I never really bother with the pattern matrix myself but one thing I recalled, aren’t patterns in Buzz tied to instruments? I may be remembering wrong, I had stability issues with Buzz and never got very deep into it. If Renoise did have an overhaul of it’s arranger I’d rather it be more like FL where a pattern can contain anything, even a whole song with many instruments. This would also be necessary in order for the patterns to behave as patterns have until now, if you preferred one pattern at a time it would still work as Renoise does now
TBH the only thing I’m really envious of Buzz on is that machine interface…
There is a lot to like about Buzz, but I can’t get it to produce any sound on my machine and it is a bit rough around the edges. I’d like to see Renoise borrow more ideas from a wide range of other DAWs, because there are a lot of good ideas that would help round it out not just as an excellent tracker, but a self contained cross-platform modular studio and DAW.
Yes, patterns in Buzz are ‘tied’ to instruments - I don’t see how that is a bad thing. You need to use Buzz for a week or so to fully understand why the Sequence Editor is so good. Of course, it should be possible to have a pattern contain many instruments, it’s only arbitrary that it currently only contains one instrument. If you could group multiple patterns together (each having one instrument) into one big pattern, that would be nice too, so you could split them up if you wanted to. (The same as you can group tracks in Renoise, perhaps.)
You could have three levels of ‘zoom’:
1: A pattern with one instrument
2: A group of patterns
3: Sequence editor, into which you could put patterns of (1) or groups of (2).
I was trying to write a song in FL Studio last night, and realised why I love trackers so much - trying to use the piano roll to duplicate some notes and then move them forward in the timeline was a nightmare, trying to get the timing right was such a pain, using the mouse, constantly having to select the ‘select’ tool’, then the ‘pen’ tool, etc. Whereas in a tracker it would just require pressing ‘Insert’ or ‘Delete’ a few times, to shift the notes up and down. The same thing applies to the Playlist in FL Studio, it doesn’t compare to the Buzz Sequence Editor.
The disadvantage of Reason’s Blocks is (unless I’m mistaken) they don’t have names (just like the Pattern Matrix), and they can’t be added, deleted and moved using the keyboard (please correct me if I’m wrong, because I haven’t used Reason for years).
Viewing and working with all notes from all instruments on one page is one of the biggest advantages of a tracker UI vs a piano roll, voluntarily sacrificing that is kind of like getting the worst of both worlds. One instrument per pattern is also less flexible, multiple instruments per pattern still allows you to use one per pattern if that’s your thing but the inverse is not true.
Those things in FL do have hotkeys, you don’t have to use the mouse to change tools and you can duplicate selections easily enough too(ctrl+left click drag, ctrl+B ). Actually there is really no reason to ever use the select tool, it’s there for people who don’t want to learn/use keyboard shortcuts.
Not to be a dick and say “if you love Buzz so much why not use Buzz”, but why not just use Buzz? It seems to be the program you’re most comfortable with and most knowledgeable about. Renoise is more of a traditional tracker(with modernized capabilities), the single column pattern sequencer is kind of a core part of it’s identity…
You are mistaken in one respect: in Reason 7 you certainly can give blocks (equivalent to Renoise patterns) names (eg verse, chorus, whatever you want), and it is a fantastic way to work on the building blocks of a song before arranging them in order and overlaying them with non-block elements. Take a look at the tutorial on YouTube linked in my previous post or download the demo. Reason does not have particularly good workflows for those who would rather not use the mouse too much.
Agree any implementation of a similar feature would need to be usable with keyboard commands, as supported by Buzz. The lack of a tracker interface, overly skeuomorphic UI and lack of support for VST keep me from shelling out for a licence. But I am all for taking the best features from a range of programs and smashing them into a program that can do more of what I want in one package. There are bits of Buzz that I like, along with bits of Reason, Ableton Live, FL Studio and others which would round out Renoise nicely if borrowed judiciously.
Can you make a video showing how you use it? It isn’t fast or fluent for me, what am I doing wrong?
To all those wishing to silence discussion about improving the arranger - I’m not talking about Buzz, I’m talking about the WAY one thing is done in Renoise, which could be vastly improved, and the perfect example of how to do it is shown in Buzz, so obviously I’m going to use that as an example.
So far, NOBODY has created a video showing how they use the Pattern Matrix to such grand effect, despite so many protesting that it’s wonderful…
Another person trying to silence discussion… Are you really that incapable of reading opposing points of view? Why are you posting stuff about what happens in the Buzz forum on this forum? “demands” indeed…
Hilarious. More strawmen arguments. Buzz hasn’t crashed on me for several years, since Oskari started developing it again, I don’t think it’s ever crashed. So you put words into my mouth and then say that is the reason I am here.
In other words, nobody is allowed to discuss the Pattern Matrix, precisely because it isn’t as good as the Buzz Sequence Editor. I get it. And those who ‘like’ the Pattern Matrix are either ‘Renoise is my religion’ types, who are completely irrational and cannot hear its name besmirched, or have just never bothered to try Buzz, or watch the videos I and other people have made, which show how much quicker and easier it is to use. Nobody wants Renoise to turn into Buzz, but plenty of people want the Renoise arranger to be improved…
So this idea that I am sharing frustrations WITH BUZZ here are laughable.
You should look up ‘logical fallacies’ and ‘strawman argument’…
Pattern XP in Buzz allows you to view multiple patterns side by side, I never work that way, so I’m not too hot on what it can actually do, but it’s sort of there. But I totally agree with you.
Thanks for that, I will give it a go.
Renoise has way more going for it than Buzz - it’s constantly being developed, it has LUA tools, many of which are really useful to me personally, it’s just better than Buzz in almost everything - except for the arranger. That’s it, that’s the only thing that stops me from giving up Buzz forever, but it’s the most important part of any DAW!
Those who dislike Pattern Matrix seem to be in minority. I enjoy it and don’t have any problems with it. Actually, Buzz sequencer doesn’t look like something comfortable to me. Don’t feel like explaining why exactly.
I’m sure 95% of forum users prefer Pattern Matrix as well, or, at least, don’t pay as much attention as you do. It’s completely understandable that Renoise devs won’t rewrite half of Renoise code just because one user doesn’t like one of its features. Taktik already talked about it.
Basically, you have two choices:
Forget about Renoise, use Buzz, despite all its flaws.
Both are pretty great.
Calling everyone strawmen is the worst thing you could do. Why not spend some time trying to learn the program instead?
It isn’t remotely helpful if you “don’t feel like explaining why exactly”. I’m all ears, tell us what you don’t like about it.
How do you get around the following problem:
In the Pattern Matrix, patterns are arbitrarily given numbers according to which number in the pattern sequence they were created in - this hampers your workflow so much, it’s unbelievable. This is a prime example of how NOT to design an arranger. The video above shows why.
FL Studio uses clips, like Buzz. Orion uses clips. I presume Sonar, Cubase and virtually all other DAWs use clips, clips which aren’t given some arbitrary number which forces you to change the way you write your music, as you struggle to work around the interface.
You have no idea whether those who dislike the Pattern Matrix are in a minority. Those who actually like it are welcome to try to explain WHY, but I doubt any of them can. Please go ahead - explain why you prefer the Pattern Matrix to the Buzz Sequence Editor - but first you have to use both… otherwise you don’t know what you are talking about.
You have all your stuff on a single screen. It’s easier to see what’s going on in the song this way.
Usually, songs are not that simple. Imagine breakcore track that has 300 drum patterns or so, and they’re all different. I’m not sure it will be easy to acheive in Buzz.
In Pattern Matrix, you can see if the pattern has automation and how notes are placed in it. In Buzz Sequencer, you can’t.
Regarding removing blocks: instead of deleting block, you can just mute it. It’ll have the same effect.
The pattern matrix is useful for some types of music, just not the types of music I like to make. It is next to useless to me, and I know full well how to use it, it is just simply incapable of helping me do what I want. The pattern sequencer in Renoise is so basic compared to the sequencing capabilities of other DAWs that it is painful to use. I don’t want to use another program (although if Reason were to include a tracker interface and VST support I’d be tempted to), I want Renoise to add the one glaring feature it has been missing for so long (one that other trackers and most DAWs have had for ages).
I am not asking for something to replace the pattern matrix (which is not an arranger or sequencer by any stretch of the imagination), I am asking for a more advanced and flexible arranger to compliment the existing tools available in Renoise and make it a more complete production environment.
You can see multiple patterns on one screen in Buzz, using Pattern XP. This looks like the patterns in Renoise. You can choose which tracks you display in the pattern, using Pattern XP.
It will be MUCH easier to do in Buzz, especially a track with 300 drum patterns.
I would disagree that you can see ‘how notes are placed in it’ - the pattern matrix blocks are much too small to be of any use for that, and all you see is the TIMING of the notes, not even the notes themselves (i.e. in FL Studio you see a mini piano roll in each clip, which is far more useful than the Pattern matrix blocks.) In Buzz you can give your clips NAMES, which is of far greater use, especially if you have 300 drum patterns… Even being able to call them ‘Drum 01’, ‘Drum 02’ is more useful than 300 pattern matrix cells which are too small to show you anything useful…
Yes, that’s a sort of workaround, but the entire problem is that the pattern matrix is simply a more advanced tracker playlist, but not really fit for purpose, and the arranger/sequencer is the most important part of any music program, I would say.
All I can say is - if anybody has used Buzz for long enough, going to the Pattern Matrix is like a massive step backwards.
I am working on another song, and have come across another problem that often occurs when using Pattern Matrix, I’ll try to make a video to show you what it is. This problem would never occur in Buzz, it wouldn’t even come up.
To me that quite sounds like it amongst others is crashing often (although i said i left buzz because it was crashing, not you left it because of that) and i wasn’t specifically mentioning your name in my remark (if you read it thoroughly). But at least my remark is based on these kind of expressions, from amongst others and including you indeed, not something i put into your or anyone else’s mouth specifically.
Seriously, these videos are supposed to be impressive and a good reason for everyone to get into Buzz ? You’re getting that vindicative in the forum for … This ?? Come oooon, you make me think of this :
Perhaps reading isn’t your strong point.
Where did I suggest anybody “get into Buzz”?
Did you not understand the title of this thread? “Add buzz styled sequencing TO RENOISE”?
I see that neither you, nor anybody else here, has been able to make a simple video explaining WHY they prefer the Pattern Matrix to the Buzz Sequence Editor.
Isn’t that strange…
Are you actually capable of understanding user interfaces, and how arrangers/sequencers work? Care to say what you think? Unlike the PatternMatrixians, I’m more than interested in ‘heretics’ of the Church of Buzzianity, so please, say whatever you want.
Do you understand how the Buzz Sequence Editor works? Do you understand how the Pattern Matrix works?
Can you produce a video of Renoise doing the same things as I do in the Buzz video above?
We’re still all waiting for you to explain why you don’t like the Buzz Sequence Editor…
You can also produce a video showing the Pattern Matrix doing the same things as I do in the Buzz video above. Can’t you?
The pattern matrix is not an arranger, it was never destined to be one in the first place.
Danoise contributed the idea as a “poor man’s arranger” which offers a little more functionalities than the pattern sequencer alone allows you to and that is frankly how people should see it and everybody will have to do with until this area is being worked on again.
The pattern matrix was also never meant to be a final solution forever.
“You know what i think is the most frustrating for Buzz users here?
They are frustrated by the fact Buzz is still a piece of instable shit and underdeveloped and most likely Buzz users feel frustrated that it isn’t Buzz that is being actively developed and stabilized but Renoise.
I bet that if Buzz was completely stable, Buzz users would most likely never have stepped away from it.”
You were clearly setting up a strawman argument. You’re saying that you think “Buzz users… are frustrated by the fact Buzz is still a piece of instable shit and underdeveloped”. etc.etc.
New Buzz hasn’t crashed on me - ever. And it’s TOTALLY irrelevant to this thread, which is about adding the Buzz sequence editor TO RENOISE…
So why aren’t you talking about the Buzz Sequence Editor and the Pattern Matrix themselves? Afraid the BSE will win the argument?
Isn’t that stating the obvious? Whoever said otherwise? Are we not allowed to talk about it then? It sounds like several other people on this thread think the Pattern Matrix is just wonderful, and not a stopgap at all.
