I have custom created TR909 instrument, the problem is when for example 3 notes are playing (bd,sd,hat) on different 3 tracks in a drum-group i hear only hat, the bd and sd is muted.
When i create the same instrument from VST (Drumazon) i have no that problem, all samples playing at once no matter what.
I revised all parameters and values all over the sampler tab place, they are identical to custom instrument and vst rendered instrument, but custom instrument still muting the notes.
Oh no… i’ve read all… no sense, confused to death. p.s. This limitation-by-design somehow reminds me of my own weird one - i still cant write and operate in traditional DAW (a traditional way - horizontal from left to right), i’m stuck with those vertical from top-to bottom hexadecimal shit. Otherwise i would already learn Live lol. Anyway, can’t wait what future holds for Redux & R3.1
Then please post a small example song which demonstrates the problem. Otherwise it’s going to be very hard to find out what’s going on here.
nah, i meant i totally understood my problem, this “using dspfx limitation” thing caused my confusion. So really then…ehm…its good to have here a more advanced features in R3, with the all new sampler, doofers, macros and shit…but when starting to dig deeper these new things, all of them loosing sense, damn. And in terms of delivering something to Renoise users, like instruments or doofers for example…the idea of sharing hiqh quality content became useless in those limitations. Like who wants a nice carefully crafted TR909 INSTR (and the idea was to sample original TR909 hardware thru some nice tape hardware, the result is brilliant, that smoothy kicks and crispy snares!) with the all ADSR macros assigned to each layer and dspfx-reverb for a snare, a little lfo for clap pitch inconsistency (damn NO PITCH SLIDER ASSIGNABLE?! WTF? there is a weird roundrobin solution for that only), etc, etc… of course for free…and the time invested into making this INSTR and analyzing the hardware and how tape is altering the hardware sound… its time, a lot of time. Nowadays guys making crap sound packs for Kontakt, Battery, EXS, younameit, and sell those things worldwide and have their cup of cofee at least. Its not possible, so no 909 for you renoise community and me (otherwise i would just use single shot samples as usual). At the end, surely dont take my words personally or something, Renoise is an amazing app, but some things need to be done PROPER.
p.s. and a quick edit, i would gladly pay 100EU more for the product and one more 100EU for redux if i’d be able to get those PROPER SAMPLER, AUDIO ROUTINGS, NEW GFX HANDLER etc etc. things.
nah, i meant i totally understood my problem, this “using dspfx limitation” thing caused my confusion. So really then…ehm…its good to have here a more advanced features in R3, with the all new sampler, doofers, macros and shit…but when starting to dig deeper these new things, all of them loosing sense, damn. And in terms of delivering something to Renoise users, like instruments or doofers for example…the idea of sharing hiqh quality content became useless in those limitations. Like who wants a nice carefully crafted TR909 INSTR (and the idea was to sample original TR909 hardware thru some nice tape hardware, the result is brilliant, that smoothy kicks and crispy snares!) with the all ADSR macros assigned to each layer and dspfx-reverb for a snare, a little lfo for clap pitch inconsistency (damn NO PITCH SLIDER ASSIGNABLE?! WTF? there is a weird roundrobin solution for that only), etc, etc… of course for free…and the time invested into making this INSTR and analyzing the hardware and how tape is altering the hardware sound… its time, a lot of time. Nowadays guys making crap sound packs for Kontakt, Battery, EXS, younameit, and sell those things worldwide and have their cup of cofee at least. Its not possible, so no 909 for you renoise community and me (otherwise i would just use single shot samples as usual). At the end, surely dont take my words personally or something, Renoise is an amazing app, but some things need to be done PROPER.
p.s. and a quick edit, i would gladly pay 100EU more for the product and one more 100EU for redux if i’d be able to get those PROPER SAMPLER, AUDIO ROUTINGS, NEW GFX HANDLER etc etc. things.
Couldn’t agree with you more. The limitations seem unnecessary and arbitrary. Is a pity. I would have really liked to see that 909 instrument. But I also see why it won’t happen. I guess the limitations also show in the currently available instruments in the downloads section…doors and noise
Let’s try to make something constructive out of this. Please share your attempt of creating this instrument, then let us know what you want to do and what you don’t manage to do. We’ll then try to help. Of course it’s also interesting for us to see where you have problems, what could be improved and so on.
For example: to macro map pitch modulation, add an “Operand” to the pitch modulation chain then map this to a macro.
That said, no one is forcing you to change your workflow from single-sample insturments to multi-sample ones, just because this is possible? Use what works for you. Working with multi-sampled instruments always is more complex and more limiting in any environment - it adds one more indirection and hidden layers (keyzones, phrases). Nothing beats the “load a single sample, see what you get what you play approach” in trackers when it comes to “directness”. On the other hand: one clear advantage of multi-sampled drum instruments is the ability of sharing such “bundled” samples in order to reuse them.
Let’s try to make something constructive out of this. Please share your attempt of creating this instrument, then let us know what you want to do and what you don’t manage to do. We’ll then try to help. Of course it’s also interesting for us to see where you have problems, what could be improved and so on.
Im perfectly happy in general what i can achieve in R3, even with things like sidechain-roundrobin called Signal Follower for example. And surely i just can drop a wav single shot TR909 zippack somewhere on the forum, let them all to play around with it how they want it. Sure, screw xrni, whats the purpose then, go play with wavs. No problem here.
Lets sum this up - in a natural scenario, i just add an operand, assign it to a macro, and it goes down in pitch when macro at 0, when macro at 50 pitch is in its default state (middle), when goes to eleven and beyond the pitch is up. In scenario what i have now, it is only up when mode is PLUS and only down when i switch to MINUS and this scenario i see no sense in macros then. So ive used a roundrobin using ADSR. Is this effective? Is it productive? Is it intuitive? No, no and no.
Or may be its me and im doing it all wrong.
p.s. Also you can clearly see that bug ive posted about micro map hidden window. Renoise is on external display running fulscreen, sampler is attached to renoise, i push a map button, the window doesnt appear.
Lets sum this up - in a natural scenario, i just add an operand, assign it to a macro, and it goes down in pitch when macro at 0, when macro at 50 pitch is in its default state (middle), when goes to eleven and beyond the pitch is up.
Add a pitch operand.
Set it to [+] mode.
Enable the bi-polar switch.
5337
When you follow the modulation values from left to right through the chain, it actually makes sense. You have a base input pitch value of 0.0 which the operand is then either adding to, subtracting from, multiplying, or whatever. In the operand’s default uni-polar mode it will only work in one direction, but in bi-polar mode the range changes to -1.0 to +1.0 and then you can influence the final value in both directions.
When you follow the modulation values from left to right through the chain, it actually makes sense. You have a base input pitch value of 0.0 which the operand is then either adding to, subtracting from, multiplying, or whatever. In the operand’s default uni-polar mode it will only work in one direction, but in bi-polar mode the range changes to -1.0 to +1.0 and then you can influence the final value in both directions.
