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.
Well if we are talking general concepts, both are used to lay out the song structure.
But anyway, the Buzz sequence editor is good and if Renoise’s pattern matrix can evolve into something like it then that would be a good thing. I just don’t think phrases should be the focus for that feature.
I couldn’t agree more. Unfortunately, I don’t know that this can be done without modularizing Renoise. That wouldn’t be a bad thing; I just don’t know if the devs want to go that route.
For a long long time, 16 or 32gb seems like a lot but it isn’t when you are talking hi end sound libraries, for an orchestral composer 16 32gb is gone in the snap of a finger hahaha.
TX16W doesn’t have DFD and never will have DFD, the developer was very vocal about that when asked for DFD by a big amount of soundware developers, why di they want it ?
The exact reason that XG2003 is again ignoring for Redux to be a success, not everybody can afford or even wants Kontakt, but they still want those big libraries 
Only time will tell if Redux will be a success, but if they want to get support from soundware developers then DFD is a no brainer, without DFD then it is just another sampler and honestly an expensive one at that in comparison to all the others out there with no DFD.
With all due respect to the dev team, just how big of a need is there for this? In the universe of things the devs could spend energy on (including things to generate new revenue streams), redux does not seem compelling to me.
Who needs another sampler this day in age? The big guys like kontakt and halion are already cross-platform. For some of the niche sound design stuff, there’s shortcircuit (although frankly kontakt can do that stuff too if you invest enough time in it). Okay, so there’s a sliver of a market of OSX/inux people who want a sc port. The MPC-heads have their choice of bpm, geist, and poise. I recall there was a point where discoDSP was giving highlife away for free and still couldn’t get people to adopt it. Arguably there’s also hybrid synth stuff like alchemy. There’s linux users who aren’t using renoise but that’s a pretty small niche too.
You need a really really compelling new sampling paradigm to make a dent in this space. Renoise instruments are cool, but I don’t know if they reach that bar - personally, the main reason I use renoise instruments for sampling at all is because they’re integrated in an awesome tracker.
PS I say this as someone who really likes the R3 beta.
So how much are those ‘big libraries’ going to cost? I take it you know the average price of Kontakt libraries? How are people who can’t afford Kontakt, but can afford Redux, going to be able to afford 20GB sample libraries?
the good thing about the Phrase editor is:
- it is available if you want to use!
i love it awesome, and very handy if i need! Thanky you awesome tool indeed!!!
visible in pattern editor is definetly needit, to visible the note you need to enter hte phrase itself. No need to view in the pattern editor what inside the Phrase!!!
Another good thin about Buzz (i use buzz more than 10 years) is you hit ENTER in the pattern it is go inside the pattern editor! and hit Enter again it is go out of the patter to the SEQUENCER, this maybe a good way to edit phrases and view them quicly!!!
i figure this problem in RNS 3. i need to go to the sample then go to the phrase then select the right note to view the correct Phrase pattern… uhhhmmm im tired when i do this 10times or more… and if i have 50phrases i need to go my cursor over that small one note button ahd hit the right note… this is not so good i think.
“really long workflow to get the right note to find the right phrase in the pattern” VS “Enter” 
/>
Hear, hear. It would have been nice if registered users had been asked too. When a couple of people make a decision without asking thousands (?) of users, the chances of it being what most of the users want is slim.
Who is going to want Redux? People who already use Renoise but who have to use another DAW because Renoise doesn’t have audio recording, etc.?
Then why not put audio recording, etc.etc. into Renoise, rather than the other way round?
Which is exactly why F2 takes me to the Pattern Editor, and pressing F2 again takes me to the Phrase Editor of the chosen instrument. I’m hoping to be able to get enough LUA Api hooks to take me to the exact phrase-note the user’s cursor is on.
so then when I’m done with editing the Phrase, I press F2 again and I’m back in the pattern editor. Of course, this is just to replicate ImpulseTracker/SchismTracker behaviour… But that’s beside the point. The key-shortcut could be anything.
Cycling between Pattern Editor and Phrase Editor is stupendously important.
- I’m glad this can be done via scripting of the API.
- I wonder why it needs to be done via scripting instead of directly provided as a shortcut.
one BUG:
- create a phrase
- put the Phrase note in the pattern
- play in the phrase editor
- then go to the pattern editor and hit enter in the note or play your song
!!!the phrase plays 2 times!!!
you can see two cursos move in the phrase editor
dududez you miss something, the Phrase editor you can use VSTi or Midi or Sample!!!
and Redux is an option for users… if you dont need dont use… its simple.
is u use renoise then dont use it. but millions of potential users want something like this… use in ableton cubase or else…
Redux is a kool thing…
I must say that this is something really brilliant which I did not think myself.
Instead, I can’t really understand the use for 0Sxx with phrases. could you please enlighten me?
Hear, hear. Anybody interested in how Buzz works can view a simple tutorial I put up on Youtube, you can see it near the bottom of the following page:
im not interest about how buzz works. as i say i Use buzz more then 10 years before i start renoise. im using buzz to my work everyday in that years, now im use Renoise to my work in the last 3 years–
im still love Buzz process , the modularity and the plugins, there are lots of simple but really powerfull plugins that cant beated today…
like a simple “Jeskola Bass 4” i dont need trilli-filli Massive to create powerfull bassline… and so on…
Sure, its probably best to explain with an example, see this song file: Dropbox - Phrase 0Sxx demo.xrns - Simplify your life
So you can play a phrase from a specific line by specifying the line number (in Hex) with the 0S command. In this example 0S is being used to play a phrase like its a drum sample. Before phrases you could chop up a drum loop like this but you would need to put each hit on a different track if you wanted to process hits with different eq/compression settings. Then you put them in a group for bus processing. However if afterward you wanted to chop up the programmed break you would have to copy and paste/reprogram each track. I actually made a tool that lets you do what 0Sxx can now do with phrases: New Tool (2.8): Pattern Offset
Now you can do all that by sending different hits to their own fx chains, program the drums in one phrase and then chop that phrase up in the pattern track. So its more convenient if you want to chop up drum breaks and so on. Hope that makes sense, its probably easier to understand by looking at the attached song.
There are of course other ways in which you can achieve the same effect but I’m still figuring all this out.
thanks for the demo, afta8.
I thought it worked like this but I believe I’ve did something wrong while trying it before because it didn’t work for me.
you can also use 0Bxx values to achieve the same effect while playing backward
Isn’t that their choice ?
Where does it say in the Renoise sales page that you will have a say in the companies decisions once you purchase ?
You don’t like the direction they are taking, fine, go elsewhere, there is plenty of software. (No not a “Renoise is my religion, get another DAW” attack, i hardly ever use Renoise anymore, it is not a very good DAW in 2014 in my eyes, so that argument is gone)
Some reason you think that moaning non stop will make them change their minds and do everything you want them to do, or are you just moaning non stop for fun ?
Plenty of us don’t like the direction Renoise has gone, but most of us just use other software.
And honestly the stuff i miss from Renoise will be in Redux and i can use it in my main DAW. (Still wondering who will use Redux, or are you just going to ignore this again)
By the way anything upto a 20gb library is actually about normal from a smaller developer, most of those are between $10 - $40 (Please don’t infer that they are inferior because of the lower cost, they just don’t licence the Kontakt player, so price is less)
Hilarious.
And then I ‘go somewhere else’ and the ‘somewhere else’ also ignores what their users want, and carries on adding things that most of them don’t want.
All I want is Renoise with a Buzz Sequence Editor. I think you’ll find MOST users would want that. I can guarantee you that IF the devs had produced a Buzz Sequence Editor a few years ago, instead of the Pattern Matrix, and the Pattern Matrix had never existed, NOBODY would be criticising the Buzz Sequence Editor and demanding a ‘Pattern Matrix’-like sequencer…
So your answer is for most of us to stop buying Renoise and let it die? I’d much prefer they add the one simple thing that I want, and that most users would want, and we all keep on using it and buying it.
It’s not the size of the library that counts so much in Kontakt, it’s the extensive scripting. Those libraries aren’t going to cost $10 - $40 because the scripting is a huge amount of work.
You’re just typical of some of the people here - you can’t even DISCUSS improvements to the interface. You act like Renoise cannot be criticised - or try to silence ‘dissent’ - and then you say that you hardly use Renoise any more, and that you think it isn’t a good DAW any more! Hilarious!
hmyes i noticed that too many times now…
and the announce of redux is imho just like a confession that its not possible to improve renoise the way it needs to be! i know, hard words again but the future will proof that statement! at least you can make music with renoise, thats a fact but the differences to other daws getting bigger and bigger (less functionality!). i could cry about that, because renoise is basically such a great software…
I agree, you can still do in Renoise 3 what you used to do in 2.8, but I think the workflow is the most important thing of all, and I don’t see any improvements have been made in the actual interface.
It’s clear that there are many intelligent contributors to this forum who come up with really good ideas, new ways of laying out things in Renoise and new ways of doing things - this is where the devs should be getting their ideas from, and then asking us if we want them implemented.