since they (the piano-lol guys) are talking about the PR, we here will talk about the improvements and new ideas about RNI format />
What I would like to see in the future:
[DONE] - more samples
[DONE] - multilayering (not necessarily via AKAI format support: I would gladly spent hours into creating a multilayered drumkit based on my AKAI samples)
[DONE] - 256 velocity levels (129, like MIDI, is enough really)
[DONE 3.0] - parameter automation (velocity, pitch, cutoff, resonance)
[DONE 3.0] - parameter modulation (via LFO or via another parameter, f.e.: modulating cutoff with pitch or volume with track3 reverb width… />)
About multilayering:
instead of having those unusable visual stuff (try to visually put 20 different layers into a single note zone into Kontakt… />), I would prefer having an editor as simple as this:
I’m too lazy to create a JPG about this, but I think you understand that they are 3 text boxes, the second 2 having 2 arrow buttons to modify the velocity ranges.
Obvious the simple parts first like ‘unlimited’ number of samples.
Then we can talk about multilayering.
Then importing of akai is not that hard.
The akais are ususally not that big either. So you can load everything into ram.
Giga is by far the best and biggest format.
It is however a much more difficult task. Now we are talking about many more parameters and advanced multilayering and editing, crossfading release samples etc etc. Also gigas are usually much bigger so you will need support for harddrive streaming.
This is a huge task, and there is a reason why samplers like kontakt, halion and gigastudio are so expensive.
You would need one or two coders dedicated to the sampler alone.
I think there are many advantages by setting up parameters in a graphical UI. You can for instance draw lines over a keyboard where x-axis is the pitch and the y axis is the paramter value (like velocity, filter etc etc).
But of course everything should be possible to enter into boxes.
The Kontakt visual zone stuff is way way to small. But it can be very usefull if it had been done in a more userfriendly way.
That said I’m all for it. I would happily pay extra for such an kick ass sampler.
This would really put renoise into a unique position as the only sampler/seqeuncer in the world that you can control each individual sample beeing played fram a multilayered format, without the limitations of vst.
And this is imoh one of the really big differences you have in a trackers vs seqeuncers, the sample handeling.
But this is sooo much work. I think there need to be more renoise developer if this is ever gonna happend.
Some other ideas:
Why not make renoise the most advanced synth as well?
What if you could insert patterns instead of samples into the sample slot of an instrument. You will have something called instrument patterns. This is just as normal patterns (a song actually with a pattern,samples instruemnts and fx), but they are dedicated to an instrument.
So basically you are triggering patterns with notes.
This way you can make very complex sounds, by mixing samples, vstis, fx and whatever, by using pattern commands etc etc.
And ultiamtely you can convert/rip off whatever you have made with the ‘pattern instruments’ into ordinary instruments and patterns for total control.
I don’t think recording is an instrument-format question. Rather a sample-editor one.
Apart from that, I’d like to have what you guys have already mentioned. velocity-layers, layers in general etc. Giga- and sf2-import (I love sf2, and people say so many good things about giga… ) would be really great as well.
another thing I’ve found out by using RNI files more deeply, and which actually I’ve already pointed out in the past, is the fact that the present LFO amount behaviour is erroneous.
I mean: if I set the LFO amount to 50 and type to SIN for a volume envelope, it will oscillate through +/-50% of maximum possible amplitude, while it should oscillate through +/-50% of present sample ampltiude, otherwise anything less than 50% of volume won’t be played for half of time.
I’ve been toying with the following idea for at least 5 years now, i call them “tracked instrument macros”.
What might be interesting was the concept of “tracking” instruments as a sort of macro, rather than using paramaters in the traditional sense.
This covers multiple samples/vst.
This covers vibrato.
This covers layering of effects.
This covers any form of automation.
So instead of using parameters, you simply “track” your instrument in an interface not dissimiliar to the existing pattern editor (perhaps 8 channels x 128 rows) - you could define some tracks are Transposable/Non Transposable. You could have it tempo dependant/independant.
The possibilites suddenly become endless! Tempo friendly drum loops and riffs. Transposable basslines. Thickly-textured and original sounding soundscapes. You could create multiples of the same instrument and change notes to reflect a different chord. Special commands inside the tracking interface could determine its behaviour in relation to middle-C, like filters, etc.
It seems to make good sense to implement it this way, as the most flexible and native method of crafting a sound is via a tracker interface anyway.
my votes for next step rni format expansion go to:
sample independent NNA
88 sample slots
new note envelope carry over (so that when you play a new note the envelope doesn’t restart)
portamento
pattern commands to enable and disable envelopes
donuts (i’d like some, i know i’m not alone here and i think the devs should give them to us.)
sorry; he is asking in italian what multilayering is. Since he is not a registered forum user, I can’t contact him privately, so I will reply here
Ciao Patrick,
innanzitutto ti prego di inviare messaggi privàti quando vuoi delle informazioni in italiano (basta usare l’apposito link “email”).
Il multilayering (letteralmente: multilivellamento) è una caratteristica di alcuni formàti sonori e grafici, e sostanzialmente consiste nel creare strutture a più liveli.
Un file grafico ad esempio puo’ essere costituito da più livelli di immagini, mentre nel nostro caso ci si riferisce a più livelli di volume.
Uno strumento che non ha il multilayering (come gli attuàli RNI), ha un solo sample per ogni nota, indipendentemente dal volume a cui questa nota viene suonata.
Uno strumento multilayered, invece, dà la possibilità di definire più livelli, divisi per volume, ad ognuno dei quali si puo’ far corrispondere un sample diverso.
Così si puo’ far suonare un sample differente a seconda del valore del coamndo volume cui viene fatto suonare lo strumento.
Basta pensare ad un rullante, che suona molto diversamente a seconda della potenza del colpo che gli viene inferto.
Formàti multilayered sono ad esempio gli FXB di Steinberg HAlion o gli NKI di Native Instruments Kontakt.
I mentioned some of this in a separate thread here. My apologies for repetitions, but it may be good to have some of this here, just for the record.
The renoise instruments and effects could be improved enormously if they supported keyboard tracking. This is something that exists on most synthesizers and samplers, but apparently not in Renoise at the moment. In Renoise, it appears that when i set the base filter cutoff for a note at 800Hz, it will be set at 800Hz, no matter which note i play. Obviously, this is not always desirable. On my old Kawai K3m syntesizer, you can also set the “amount” of frequency tracking, so that the tracking can be set to various positions between “full tracking” and “no tracking”. I think this is a good feature.
For those of you who don’t know what keyboard tracking means, it means that the base frequency of the note being played controls the frequency of another parameter. For instance: If i play a sample at middle A, at 440Hz, and have a filter cutoff set at 800Hz, and then play the same sound an octave lower at 440Hz, the filter cutoff will follow, and change proportionally so that the cutoff is now 400Hz.
Something else which would be a good future feature, would be to be able to use automation with the velocity of an instrument. I know it’s mapped to the volume column in the tracker, but i don’t think it’s mapped to the volume in the Track DSPs section. I know a lot of VSTs use velocity, and so do a lot of my synthesizers. More control through automation would be useful.
Another more “far out” feature would be using integrated sampling to do multitracking of external instruments, like you do in for instance Cubase. Currently, i use CoolEdit in the background to record the output of my synths, and then manually load that recording as a sample, and try my best to synchronize that with the rest of what’s playing. While i think most people use renoise with samples and VSTs, a lot of people still use external synthesizers and added added functionality like this would probably give more people a reason to use Renoise.
In addition to all the ideas above, here’s something to really confuse the devs.
I remember there being some discussion about increasing the number of pattern effects. Well, since they’re instrument related (well, all the ones I use are), it occurred to me that each rni could have a list of possible pattern effects (could be hundreds that could be assigned to each pattern effect number.
That way, even though the default behavior is the same, the user could make some instruments that do some wacked out crazy shit using the same effect numbers.
… And what would be really cool would be programmable effects! That is, the user could define some of their own personal effects and assign them to the currently available effect numbers. I’m not sure how that could be pulled off, but hey it’s all open to discussion here, isn’t it?
I think that is really smart!
A bit like the vsti automate device lets you select what the command is going to automate, but for built in tracker commands.
/>
/>
/>
/>)
/>), I would prefer having an editor as simple as this:
