How is Renoise “unmatched” as a sampler? ‘Phrases and stuff’ - oh, you mean the phrases which were designed badly from the get go, so all you see in the pattern editor are note values, to represent phrases? Because implementing a Buzz sequence editor would be too simple, clear and easy, wouldn’t it…
Good grief. “you can’t visualize waveforms, or notes, or an instrument icon, all you see are numbers.” That IS the tracker approach, so yes, it IS what is keeping people away from trackers. LOL.
Redux will be an epic failure, and the devs should have tried ASKING PEOPLE FIRST.
What sort of person thinks that they can just ignore what their customers, and potential customers, want, and just try to sell them whatever the business owner wants to sell? Never heard of Windows Metro? Microsoft Surface? ‘The Ribbon’? Epic failures from the biggest software company in the world, that have lost them billions of dollars, because they thought they knew best, and didn’t bother asking their own customers what they wanted.
I’m still waiting for somebody to show me a video of them using the Pattern Matrix to write a whole song, so I can see how they do it. You’d think Renoise users would be leaping at the chance to show me how brilliant and useful it is…
So YOU’RE the one who came up with the genius idea of trying to represent umpteen different phrases by a mere NOTE in the pattern editor. That explains a lot… I would call that neither ‘dynamic’ nor ‘flexible’.
So you haven’t used the Buzz Sequence Editor either then, I take it?
Yes a long time ago but not after it’s recent resurrection.
Have you tried to make a track using phrases?
IMO you are missing the point. Phrases are like samples, you use them in the same way when sequencing.
I agree that the Buzz Sequencer does have features that would be nice to have but I think those should be implemented in the pattern matrix. Phrases are not the same as Buzz sequences.
Some of you guys are missing the point. Phrases are simple and powerful. Before phrases, you hit a key and the sampler played whatever was on that key, with whatever modulations. With phrases, you can still do that, but you can also play entire patterns on a single key. The phrases become complex notes themselves, and you can play them with a midi controller or sequence them in the pattern editor, same as you can with any sample-based notes. You can do this with plugin instruments as well.
You are angry because you are obviously unimpressed with the 3 Release (I do not blame you for that and have not seen a Renoise release in recent years i was impressed with)
1 If you need evidence look at any FR forum on any developers website
2 What you are talking about is the developers making a list of what they are WILLING to do and then the users voting on that list, there really is no such thing as asking your users what is needed, go on i dare you, make a forum post asking people to say what their number one needed feature is for Renoise, every single user will be different, give them a list of ten and let them vote and yes you would get a consensus, but only a consensus on the options the developer already chose, so your argument in this case is wrong.
As to all your other points i agree entirely with most of it, however why would anybody be interested in Redux, i have covered this before, if it has DFD (No idea yet , they haven’t even coded it) then please name me one other sampler outside of the very expensive Kontakt that has Round Robin/Random Robin and DFD, there actually isn’t one, and this offers a low cost entry point into high quality libraries (If soundware developers support it, no reason they wouldn’t)
I knew all of that already, I’ve just written a simple song using phrases. None of that addresses any of the inherent problems with how phrases are triggered by note values… Nobody said phrases weren’t powerful, they are, but it’s no use if you can’t SEE what you have put WHERE in your pattern, because all you have is a random note value to guess at. It’s just so ridiculous I can’t comprehend it.
I’m not remotely angry.
Yes, there is a reason they wouldn’t - they can do much better creating libraries for Kontakt, it is the industry standard. Redux is not going to go anywhere. It’s a chicken and egg problem. Why would any of the developers who currently create libraries for Kontakt, and take advantage of all its features, such as scripting, redo those sample libraries for Redux, if Redux isn’t really popular? Who is going to want Redux?
Hear, hear. And yet we didn’t get either of those in Renoise 3. Why? What’s the point in the devs producing changes that aren’t the most wanted features?
So because I state that the way you ACCESS phrases is bad, I don’t understand what phrases are? They are two different things.
The phrases
The method of accessing them, the method of viewing which phrases are being triggered where…
Two separate things.
The Buzz Sequence Editor solves all of those problems… Phrases are the same as Buzz patterns - they are a tracker within a tracker! It explicitly says so on this site!
I’m just finishing off a Buzz tutorial video which will clearly explain everything, just need to do a few more annotations, then I’ll post it up in this thread, so you can understand what I am talking about.
Ha ha… my bad…
Isn’t there an older survey then?
I remember the days when we used to have a survey from the devs, for registered users only, and we’d vote on what features we wanted most. That’s how things should work…
No, you understand what phrases are. But you’re claiming that phrases are bad because they don’t copy the feature set of another application. I think that’s wrong. Phrases fit into the renoise way of working and enable you to work a bit differently. You’ve proven that by writing music with phrases, you said it yourself. I guess I’m suggesting that you say “Hey, here’s what I’d like to see” in the suggestions forum, and continue making music in renoise the way you know how, using the new tools at your disposal. That’ll be a whole lot better than suggesting the renoise team intentionally puts out convoluted stuff for no good reason, and that the feature is of somehow no use because it doesn’t copy another piece of software.
I think the problem you have with phrases is the same one you have with samples, its inherent to the tracker design.
Say you have a sliced loop, how do you know what slice plays what when looking at your programmed sequence? How do you what instrument is playing? and so as you state how do you know what phrase is playing… This isn’t a new problem and buzz doesn’t solve this either.
At some point in a tracker things get very alphanumeric, thats why its called a tracker. I suppose in contrast to a traditional DAW you have to use your ears a lot more to know what sound is playing but IMO that is an advantage.
I didn’t suggest that PHRASES were no use. I didn’t suggest the Renoise team designs things the way I wouldn’t, for no reason - they come up with an idea and then implement it, without ASKING users.
What if I were to suddenly somehow implement the Buzz Sequence Editor in Renoise and get rid of the Pattern Matrix, without ASKING anybody, and just said ‘This is the way it is’. Wouldn’t that be wrong? How can you expect to design a user interface correctly if you don’t ask users?
“Phrases fit into the renoise way of working and enable you to work a bit differently. You’ve proven that by writing music with phrases, you said it yourself.”
Huh? I didn’t prove anything of the sort. They “enable me to work a bit differently” - is that supposed to mean it’s a good thing? They FORCE me to work different, you mean.
Representing phrases with notes in the pattern editor is a bad idea.
Somebody make a song with 50 phrases over eight instruments and then show us the patterns. Preferably using Kontakt libraries, so the lower notes and higher notes are already being used by Kontakt for keyswitching…
In a month’s time you’d come back to that song and not have a clue what note was doing what, you’d have to constantly go into and out of the phrase editor, just to see what each ‘phrase note’ actually represented.
Whereas in Buzz… Please tell me what is unclear about the picture below.
I use Slicex to play sliced loops, so I can pretty much see what note is playing what slice.
So what you’re saying is - two wrongs make a right. We can’t see what slice is playing with a sliced loop, so using note values to call up phrases is ‘just as bad’, and therefore good. Okay.
It’s not about using your ears more or less, it’s about being able to SEE things laid out in front of you - you can’t listen to an entire song in one tick, can you. That’s WHY we use patterns, etc. to represent the song, so we can SEE what’s coming up next. Only you can’t see it if you use a note value to represent a phrase. It’s woefully inadequate. This is an unnecessary limitation.
It’s no skin off my nose because I will never use phrases. But please, create a song with 100 phrases over ten instruments, and post it up so we can see the patterns. As I said before, you will be going in and out of the phrase editor all the time, just to work out what note represents what phrase.
Okay then - the GENERAL CONCEPT of phrases is the same as Buzz patterns in the Sequence Editor. Of course, Buzz patterns COULD be made to do those four things, I am talking about the general implementation of the user interface.
I am well aware that Renoise can do about a hundred times as much as Buzz can… why else do you think I want to use Renoise, instead of Buzz?
No I won’t, I will just hit the key a phrase is assigned to and HEAR the phrase to identify it. I don’t see what posting a song with over 100 phrases will prove.
No, the GENERAL CONCEPT of Buzz patterns in the Sequence Editor is the same as Renoise patterns in the pattern matrix.
DFD = Direct From Disk streaming.
It would make Redux complete for a standard sampler and i don’t think the devs can really go much around it. But todays machine can easily have 16 or 32GB of memory (I can even address my current MB up to 128GB), so i’m not sure how long this kind of use remains valid.
Not really. There isn’t a Renoise equivalent of Buzz’s sequence editor. The pattern matrix has never struck me as particularly useful beyond muting tracks within individual patterns or giving a general overview of which tracks have something going on in which patterns.
XG2003’s apparent use for phrases within a pattern are the closest thing to the Buzz sequence editor, but that really just turns the phrases into patterns and turns the patterns into a sequencer.
