Pianoroll can be a very useful thing.
To state the obvious… a piano roll allows for a clear visual indicator of relative pitch. Does anyone hate the way that renoise patterns show time relatively or would you rather see a list of note events? I find the immediate and intuative way i see how many lines are between each note damn useful compared to the way my mpc or asr10 did things. In its most simple form piano roll does something very equivilent for pitch.
If one is ever added id hope it would be vertical.I dont think the current automation window is really very intuative or as usable as it could be. Id rather see it either:
Expandable next to each track.
As another open/close tab like and with advanced edit on the right of the screen.
Or idealy as something which can be switched in and out and when on shows a view like the current one overlaying the note data. (ie youd see what you see at the bottom now but itd be transparant and youd see the note etc columns under it.
New to this forum, Very very old to tracking and renoise.
Keeping the 1024x768 users in mind, here is what it would look like in 1024x768 with the same layout design.
Adding new features is easy, keeping the layout design functional and not overdoing it is not.
I Really do not want to see renoise end up having ALOT of features (minimized) in the pattern editor view, it will just end with you guys removing most of the buttons and adding “quick buttons” or having a more graphical interface/more “views”, with nice little quicklaunch stuff and whatnot, which would really suck because i really like the way 1.9 looks and it’s overview.
Adding a pianoroll might actually be the first step for renoise to change into something else than a tracker. And it is so much more forgive-able to go from a hybrid to something like fruity loops for example. (i pray that day will never happen).
I started out making this picture, adding ‘new features’ that i thought would be cool to have in there.
But when i was finished with it i thought to myself; I would hate it if the standard ‘renoise Track’ ended up looking like this.
Would be alright if you could ADD these features IF needed (just like DSP effects), same goes with the Track Grouping.
Having that extra Track Group column under trackname without being able to remove it…, god i feel irritaded just looking at it MAKE IT GO AWAY! it is removeable right?
The ‘Defuault Track’ shouldn’t have these things (minimized) taking up space when you start a fresh new song. They should be invisible = 0 pixels and you should have the choice of enabling AND disabling/removing them when needed (like DSP’s). Remember choice = important.
and this…
sorry, but those ““Minimized”” Track bars) look awfull and take up ALOT more space than needed.
Make it something more like this maybe?.. please? (note the x button and the thinner group name collumn )
PLEASE stay with the tracker design and dont overdo it. Think about the 1024x768 users.
oh and btw, those 9month old pics look ALOT better than the “new” example image
heh… there really is a huge difference between sketching a few ideas, and doing the final design.
The last thing I would worry about is how the final design would we. The important thing is if it fits the whole concept, and that it really is useful and meaningful to have.
And as always… for people not wanting progress, you really do not have to download the new versions. And of course these kinda features would only be optional.
How many new/modern features do Renoise have compared to for instance FT2?
And how different does it look and feel when you start it up?
The only reason i stay with Renoise is because it’s basicly the only Tracker that enables you to do professional music
(I score music for film), and the only Tracker that is actively listening to user input and updating.
There have been times when i wanted to switch to Protools HD, and was about to do so just before Renoise 1.8 got released (my current version in use).
I stand behind everything the guys have done in the past to renoise, my only concern is that there would be too much new stuff in the track editor taking up more space than necessary (the oh so “minimized” tracks in the track group collumn from the sketch pic).
More does not equal better, for example, another spectrogram isn’t really needed for music productivity (i have never used Master Scopes).
And i dont really see myself using pianoroll, i use Renoise because it is a Tracker after all… i got all the pianoroll in the world in other apps.
also lol, thats not something you say to your users (dont download our latest release).
.
And you know it… telling people to go use something else is just very stupid for what I see as a minor feature.
We are just talking about an optional way to show some notes. Should not need to revolutionize the tracker concept or to change much code.
It’s just another feature. Why the anger?
I like to see the PR just like I see the automation window. A really useful tool that is not in the way for anyone. Perhaps this is how we should implant a pianoroll too…
btw… How come you do not use v1.9?
Any changes done that you don’t like?
The reason is probably because I have alot of unfinished .8 songs that i dont want to “import” over to .9 because of the changed/updated and replaced DSP effects.
I usually have 60+ tracks with 8-10 DSP effects each, so i dont really want to go through all those to get the same sound i had with .8
I read the changelog and spotted some changes in there that might actually change the overall output/sound of the songs.
There is nothing i dont like in 1.9
and im not angry, just concerned because i love Renoise to death and really dont want to change to other software because of bad design decisions.
Now this i didn’t know.
I got scared by the Theme saving, saying: You cannot save theme here because this directory will be overwritten when installing new version.
You are probably not angry. I was thinking more in general how much a PR can upset people But its funny though how many old-schoolers in general thinks that pianoroll is THE one feature that will “turn renoise into another software”.
I think they just overreact on how much an negative impact (I cant see any really) this will have on the program as a whole.
Mousing in note by note must be the ultimate inspirational killer. But a PR can do so much more then just that.
A piano roll is really needed in order to make this music software a lot closer to something “complete”. The approach needed in a tracker to just enter triplets is RETARDED, and I hope Renoise goes beyond that one day.
I don’t understand people who think a feature they won’t use can kill a software (or dumber, its “spirit”). See a Piano Roll as "mousing"is also retarded, they’re a lot of people (like me) who would just like to be able to record keyboard performances in Renoise. I really don’t get why a Piano Roll would make people angry
Personally, a big fan of Renoise, I would take proud in being able to use it professionally (which I did a little). But as my taste is more toward real instruments nowadays, I feel 100 times more confortable and fast simply using Cubase SX 4. So to me Renoise is back in the basket of programs that are targetted at a limited range of music genres (although theoritially you can do anything with it, and I did symphony with it).
Using Cubase I miss the great amount on control Renoise gives you over samples (and that’s why I stil use for chiptune, but that’s all).
Piano Roll => good thing, will attract more users and show them what’s great about it without forcing them to learn everything about a tracker (trackers make absolutely no sense musically when you come from a tr
Opinions opinions… For me, Renoise is the most complete software there is.
I use Renoise professionally, and so do many other (signed) artists mind you.
Um, People whould not use, or even consider using Renoise if they didn’t like trackers or the way a tracker works in the first place.
A Pianoroll is not needed. Seriously.
Pianorolls are for n00b (look at me, im an artist) Fruityloop nerds who cant use their keyboards.
I like Renoise, because it’s a tracker, with all it’s advantages, but also disadvantages. Remember, no software is perfect. Of course Cubase is better for recording live instruments, but it’s much worse than Renoise for sample based sequencing. We use whatever we need and suits us/our way of work.
I do sometimes need piano roll and audio tracks, that’s when I load up energyXT VSTi, problem solved. Renoise developers: don’t forget Renosie is essentially a tracker. We use Renoise because of that fact. There’s many good (and inexpensive) cubase-like sequencers with piano roll and all that. There’s also a tracker with sort-of vertical piano roll, similiar to what’s proposed in this thread, Aodix (Arguru RIP). If we wanted that, there’s nothing stopping us to use one of those, because they’re all mature and powerful products.
The point of this post: whatever you’ll do with Renoise in future - do not change the essential concept. I love the additions in latest versions, because you upgraded the most important points of the tracker environment, and it didn’t change concept in any way. If you’ll change or even compromise this essential concept, that makes us like Renoise so much, you will IMO not expand your user base. You will change it completely. I hope this wont happen…
Despite all that is said, and I am not saying I disagree with it, but I still think a piano roll is a good idea. For most things, yea, a tracker is better than a piano roll in the first place, but some rhythms with difficult octave “arpeggiations” are extremely difficult to do without being able to see a note to note relationship. And as far as using a vst…well, some of us aren’t just dying to spend money on every vst that flies down the pike.
The piano roll feature may be for "n00b"s, but I still think it is worth developing into the software, it can’t hurt anything, and if you don’t want to use it, you don’t have to; but simply this: Some things are hard to get the hang of in a tracker.
And just because a piano roll is wanted or “needed” for some things, it doesn’t change the fact that it’s a tracker. A piano roll can be useful for allot of reasons, ESPECIALLY if your just getting you “feet wet” in music creation.
After some thought and playing a WHOLE lot with Aero Studio…piano-roll + tracker = nice. I’ve used both PR and tracker interface to great extent (not really one more than the other, though I’ve had different results and directions in my music due to note entry/song writing tools) and I think marrying the two logically would be very inspiring so long as neither gets any kind of gap in features.
For instance, in the piano roll, you should still be able to numerically edit pattern commands and automation. In the tracker view, if you input a note with no note off, it should reflect as an ‘infinite note’ in the piano roll. Etc. etc.
The only thing I’d ask for in a piano roll is the ability to see notes from other tracks in the form of ‘ghost notes’ that are faded or even a different color, and those particular tracks should be selectable. For instance…I have a bass track and a lead track. If I’m choosing to enter notes in the piano roll, it would be great help to be able to see my bass notes while plugging in my lead. To keep clutter down, I could deselect the tick box to show a ghost of notes that play a chord on a pad track. Etc. etc…in other words, have a tracker mentality to see the all notes simultaneously, but singular if necessary or desired so that the screen isn’t just filled up with tons of piano roll notes of all different colors and what not.
Zoom feature vertically is also a must…there’s a couple of programs that don’t do this and it’s sometimes frustrating editing or entering notes when the damn piano row is only 5 pixels tall.
Also, if you do a piano roll, PLEASE don’t pick retarded colors for notes. Make them a part of the theme.
This could be solved with a proper, aodix-style zoom engine
This could also be solved with a proper, aodix-style zoom engine
Again, as you want human performance, this could be solved with proper zooming
Renoise gives so much control over samples because it’s NOT a pianoroll based system
So, you’re implying that we should turn Renoise into a sequencer because trackers don’t sell? Well, sure if you want to alienate all the current users… but why not find a more trackerlike solution to the issues a piano roll would fix… in other words: Pattern zoom, multi-selectable note blocks, mouse aided transpose, and note quantize functionality for greater control over human played instrument recording?
… There’s NOTHING a piano roll can do that a properly designed pattern editor can’t do… and I think going the piano roll route is really limiting to the potential of tracker interfaces. In fact, if it’s entirely negating their merit, and saying to the userbase “we don’t think your choice in interfaces works well so here’s a better one” … it’s amazingly condescending, and really sells the tracker concept short. I think we should plow ahead with the pattern editor concept and make it trump piano rolls. Lets make vertical sequencing BETTER than all the horizontal sequencers on the planet.
Along with Aero Studio, Dreamstation 2 was released today and has piano roll and tracker together…again, another place to see how it could be implemented or even a ‘how not to do it’ if it’s not good. Haven’t tried it myself, though.
Of course a lot more could be done in the pattern editor itself. But there are many technical reasons why this is much more difficult to do. A pattern zoom is VERY hard to code into Renoise right now. I have my doubts we will ever see this (perhaps in the far future… who knows…)
The whole engine then has to be redesign from ground up.
Because of that it is much easier to code ‘external’ editors.
And btw, there ARE some things you can never get in the pattern editor without implanting a PR. And that is to sort the notes by pitch, and to have independent zoom level from the pattern editor (like you can do in the automation window now).
For many ppl those two things can be very vital (especially the first one).
And let’s stop this black/white nonsense. It’s not like one thing exclude the other. If we do this in a smart way I think everyone will appreciate more editing options.
Personally I like the idea to expand the automation window a bit to also combine an optional PR there.
So you can add several tracks the be shown as bars there, and at the same time draw envelopes etc.
It’s not certain at all that any graphic really should be in the pattern editor after all.
To put a Aodix kinda zoom in the pattern editor means that we have to un-quantify it visually. And might not be what ppl want. Renoise is not designed to be unquantified and thats a huge argument for keeping these things in external editors. And that might not be so bad if you take into account a new arranger, better xrni format, a PR (expanded graphical editor) etc.
To put everything in the pattern editor might sound tempting at first, but might turn out to be the wrong way to do things.
They try to show the best of three worlds actually as it also has a drum sequencer view.
For as far as i tested it, it is rather limited and still buggy.
Only when scanning the VST folder it crashed out over 4 times because it could not handle analysing various plugs.
And not all plugs work.
But the idea of having these options in that matter is ofcourse always nice to steel from.
i am no coder so don’t mind me if i ask a stupid thing, but perhaps some kind of simple zooming would be possible ? maybe it would be a problem to change the way renoise deals with the time but i could imagine it to be something like
[100% zoom in]
C-4
E-4
G-4
C-5
C-4
E-4
G-4
C-5
[2x zoom out]
C-4
E-4
G-4
C-5
C-4
E-4
G-4
C-5
[3x zoom out]
C-4
G-4
C-4
G-4
[4x zoom out]
C-4
C-4
it would be basically still the same view, it would only hide some notes that are out of zoom -
the advantage of this thing would be mainly in writing long sequences of pads for example, the mechanics behind the playing would be the same only view would be changed… combine this with arranger where you can play several patterns simultaneously and renoise suddenly gets double awesome
)
And of course these kinda features would only be optional.
But its funny though how many old-schoolers in general thinks that pianoroll is THE one feature that will “turn renoise into another software”.
For me, Renoise is the most complete software there is.
