Comparison To Skale-tracker ?

General Discussion
1

Heya Folks,

i just found the Skale-Tracker ( i know there might be other ppls found them before) and i am really impressed about the usability of that program.

I used to work with renoise to build up my tunes, but when i saw skale the 1st time i was really deeply impressed.

No awful clicking onto that front-end, “1-click-thats-it”-Style !

Wow i like this one, although i guess, it hasn´t that bunch of features like renoise, and its still beta, so i think its still buggy.

Nevertheless it is an amazing program, and i am REALLY thinking about changing my favourite music app to this ( please dont kill me now :D )

Unfortunately this program is still in progess, so i`m gonna waiting about the future-releases, cause the most important feature isn´t still implemented ( ASIO-Output )

So , whatcha thinkin about that program guys ?

greets notorius

2

Wow…

This brings me back… Looks exactly like FastTracker 2.08!!!

Crazy stuff hehe, ah, memories…

I’ll stick with Renoise though B) That 1.3 release is gonna be big, I’m sure…

Although doesnt really matter what program you use, as long as you’re happy with it :) And of course, that the outcome of what you make sounds good/great/amazing/Renoised ;)

Back to Track-ing

3

I did a search on the Skale forum for “Renoise” just to see how people compared the two… It’s kind of funny Renoise is automatically replaced by jabbanoising for some reason…!? :unsure: It probably serves some purpose, but everyone only seemed to get confused by it…

4

First time I came in contact with skale tracker was alittle more than 1 year ago. Since then there has only been 3 (minor) releases and not much has happened so I doubt that this tracker ever will be finished. But I do not realy care. I’m not very impressed by skale, it doesn’t have much features and the GUI feels like something from another century.
Probably a good alternative for people who can’t divorce from old FT2, on all other aspects Renoise beats skale without any competition ;)

btw, I said it before and I say it again, the only thing I realy miss in renoise today that sk@le has is the mixer ;)

5

Well, the thing is that almost all features that sk@le has in the current version is free in renoise aswell. It is only the render-to-wav function that you get for free in sk@le but have to pay for in renoise. But on the other hand you get so much more features for free in renoise than you don’t get with sk@le ;)
I still think the “Renoise 1.281 demo download”-tag shall be replaced to “Renoise 1.281 free version download” on the download-page so people acctually understand that they get a working program by free when they download that version. The demo-tag just make a show of being a version with save-functionality and other fundamental functionality disabled… but so isn’t the case. The only other non-free freature, besides the render-to-wav option is support for ASIO, and everyone doesn’t even need that, if that was the case noone should use sk@le today cause in sk@le ASIO is disabled. ;)

6

I agree with you, because of renoise`s feature-list, BUT that was not the point i am talking about.

I noticed the very fast interface and the usability of Skale, having the feature-list in my mind of renoise.

But the biggest program dont fit ur needs, if u can´t handle it like the way you want.

Lets take Fruityloops for example. Fruityloops has a bigger featurelist then Renoise, but the front-end simply DONT let you work WITHOUT using the mouse :( .

It is probably true, when i say, that i wouldn´t use 100% of all that features, that renoise offers, but the most important thing for me isn´t a bunch of features that i will never use, but the possibliy, that a program doesn´t cut off my creativity.

7

appologies to “notorius” i accidentaly replaced post instead of quoting new one. above is my answer to original post and a part of quoted original post by notorius.

8

It is nice that you find Skale usable. That is probably just a matter of taste and habit. Most people that loved FT2 will probably feel like home in Skale aswell. However I think it is hard to deny that the old FT2/Scale-interface is pretty primitve according to todays standards. Nowadays you have monitors that can handle resolutions over 1600x1200, technology that allow you to make use of multiple monitors, mice with multiple buttons and wheels, cpu’s that manage to handle andvanced gui features etc. etc. Features that will make the life alot easier to live and broaden your choises. The technique is available so why not make use of it? If I shall speak for myself I can atleast say that I want to make use of it ;) Exactly as you I like to work with the keyboard and want to be able to do as much as possible with it, but I also have a mouse with a wheel and a big monitor and I want to make use of them aswell thouse moments when I feel to.
If you are used to the old FT2-interface and used it for years you probably find it very easy to use. But for other people it probably feels like starting a program from stone-age ;) Even me that am used to old trackers feel that thouse types of interfaces belong to the past, but the choise shall ofcourse be there, and therefor it very good that we have both renoise, skale and other trackers today, cause it will probably take a while before one single tracker is configurable to suit everybodys needs. ;)
To be honest I even think renoise inherit alittle bit too much from the old FT2-interface aswell, for example I sometimes want to be able to have more than one editor open at the same time, ie both the instrument-editor and the pattern-editor , but that type of workflow is unfortunately impossible with the type of GUI that renoise uses today. The GUI in renoise can be improved much, but I have to say that it gets better and better ;) I realy look forward for the new interface in the upcoming 1.3 :)
Even if I don’t think the GUI in Renoise is perfect today I still think it has so many good and usable features I often use and never seen in any tracker so that makes it excusable ;)

Me neither, but a bunch of good features that I often use is quiet important for me ;) thouse make it easier to use the program and accordingly also increase my creativity. :D

btw, according to Fruity Loops. That program isn’t even a tracker , it is a sequencer-based program that is based upon the mouse-usage. so I feel the same way as you. But even if you could do everything with the mouse it would probably not feel as good as it does in a good tracker anyway ;) My dream is ofcourse a tracker with all the functionality that the big commercial sequencer-softwares have (Cubase, Cakewalk etc), but until then I use a combination of them, I use Renoise for all programming and songwriting, and when it is time for harddisk-recording (song, guitarrs etc), mixing and mastering I export the song as wav-files to cubase and continue my work there. But I still feel Renoise is the most superior tracker of today so I stick to that. Skale isn’t realy my bag ;)

time for me to go to bed. l8r…

;)

9

Well the reason why Renoise is replaced by jabbanoising was that some people were spamming the skale forums with Renoise. Saying it was much better etc… Imagine how you feel when for example Cubase users came to these boards and start saying that it is a much better program than Renoise…

10

Skale is different in that it applies vst effects on the samples and not on the tracks. That could in some cases be abit better. But it hardly makes any different…

But then again it lacks alot of features for handling vsts, so Renoise is better in this aspect too…

Skale runs on Linux, but I don´t use linux.
And in the future when there is a mac version of Renoise it should not be a to big problem to convert from mac to linux?

Whats important for me is that Skale has no vsti support. I know it says it has and I know how to use vsti’s in skale, but almost no vsti works and it does not have important things like vsti automation devices.

I also think Renoise have a better pattern interface, with tracks containing
columns…

Also, it does not have automation, it has some bars, but that is not the same thing…

Then it lacks alot of features and the devlopment of the program is second to none…I want to make music now not tomorrow, and I don´t want to make alot of tunes in a program that is almost not devloped.

I´d rather pay some to help the developers keeping developing the tracker than seeing the tracker die like FT2…Or waiting a year to get a certain vsti to work…

Maybe Skale will be nice in two years time, but in two years time Renoise will be much much nicer…

11

Skale Tracker looks like a good idea though, I mean, alot of people converted to Renoise simply cuz it looked and felt like FastTracker (me among others)… Alot of users probably gave up on fasttracker after getting a new soundcard which didn’t work with the program.

Finally they can have “fasttracker” back, for free, and with enhancements…

Still though, I wouldn’t trade Renoise for anything.

:rolleyes:

12

Just a couple of comments to some arguments:

- Skale has a faster userinterface, and is easier to use because it’s like FT2.

Wether this is true, is probably a matter of taste anyway. With Renoise 1.3 we focus on improving the userinterface. The improvements are both visual, functional, and speed. We can talk again after that…

- Skale is free, just like FT2 and IT2.

FT2 wasn’t free. Neither was IT2. FT2 was shareware, they asked for a bit more than half of what a Renoise registratino costs (if I remember the sum correctly, and with the current dollar value, and NOT adjusted to the general price increase the last decade). IT2 asked for a little more, 30$ (found that on the web just now) for a wav-writer. Indeed, that’s what we are doing too.

FT2 was used by thousands of people, but only very few actually contributed as they were politely asked. FT2 is no longer developed. I’m not saying there’s a direct link there, but it’s not unlikely that there would be a FT3 if the support had been better.

- Skale is free, however unlike the most popular trackers in the past.

Yes it is. And Renoise is not. Renoise gets continuously improved with a high amount of direct interaction with our users. Skale is moving slowly towards a stable version 1.0 in a year? Two? I don’t know.

- Renoise is just like the Micro$oft of the tracker world, run by a large company with many highly paid programmers and a large marketing team.

ROFL :D. I actually saw something like this somewhere a while ago. And I admit, speaking for myself, I do feel a little guilty when I have the privilege of being part of developing such a great music program, instead of having some random boring part time job, beside my studies.

Seriously: taking money from you isn’t about being greedy. It’s about getting resources for webspace, server etc, and freeing our own time to develop Renoise further. And we’re not asking for that much.

- Should I use Skale or Renoise?

We want you as a user of our program Renoise. But it’s your choice.

13
  • Renoise is just like the Micro$oft of the tracker world, run by a large company with many highly paid programmers and a large marketing team.

I think its sad that some people seem to think that Renoise is developed by a huge company which makes alot of money. And they therefor don´t think they should register?

They dont understand that it is developed by enthusiasts that does not get much money out of it at all…I hope you guys get rich in the future though…

But anyway, another thing I miss in Skale is the ability to have more than one pattern command on each track.

14

I really wouldn’t care if it was, it makes no diffrence…

IT IS A GREAT PIECE OF SOFTWARE THAT IS FOREVER IMPROVING, LISTENS TO IT’S REGISTERED USERS AND IS PRICED REASONABLY…

Now quote that…

:D

15

my personal points about using ReNoise instead of Skale:

  • fast development
  • great user support
  • VSTi support
  • track DSP chains
  • multicolumn tracks
  • no “100% XM support!!!” ridicolous claimings
  • low price
  • TEAM work… not ONE-MAN work…
  • respect for legacy trackers, though not being bound to them in any way

Skale’s interface could look better because it is similar to FT2… well… this is true if you’re still thinking FT2 had the better interface. I don’t.

The rest of my thoughts have already been pointed out by Martinal, plus (better remembering this) I DON’T earn money from ReNoise nor manage a single Euro of registration money: I’m just a (proud) volunteer.

16

Sk@le will be a nice tracker, development time is unfortunately pretty slow, which seems to be a trend among tracker developers.

I would personally not convert to it. Renoise just keeps on improving, it’s a wonderfull world.

17

Hmmm maybe there was a misunderstanding of the topic, that fadet out to
other arguments.

I´ve never claimed that Renoise costs too much (Yes i am a registered User !) :P

I just wanted to give my thoughts to you all, about the interacting-speed of that program.

Surely i did noticed, that renoises is more CPU-hungry then skale, because of the higher resolution etc. but renoise is still #1 Music Creation Tool for me.

But u have to recognzie, that i am a old FT2 fan, and so i always compared renoise with Fasttracker.

So that WASN´T any critic at all to renoise´s developer (you guys still rock :D ).

But i guess i have to continue my old unfinished FT2-Tracks with Skale, while the new stuff will be created by renoise.

greets

notorius

18

If this thread will result in that the developers decide to make Renoise a 800x600px-only-app I will probably kill myself :ph34r: :lol: ;)

19

hey, I paid 20$ for FT2 !

and this microsoft-stuff is pure bullshit. I would like to punch people who bring this stuff up.

20

I never claimed that you claimed that either :)
It wasn’t intended as a direct answer, just a sidenote.

I just wanted to give my thoughts to you all, about the interacting-speed
of that program.

Then it would be nice to hear exactly what it is that you think is better.
Otherwise we can’t learn from it.