in my opinion this picture exactly shows where piano roll (and score) fail at attracting me: an enoumous waste of space and no info about note properties.
I agree so much. Perhaps it’s “just” the design, but if a piano roll doesn’t ADD anything to the workflow,
it’s most likely to take its toll on it. However, I do think a piano roll in a future is the way to go, as it does
allow a whole new approach to making music in Renoise. And imagine combining top to bottom with left
to right in one program… the thought alone makes my spine tickle.
EDIT:
WHAT BANTAI SAYS!!!
It certainly gives you info about note properties, mainly where it is placed on the timeline and the relative pitch difference between several notes.
The way I look at PR is as some sort of analyzing tool and selection tool. Not that much of a ‘composing tool’ as I suspect too many ‘PR-haters’ think of. It’s like saying frequency analyzers are useless because you have scopes, or automation is useless because you have pattern commands that do the same.
PR are very good to quickly detect problem notes, also to select notes according to pitch etc… many like to resize and transpose things as well.
That’s also why I like the idea of maybe have the PR in it’s own window (like in the lower panel for instance) so you can have separate zoomlevels as you work in the pattern editor. Where both editors are showing the same data.
I also think a PR should have two modes.
One without pitch differences so that its only showing note columns. This is a very compact roll where you can easily and freely move notes visually and unquantized on the timeline.
And another mode that do take more space but also include the pitch (normal PR).
I can’t possibly see what there is to not like about that 
It’s extremely useful for ppl recording things live at least.
It just looks like a waste of space since the pattern is at the top of the pattern. Open and close the pianoroll editor when needed.
All the note information you need is on the left side of the pianoroll if you wish to show note, volume and pan colums the regular way as well. It’s just a tool for editing. What other ways would you use a pianoroll for? to see the notes are played? What more information do you need in the pianoroll?
I don’t need a pianoroll 
seriously, as you say, the other info are all in the vol/pan/del/command columns, and I need just them.
the idea of a separate, dedicated panel for pianoroll (what Bantai suggested) is way better, because (as Pysj says) it can interesting to perform pitch-based selections, while an inside-pianoroll looks crowded as hell to my eyes.
oh well, anyway I’m so much a pianoroll hater that I rarely check this thread, so I’d better shut up, but this time I didn’t resist, sorry.
That could work too. Doesn’t look too complicated. 
Only problem i see is how you would actually fit several pianorolls vertically, even for people with low resolution screens But that’s not up to me to solve. But this could work as well.
On the other hand there’s still some major problems with editing notes in pettern view. (for people who refuse to adopt and use a pianoroll) so I made a quck scetch a while back. This old thread might shed some light to the issue.
Or why not have both? Ctrl+Shift+P Could opnen a vertical pianoroll editor in pattern view. Don’t know why but vertical just makes more sense. since that’s how you see a pianoroll anyways.
Bantai’s scetch is not bad, I would just like to see it tilted 90 degrees clockwize and have it as ONLY a piano roll so the editor buttons on the button would be.
[pattern editor][Piano Roll][Arranger][Instrument editor][sample editor]
or something like that.
Absolutely.
I do not need a piano roll and I also can not see a single benefit from it.
Not as analyzing tool and not as note-correction tool (detect wrong notes via listening to your pattern, and transposing, shorten/lengthen blocks is currently a matter of ms) and by far not as composition-tool.
I want to make music with the keys, not with the mouse.
and if you really implement PR please in a separate window with an option in the preferences to never show up! PR is death for Renoise.
Wow! I never thought there were so many piano roll haters around!
I’ll not try to convert anyone, but here’s my reasoning why it is useful: when you record long passages played on a MIDI keyboard, notes more or less fall on whichever sub-track is free at the time. This results in a chaotic mess of note-ons and note-offs that you could hardly ever tweak afterwards and keep your blood pressure at normal levels.
With a piano roll you have an orderly representation of what you played. It takes milliseconds to see how notes flow and relate to each other and much easier to tweak.
Mind this, I too don’t need a piano roll for stuff I’ve entered with the computer keyboard at all. I need it for the stuff I record live, as there I have no control on what goes where.
As for this particular vertucal design, there’s one more reason why I love it so much - you have it side by side with the tracker view and all correlation is immediately obvious. If there ever is a PR in Renoise - I want this one!
if there should be a piano roll in renoise,something like the above IMHO should be the way to do it
Okay, majority of us, renoisers are soundtrackers babies, i won t need any piano roll… BUT that would be the biggest commercial feature of ever. As a Jehova witness i try to convince a maximum of people to use Renoise and the 2 things which prevent them to join are often PIANO ROLL and ARRANGER missing.
If you find a way to integrate them without bothering the oldschool trackerists community, i m quite sure that renoise will become as successfull as FLS or Ableton and the devs will become rich famous and successfull with limousines and private jets (take me for a trip sometimes )
^Agree.
When I purchased renoise …almost a year ago …I defenetily needed a piano roll …at least I thought I did …after a year …it would still be a welcome addition but not as crucial anymore …
fact - It takes some time to get used to tracking …but once you get the hang of it …it becomes a second nature …
I dreamt about renoise piano roll last night… AND IT S HIGHLY UNCOMPATIBLE WITH THE PATTERN COMMAND!!!
it will be visually wrong in lots of cases…
THE ONE WHO WILL BRING ME AN ACCEPTABLE PIANO ROLLED VIEW OF A TORTURED TRICKED MASHED DESTROYED AMEN BREAK WILL DEFINITLY CONVINCE ME BUT… I STILL WAITING and i really dont know how effects like delays or others playing effects, multi samples used on same channel etc can be graphicly translated… if they re not, piano roll will be wrong
The pianoroll and the patterns are not incompatible.
They are just different views of the same model.
The maker of renoise should follow the following Object Oriented Design Pattern:
Model, View, Controller (MVC).
We have a (classes):
MusicModel
abstract View
PatternView extends View
PianoRollView extends View
PatternController
when editing a pattern the controller makes sure that both the view are updated.
So if you prefer editing in the pattern: you can do so.
If you prefer the pianoroll: you can do so
Anyway, is i read somewhere, the current model is based on discrete ticks, this makes precise editing impossible (because we have a discrete grid).
Proffesional sequencer have a continues time model. So you can place notes with miliseconds precision. This cannot be done with renoise.
The tick based model is a subset of the continues based model: Whatever can be done with ticks can also be done in the continues model, not the other way around.
Therefore we first must change the model, and then change the pattern editor (patternView) end then add a PianoRoll view. As you can see: a lot of programming and rewriting is needed.
Anyway. Never say that pattern/track based editing and the pianoroll are incompatible: The arent!
Greetings from Tjerk
An argument why the discrete based musicmodel is not good enough:
Try to get the following melody right 4 ticks per beat: you cant:
http://nl.youtube.com/watch?v=5W9C2I2uQEE&…feature=related
You need a lot more beats per ticks.
Continious timemodel would allow zooming and easier editing.
The point is: When you use a tracker based sequencer you are less creative because you must stick to your choosed ticks/beat meaure.
So fix this, (see my previous post)
@DreamSound / TBone
You’re preaching to the choir. Whatever you read about ticks has been deprecated since september 2008.
Please read: http://www.renoise.com/board/index.php?showtopic=17649
And welcome to Renoise.
Sorry but there are still ticks (as i read your link, i read it already a time ago).
There are tickes per line, so still a discrete model and not a continous model that is needed for the pianoroll.
So my argument is still valid.
Or do i not understand something?
What you need is milisecond accuracy, so you need a continous time model, not a tick based discrete model.
Off course we can still use the pattern-editor but when you need more accuracy you can use the pianoroll.
btw: that zooming feature is really usefull, with a continous model one could zoom in infinetly
For example:
beat = 1 second
4 lines per beat ( 250 ms per line)
After zoom: 8 lines per beat (125 ms per line)
zo a zoom doubles the lines per beat.
Renoise timing 2.0’s engine has been overhauled. From the link:
TPL is there so we, oldschool trackers, can use effect commands like we know and love them. They don’t have any thing to do with timing anymore. The engine has completely changed. Interface to that engine is something for the future, as you described.
This is why 2.0 is a big deal. Everything inside Renoise has changed to pave the road for the future.
Cheers!
Super Awesome!
I missed that part in your link, sorry.
So a pianoroll is coming?
By the way, i am a programmer myself, and it is too bad that renoise is not open source. Or allows plugins of some kind. Then i could program some functionality myself!
Anyway i understand the reason that it is not open source 
And thanks for your time and information!
Renoise rocks!
Optional vertical view for piano-roll sounds fantastic, but I’m even more excited for a piano-roll where I never have to touch a mouse.