaëxx – Nice and Soft and Smooth (Daft Punk Remix)“, but then the second one would need to be called either “Mixer Jaëxx – Nice and Soft and Smooth (Daft Punk’s Happy Remix)” or “Mixer Jaëxx – Nice and Soft and Smooth (Daft Punk Club Remix)“. Either giving a remix a name or simply calling out the type of remix (club).
Continue reading The Unoffical Rules Regarding Remix Naming