After reading all these well-thought up ideas here something struck me…
Are you really still talking about the RNI structure?
(Exept the talk about multilayering etc ofcourse)
All the talk about using patterns in the instruments seems more like a misplaced wish for a more advanced sequencer. Which I REALLY want. Besides, we already have a pattern-editor. Why use two? If you want to track your instruments, do it like this:
Add a pattern in the end AFTER an empty pattern, name it as you wish, but leave it outside the sequence (set sequencer loop-points to end before the start of the instrument-patterns), when satisfied with the loop, just render to sample. Hey, presto! A perfectly customizable killer instrument that won’t eat cpu for breakfast.
No offence to all your ideas, but they are far from the easiest solutions for the devs, your creativity simply went way too far in the wrong direction in my opinion. To me, this way is a far more efficient way, although there should be some kind of storage place for the patterns not used in the sequence.
Well this is the ideas and suggestions forum afterall.
If enough people toss around enough weird/random/cool ideas, I’m sure that some really wicked concepts will eventually appear… kinda like the theory of a million monkeys with typewriters.
I guess it’s all about picking up what works in between all the brainstorming, and it works as far as I’ve seen!! There’s one banana after another, and WHOOM comes the Chiquita!!
…okay, that was just too horribly lamishly commercial-related…
Point is: 1.5 is awesome, and 1.6 will pick up only the best and most brilliant ideas! Because seeing is believing.
I cant see the link how this has anything to do with an arranger…
I was simply talking about building instruments. And as a side effect you can actually trigger/play whole patterns/songs inside another instrument.
I can see enormous potential in triggering patterns inside a instrument.
And its not at all that easy to just do this manually in the current interface.
Its ok if you just gonna render a single pattern into a sample-slot. But what if you gonna render out 48 keys in 4 velocity layers? Thats 192 renderings.
In many cases you dont wanna render it out at all. You just wanna multilayer instruments and then scale them real time. Making for instance one layer louder in higher keys at the same time another layer will be softer etc.
You could assign virtual knobs that will control several filters in the different layers of the instrument etc etc (moving one slider is actually moving several sliders inside your instrument).
If you where to do this manuelly you have to know. even without hearing the sound, how every parameter should be before starting rendering out 192 patterns into samples
And finally… why would this be so hard to code? Its all in the code already.
You are just triggering several patterns at once. ( I guess its hard anyway… but all the basics are there)
With a slick interface I think this could work really really great. And it wont be more complex then what normal tracking is today. You decide how complex is gonna be.
Like any synth programming (or tracking) you would need to spend some time learning the basic of things. But then there are no limits
Guess all we can do is post our ideas, see if the devs dig it and let the users choose the priority of events in the polls. As I said, it’s worked exellent so far!
this stuff (particularly pitch automation of instruments) would make me very happy (oh: and automatable control over sample loop length would be lovely, would mean i wouldnt have to use a third party sampler anymore)
Sorry if this has been posted already, but the LFO really needs a ‘trigger’ option.
An example of this is when trying to make a warbly boards of canada style synth with a slow and deep vibrato, the pitch LFO is reset with every new note (which you don’t want).
In the LFO section of the instrument editor, a list box called ‘Trigger’ with the options: ‘Note On’ ‘Note Off’ and ‘Free’ should do the trick!
Cheers.
Oh, and another thing… AKAI S1000-style multilayered samples. With just 4 sample layers you could turn the instrument editor into a failry powerful synthesizer.
If Renoise could do that then I imagine I’d never use my S1000 again. /
I personally don’t see why there needs to be an additional embedded pattern editor… why not just link an existing pattern to the instrument? … that way you can use the main pattern editor to change the pattern… and use it wherever you like
Yeah. The regular pattern editor would do. I guess the default instrument should be omitted, so that it wouldn’t be possible to envelope an instrument within another. Things can only get so modular before they turn downright confusing.
This could yield all kinds of interesting things, like weird portamento slides on the start of every note, vibrato’s, etc. It would be terrific.
An LFO controlling Sample Start Offset would be nice to have in some situations (like Pads, Leads, Supersaws samples etc, that are looped). Being able to modulate this on instrument level instead of pattern commands would make the sound more ‘living’ (or like free running oscillators on a synth). For example :
Let’s say you have mapped some (stereo) supersaw samples across the keyboard (all samples looped from position 0 -> END of sample (no sustain etc.)) Triggering one note several times in a row will always sound the same. If you add the Sample start offset and an LFO set to random, the sample could be triggered from anywhere within the loop, always making the start phase sound different when playing with it (like the sample positions in the stereo field and so on…)
LFO -> Sine Offset -> 0-100%
Saw
Triangle
Random
....
Instead of having a fixed offset number (like 0 - 13248) it would be nice with a percentage instead (affecting all the samples within the instrument). Having the random LFO and an offset amount of 10% would randomize the start offset’s first 0.5sec of a 5sec sample in the instrument, 0.7sec if the next sample is 7sec etc… And 100% would ofcourse trigger the sample(s) anywhere within the loop (if there is a loop). A bit like rgc:audio’s .sfz format, offset_random= opcode but with % instead.
EDIT: With this, other possibilities comes into my mind . Let’s say you load up a mono sample into a slot, add the offset to an lfo. Pan the sample to the far right and detune it a bit. Map the same mono sample to the same zone as the previous zone and pan it to the far left (and detune). If Renoise could use the same sample for different zones (treating the same sample as 2 different ones, still using the amount of RAM as a single sample), you could easily make nice stereo samples of a mono one as the start offset would be different for both of them. Some samplers have this feature and some don’t, but it would be nice to see this in Renoise.
Another nice feature would be to have the possibility to save the effectchain for a certain instrument within the .rni file (or having Renoise to save a .rne (?effect) file with the same name as the instrument. Loading an instrument would then make Renoise check if there are any .rne files with the same name as the instrument and load the effectchain with it) (would only work for the internal effects, since not all have the same VST effects).
EDIT: Ok, never used it, but noticed there is an option for saving the DSP chain separately in the file dialogue. Still would be nice if Renoise recognize if the instrument name and DSP name are the same and a dialogue appeared asking if you would like to load the associated DSP effects with the instrument
I would like extended rni feuture. If anyone is familiar with the the NN-XT sampler in Reason that kind of sampler features and similar layout with layers and regions would be much appriciated. It’s easy to use, and yet advanced enough to make good drumkits, and instruments etc.
To be more precise, like people above already explained. I like that sampler, i have tryed several others but they are usually too complicated or lacking any user friendly interface that’s easy to understand.
But if i could rank the importance of new features that i would like the list would look like this.
1: Vol, Pan, Cutoff, Res & type. settings per sample in instrument. Either set by knobs or envelopes.
2: Layers with graphical interface displaying Low & High keys (Regions) for each sample…
3: Velocity controlled effects like Cutoff, Resonance, LFO’s, Vibratos, etc. (per sample)
4: Simple Waveform synthesizer (AM/FM) usable as a layer in the instrument. With some simple waveform options to generate sounds for blending and mixing.
You know, working with some 40 samples in one instrument slot for a project now which I need to control samples live for a on-stage performance I’d love to see a check-button that either sets the NNA’s and filter options to be controlled via each sample OR globally on that instrument.
That would help me a loth. But not now anyway, since the play premieres in 1 week, hehe…
So basically… song that can to be triggered within a song. That would rock
Maybe it would even be easier to do just that than create something new like “instrument patterns”, provided it is even fathomable with the internal architecture of Renoise of course.
Most work would need to go into the “rules” regarding modification of the speed and pitch/transposing of these “subsongs” (maybe instruments could be markable as “melodic”, so e.g. drums don’t get transposed?), which would be done in something like the instrument editor for regular instruments. Naturally the real work would be to make the engine able to do it, but I cannot make any guesses or suggestions about that so I’ll just hope it is feasible and dream on.
Renoise would also need to be able to handle several songs at once for maximum ease of use, but not necessarily for the feature to be usable in the first place: save your song, create a subsong, save it, load up the main song, load the subsong into it. Then again, Renoise with tabs… drools
Apart from that (not that “that” is trivial) , the editing of such a subsong instrument would always be as powerful as Renoise itself… I’d definately buy Renoise again just for that (not that it’s worth way more than it costs as is anyway…). Imagine making a mix CD of your modules within renoise… when you change a track, you just re-render the “mix-CD-module”! (For such purposes it would be great if you could have embedded subsongs as well as referenced ones, and if you could point Renoise to the new location if you moved a file. Oh, and a button to check all referenced subsongs and reload them if they have changed).
It might also help a lot in getting more organized with epic tunes, and it would also open crazy possibilities for coops! With network shares, people could work independently on parts of the song/the arrangement of those parts…
Guess why I have always yearned for sample pool with instrument-independent samples? Guess why I loved that feature in Impulse Tracker?
The hierarchy should be like this:
Sample pool - Instrument-binded sample envelopes/effects (like EQ, modulation & dynamics, with ability to process them into sample if wanted/needed) - Instrument envelopes and effects. Then this whole complexity could be saved including samples. Or not.
I don’t see the necessity for patterns inside instruments. Arpeggio editor would practically do the same, and those you can code into main patterns also. If play and edit sequence positions would be made independent then you could always have some “working patterns” where you could store all the note/pattern data you would want to use afterwards. That would be sufficient for me, songs inside instruments would be total overkill.
Velocity layering/velocity controlled lfo’s /envelopes would be nice. How about envelopes that you can assign to specific function instead of having fixed envelope for each? And then having and ability to negativize the modulation? How about ability to control LFO speed/amount with one of the envelopes?
Some simple additions here and there… and Renoise could an instrument neverheard of.
More than one waves on an instrument to create a sound with independent tune settings would totally rock. Perhaps 4 saw oscillators for example. They could be a replicated or “slaved” osillators, so that you could eiher load a sample into a slot for the next oscillator, or use the first one as a parenting osc. Some more advanced modulation would also be really nice to see…
Another feature - that has never been seen on any software - would be the ability to controll the track FX using the sample envelopes and LFO.
This could be done both CPU efficiently in MONO and (for basses etc.) for other types of sounds in a bit more demanding polyphonic mode. How to make this happen programming-wise Renoise would need to calculate a perfect replicate of the plug-in settings for every polyphonic note fed to the the modulated plug-in. This would require polyphony dependent amount of more CPU power, but when coming to think of it, controlling for example pair of filters in poly mode would not require that much power on any system.
Maybe the available plug-ins to controll could be safely minimized to one that had to be pre-fader, so that the poly mode routing would not get too CPU consuming and complicated.
In mono mode (where all keys pass the same processing as usual) you could then modulate any parameter since that does not consume any more than the usual automation.
But ofcourse this is just brainstorming and Renoise really is ultimately enjoyable to use already
Id really love multi-layering. Definatly gets my vote. As does an adsr option.
Maybe ive not spotted this being suggested already but different pitch envelopes for different zones would also be very handy for making and programming drum kits.
hm, keywords for this post: envelope device and device chain in instrument view. also i’m not sure of what i’m just repeating in this post, so nvm if i’m repeating many (or all? :x) things ._."
as the current instrument view consists ONLY of envelope editors (i’m not talking about the keyboard for splitzones and multilayering and stuff in this post, so just nvm about that), why not make a generic envelope device, which could be routed to ANY parameter of the instruments device chain, which then would be placed in the current instrument view?
an envelope device could make renoise instruments so very powerful. and naturally it doesn’t make sense to route it to the midi of a track, so why not route it to one instrument? my ideas for an envelope device would be as follows:
routable to ANY parameter in the instruments device chain and to several parameters at once, perhaps with a little “amount” slider at each destination box, which could be negative as well
perhaps two modes: adsr and freehand, whereas freehand would be what we see now in the instrument view
it should NOT move the sliders of the parameters that it’s modulating. example: i wanna make a 303 bass, so i put an envelope on the cutoff, but then i still wanna be able to open up and close the corresponding filter that is being modulated. if the cutoff slider would move with every keystroke, this would be a rather impossible task.
several trigger modes, just like the NNAs
those are pretty much the basics about an envelope device that i had in mind. here some thoughts on the device chain in the instrument view:
each device in the instrument view should be able to send it’s audio output to any other device in the chain and to recieve it from any other device in the chain
there should be one special (and virtual, ie: not visible in the device chain) device, the “master” device which, if chosen as destination for output would just send the audio “out of” the internal instrument’s device chain in the “real world” :0
the lfo device in the instrument’s device chain also shouldn’t move the modulating sliders for the same reason the envelope device shouldn’t; hence the modulation should be “internal” (if you catch my drift :0)
the instrument’s device chain should have it’s very own automation track (this may seem obvious, but i wanted to mention it anyway) where all the parameters could be automated
sooo, that was what was floating around in my head the other night. tell me what you think of it.
(ps: this idea would of cource be fully backwards compatible to today’s renoise instruments. (i think this needs no further explanation))
EDIT: to make it more realistic: the “freehand” envelope points shouldn’t be automatable, that would just be too much. but their respective “amount” sliders could still be, as well as adsr envelopes, as they consist of a constant number of 4 parameters. (>_>)
To me, this way is a far more efficient way, although there should be some kind of storage place for the patterns not used in the sequence.
/ 
