In above concept you may have only one track per pattern ,so you’ll end up with tracks pool on the left.
The arranger should definatly not be based on arranging whole patterns instead of clips.
Clips or even tracks would be so much more simple and powerful.
If it is track or clipbased it allows you to create a few patterns with lots of stuff then arrange the tracks of these few patterns in different combinations in the arranger.
The pro is that when you can control part of pattern like a track or a clip you can mix tracks from different patterns. Its also easier to first create one or two base patterns in which you can hear and see everything playing next to eachoter and then arrange this stuff in different combinations in the arranger.
Why lock yourself to having to use a full pattern in the arranger?
why lock yourself into anything? 
i think being able to arrange any object you choose to allows for the most control. i would like it if you could select whole patterns or pattern components like tables in SQL: like track2.pattern1 or *.pattern1
… or …
‘track2.pattern1 where ($row >= 32 && $row < 64)’ 
renoise scripting… now that would be awesome
Unempty’s arranger concept is awesome and well thought-out.
The way this is laid out, we can use it like a clip arranger or a pattern arranger. With some small additions, we can have an over-view too.
To be able to ‘overview’ the song, we need to see all patterns (at this point in the arrangement) in the pattern editor at once. Unempty’s track overriding mechanism means this view will be very stable.
We could have a switch: solo-view the current pattern (as we’re all used to), or show all currently playing patterns. When you tab into a track used by some other pattern playing in parallel, the “current” pattern becomes the one using that track.
The worst problem I can see coming would be line numbers not matching when tracks are arranged in parallel. So! Make it so line numbers are showing only for the currently focussed track. Also, make line-highlighting per-track, as a visual indication of where tracks begin in relation to one another.
Here we go again 
This thread is huge now. And the pattern vs clip arranging has been discussed 5-6 times. I recommend to read this whole thread again
I have nothing against adding patterns into a single track in the arranger, but it’s not just that simple. The point is that patterns can not be shown in the patterneditor side by side very easily (they have individual speed settings etc). It would be a mess. Each pattern also need its own mixer/plugins etc. Patterns can not share plugins when they are arranged like this.
And just very few really like to track a single instrument at a time, and not see them side by side. BUT in the arranger I have no problem to just see an entire pattern as a clip that you have to edit individually. This is especially useful for instruments. Connecting pattern to a instrument (instrument-pattern). Then you would just see the pattern as a Note in pattern editor.If this ever will be implanted then its just a matter of a few adjustments to also be able to arrange whole patterns as normal clips in the arranger window. But no useful data of this pattern-clip will be shown in your main pattern editor. you would then just see it as a bar or something (or as a note if you are inserting the pattern as a instrument-pattern).
So no matter what, IMO the main focus should first be on a pure clip based (single track clips) Arranger. The whole ‘pattern as a clip stuff’ could be implanted later.
I second this 
A arranger is definitely needed for Renoise. But all these ideas should not overwhelmed the development team as I believe they do now.
We all can agree that our beloved tracker is well the most powerful way to compose, fine tune, edit our music. So rather then reinventing the wheel with a piano roll, or trying to implement how these two worlds should co exist, I believe it simple.
Lets use Renoise and EnergyXT for example. Renoise as a master (tracker) and energyXT (audio clips) as the slave works on a horizontal timeline much as psyj wonderful representation was at the beginning of this thread. I do all my core composing within renoise pattern based world and only rely on energyXT as a audio playback device. WE need the ability to manage audio waveforms larger then 30 seconds in some sort of visual display, because a invisible instrument isn’t cutting it. I believe to keep things simples for the devs, lets just add a arranger like psyj screenshot to renoise. I dont believe the arranger should control, play, or have any baring on our pattern based world and should only allow a audio clips timeline. (for now) Using much of the default GUI (pattern buttons, sampler waveforms, etc) this would be a much easier start to allow use users a functional arranger.
I believe the pattern world should show NOTHING in the arranger world or vice versa. The arranger is ONLY a representation and way to display your large audio vocal clips, guitar tracks, mixdown synth lines with some basic audio editing. Look at the arranger as a waveform audio editor / player that just co-exists with our tracker. Another words, tracker(all music composing, editing, mixdown, etc. such as we currently have) arranger(big waveform audio clips that are not displayed in the tracker world).
Right now I am working on a commercial trance album coming out next year and I have to tell you working with audio clips of vocals is just a pain in renoise and out dated, so I rely on energyxt to pick up the slack. The workflow here is my concern, its just to slow and obnoxious to externally load and reload samples for every clip you want to test, re test.
Taktik, please consider a simple AUDIO only arranger (for now) to allow us that also need to sample allot of material much more flexibility.
Thanks for reading
Sorry I had to do a quickly 
RENOISE 1.8 PATTERN MODE
RENOISE ARRANGER
lol only a 2 min photoshop job… wanted to see in my theme.
have to work on some music now
What really puzzles (and even annoys) me a little is when it comes to arranger - WHY NECESSARILY HORIZONTAL? I mean, the whole concept of working in a tracker is VERTICAL. Why in the world could this “arranger” thing, if it’s so necessary, be any differently oriented? It’s confusing, really.
My opinion - take arguru’s Aodix as as a starting point (vertical arranger with pattern instances), add more flexibility, and allow it to show graphic representation of waveforms, and all this - VERTICAL! I know, it may seem strange and “unorthodox” to a usual music software user but why should we trackers lose our ground because of that? It’s our style to lay notes on a vertical sheet, why can’t we lay a waveform the same way?
Why the beauty and robustness of tracking should be compromised (if not tainted) by the tedious and ordinary horizontal layout?
I don’t know about the majority of tracking fans here, but I have managed to produce several commercial tracks (with vocal and guitars!) assembling everything in a tracker. Horizontal layout is alien territory for me, and it’s the last thing I would need in a tracker. Seriously, if Renoise becomes another tracktion or whatever, i’ll go for aodix any time and feel totally comfortable there. It’d be a shame if THE best tracker in the world would be compromised.
GO VERTICAL! 
I think nothing is wrong with a horizontal arranger. The thing is, a lot of people have wide screen displays and a horizontal view would provide a much better overview than a vertical view. This is one of the key features of an arranger, right, overview? Imagine how much one would need to scroll for a global automation curve! Even if one would zoom in to fit it in a vertical view, you have less resolution to work with, than in a horizontal view. Also most people are used to horizontal view, so why not rely on something people are used to already?
Ok, why not using a regular “horizontal” sequencer then? Or better yet, why aren’t patterns running horizontally too, for a better fit on a wide screen!
Don’t you agree that its confusing, thinking one way while editing patterns and then switch another way while arranging? There was already Aero-studio (dead by now, as it seems) which tried to combine two approaches.
I guess its in the origins of people’s approach to software. Sequencers were initially made by/for people used to working with tape, whereas they could lay down pieces of sound in the familiar way.
Trackers are in a way “programmer’s music tool”, where the composer communicates by digit an letter instead of knobs and tapes. The usual way of scrolling text on screen has defined the way trackers are - up and down. And I want to stress that there is no need to change that, cause that’s what tracking is about, and if you change that, you’d better switch pattern flow to horizontal too. And there you go - frooty shloops 2. 
I think the comparison is not appropriate, since a pattern length is nothing compared to the length of a song. I agree with you, that one can edit a lot faster there than in a traditional sequencer, otherwise i wouldn’t have chosen Renoise as my main host. But the arranger is mainly there for complete song overview and one normally doesn’t edit things there except moving blocks of song data around or adding long audio tracks like vocals or guitars. It’s a totally different level of overview needed.
The current sequencer should stay as is, so that people who don’t need/want to use the new arranger can work like they did before and simply ignore the arranger. I don’t think it’s confusing to have a vertical pattern sequencer combined with a horizontal arranger. With a good arranger the pattern sequencer would be probably not necessary anyway.
Personally i wouldn’t have a problem with a combination of both worlds and honestly, if a good implementation of a horizontal arranger would be implemented, i’d use it too, though i think horizontal works much better. Just browse through this thread and look at all the sketches people have made. Notice that nearly all have chosen a horizontal view.
Here is a suggestion i’ve posted in the wrong thread.
One idea for an arranger without breaking the current pattern sequencer:
One could imagine a Renoise song internally as a huge long pattern (invisible for the user), divided with some kind of markers (internally) into real patterns, just like we have now. Twirl the current pattern view by 90° right and instead of seeing the notes one would see blocks of pattern data or an audio waveform like in some other arrangers. When moving blocks around, Renoise would just move the data in the patterns and adjusts the data in the tracks as needed. Basically like if one has copied a note block in pattern 10 and manually copies it to pattern 12. If for an example one would draw a global automation curve it get’s automatically splitted across the song patterns, just like if one has drawn the curve with the current automation view.
I’m to lazy to make a mockup now, ask if it’s unclear.
I don’t mind horizontal or vertical arranger, I thought Buzz’s way wasn’t that bad.
Often the problem I found was aligning one track which may just contain 16 rows with other tracks using a different count.
The other problem was the lack of overview with other instruments while editing one instrument/track.
The question I have is why not combine patterns with track-clips + arranger ?
I think this is kind of what Beatslaugther talks about.
Why not use the track labels as the common denominator ?
So basicly the arranger is the one that sets the “time” of clips/tracks, the tracks sets the actual note’s/velocity etc. The pattern editor builds it’s pattern view based on the start/end time of clips in the arranger+the contents of the clips.
So the pattern is dynamicly changing when you edit the tracks and/or arrangement.
In the pattern view to easily see what is what, the pattern view shouldn’t show anything if it is not in use.
So let say that you offset an instrument in the arranger, so bass1 is a 16row clip copied 4 times in the arranger. At row 32 you want Synthline1 to begin and you set this up in the arranger.
When you then switch back to the pattern view.
Row1 is were bass1 start, in the synthtrack there is just an empty background (no frames, no note columns etc.) until row 32 where the synthline1 comes in.
That way you would combine the arranger view with the patternview.
Not sure if that makes sense, I can try and create a mockup screenshot.
Perfect ideas to me [for V2.0] 
!!! Thumbs up!
For me ,too. But, I have some strange feelings, lately 
haha good one
The arranger as suggested by Unempty looks amazing, but would be a lot of hard work.
For now, the idea by Dezacrator is BRILLIANT. As a way to handle long audio files this is an absolute must have feature. I cant see why anyone would oppose it.
Horizontal is the way to go with this too. If you are so keen on vertical, why are you all not compaining about the sampler and envelope editors in Renoise. Should they go vertically too???
Horizontal is the only way with this one.
I complain cuz i’m used to tracking. I never use horizontal arrangers cuz i’m used to coding DIGITS and NUMBERS when arranging a particular piece, instead of MOVING COLORED BLOCKS like an office secretary. Sorry if it sounds arrogant, - i don’t want to disrespect anyone - but it’s depressing to see how the very essence of tracking is about to be lost as the last remaining mighty piece of software prepares to adopt this global “dummy-friendly” software mentality - “drag this here, click and drag that there…”. bleauchhhh
Instead of bothering with arranger, i’d recommend adding a modular VST router, cuz that’s the healthiest way of constructing sound on a PC. But that’s just my opinion. And to me router would be the only screen where clicking and dragging is really useful.
As pointed out by others, this feature has been discussed to death.
My humble opinion revolves around one single need: I want to be able to arrange very long samples and overlay them on top of patterns.
As it is, if you have a long sample that spans 8 patterns you have to scroll back 8 patterns to trigger it and leave an empty column for it to play through. If you want to edit pattern 5, you have to do it without the sample (or cut the sample into smaller pieces, trigger it, bleh) then rewind and listen to 4 patterns before getting to the fifth. This has always been my pain in the ass and this has always been the driving reason I have to render tracks to export to an external sequencer.
I think all the ideas are great, and I think Renoise will find a very creative way to implement them. That being said, i’d rather have an immediate solution to the above simple problem than a “killer app” that could take 5 years to develop.
Thanks.
Oh and this too.
