If Redux would have midi out then classic daw plus it can be alternative to renoise but not now.
+1
Given the reason why Redux was made, this seems like a very strange oversight…
This topic is getting really weird.
[…]
I do understand though, that the lack of information is causing such threads too:
If it helps to write more “what’s currently happening here” blog or forum posts, we will try doing that in future. Right now there’s not much happening though.
It got weird because most of the replies are slightly off-topic. But the thoughts from several users are justified and legit due to lack of frequent official news & updates (seems like this is about to change though so that’s nice).
Then again, you have no obligations. You run a business in the way you have planned, and you’re doing fine (obviously). So it only comes down to a matter of customer ethics, nothing more nothing less.
We’re doing little work on Renoise right now, mainly small clean-ups and bug fixing and have started some other project a while ago too. That we’re doing something else doesn’t mean that Renoise is dead. I think it will benefit Renoise and Co in the long term. We always have been working on/off Renoise in the past.
If Renoise or Redux is worth the money should be decided by what it is, and not what it could be.
This is true in some sense, but from a business / market pow I wouldn’t say ”hell ya, it’s that simple!” Before people decide to buy a software today, they often make sure it’s updated and still maintained. It’s not 1999 anymore when everyone used an old Fasttracker II version for years.
Still, you don’t have to worry I think. This is due to the unique (compared to other high quality DAWs) pattern editor and imo the very easy to use yet advanced sample editor. Except from that, there’s nothing extraordinary with Renoise. But for what it is currently, it’s good enough. I have a lot of fun with it, although my personal opinions seems to be in line with the part of the user-base that would wish this software to evolve and include some traditional features some day.
[…] There are also no plans to change this: Renoise is a niche product in a niche market. Trackers never will be THE way of doing music. And honestly, they should not: they make a lot of sense to some, none at all to most. […]
Haha, ok… Is this the next tagline? Renoise - Not THE way of doing music. :lol:
By ”tracker” you probably mean the pattern editor feature? Yes, it’s just another tool from the general toolbox of todays digital composers. With the tracker view or the piano roll view alone, respectively, you access a pretty comprehensive view of the arrangement and can do edits on a micro level at a certain part of the project in the timeline. But you can’t do so much macro-level editing with neither the tracker or the pianoroll though. Here’s where for instance audio tracks and a more advanced arrange clip editor comes in, which currently is lacking imo.
There are pros and cons with all the tools, just like a screwdriver alone at a workshop won’t do the job. I’m sure a software called PianoROTFLOL with mainly only a piano roll wouldn’t be enough for many dedicated digital composers either. I haven’t at least yet heard anyone say ”This program is a piano roll, and that’s it… No need for anything else”. 
[…] Adding a piano-roll on top won’t fix that. […]
I disagree. I think additional features would rather make the tracking more sense. At least to people who wants to delve into the tracker styling, with earlier experience only from a more traditional DAW. It could work as a translator, if not anything else. Personally I’m not that fond of piano roll, but certainly audio tracks and a more comprehensive Matrix arranger would be enlightening to newcomers and also interesting for old school guys.
Sure, as you mention, to some a tracker (like Renoise) is enough to get the job done. This was also how I worked with music during my first 10 years. To others, as a contrast, Audacity with its record-audio-clips-only feature may be enough for them, by comparison pretty ”niche” that too I would say at a global level.
So while every digital composer is unique, I believe some are just unaware of stuff which could make some of their workflow more intuitive. Presumed the music & project is the focus and not a certain tool. DAWs are essentially toolboxes; viewing and editing the same content but with different devices and different entrance angles to more efficiently get the job done depending which particular issue in the project to deal with. Different devices also stimulates creativity and opens up new ways of thinking. Then again, if the tool itself is more important and to ”feel special and undergroundy” than a final product I suppose that’s another deal.
Most digital composers are quite aware though and very rarely depend themselves with only one or two tools. Say, with mainly only a tracker view (like Renoise) or with mainly only an audio track view (like Audacity). Advanced users most probably want to take advantage of all the great tools available. They could probably get the job done with a half toolbox, but it wouldn’t probably turn out as complex or it would just take more time to reach the vision in mind.
(Sorry, this segment of the post is certainly more “weirdness” to some of you… But not so sure how to express myself).
[…] Making Renoise open-source also won’t fix this: this would simply create a new bunch of other problems.
I do get that many of you here are getting more and more frustrated because “their” THE MISSING feature isn’t implemented - after all those years. But we really never will be able to fix that under those circumstances.
Open source would probably solve a lot of issues from the user-base pow, but yes new problems may or may not arrive. There are pros and cons with everything, like life in general. Moreover, I’m not sure if this is only a swedish expression, but the saying is like “It’s foolish to go to the same funeral twice”. Which basically means it’s not necessary to worry about something that hasn’t happened yet. If you want a very slow developing but stable process by yourself only and already making enough money, then that’s fine and also something that’s fully understandable.
But there’s middleway-solution to this. For instance set price quotes for features and let the user-base and other volunteers support you as they wish. Upon completion, these features could be bought optionally as extensions from the backstage. This is presumed the features are too advanced to be programmed with the Tools feature of course. This way “tracker-purists” wouldn’t have to worry about Renoise “taking the wrong direction”. The extensions-model is a modern and nifty approach to software in this day and age. Renoise, being quite cheap to begin with, could especially take advantage of this.
Well, just brainstorming here…
Redux actually was an idea to fix this problem once for all, by bringing the core of a tracker into “your” other DAW of your choice, so that you can use all the other features you always wanted, but no tracker.
This wasn’t meant as an excuse to NOT implement this and that feature into Renoise […]
Sure, Redux fixes some dilemmas in this context, just not so intuitively in terms of workflow though (imo). With many Redux instances, the overall view of what’s going on requires some splendid human memory unless you have 2-3 screens on your desk full of Redux instances opened (and even that is kind of messy), since the basic overview in the host DAW are limited to program changes and/or piano roll clips from said instances (I understand there’s some limits in todays technology though). Not to mention the window-management in general was kinda disappointing, but I made a thread about that last year.
My point, and others who have commented here, is that Renoise with integrated traditional DAW extensions (or another DAW with a tracker extension), working directly side by side internally would most likely make the work flow pretty much unbeatable to any other solution today.
I still think Renoise Rewire is the best of the options today, but it has some other cons but I won’t delve into this now. But yes, Redux is cool for some small urgent tracker-styled stuff in an otherwise traditional setup of an arrangement so it was a welcomed product. Needless to say, I own both products.
I do understand though, that the lack of information is causing such threads too:
If it helps to write more “what’s currently happening here” blog or forum posts, we will try doing that in future. Right now there’s not much happening though.
So with all that said, thanks for the heads up & sorry for the long post.
You’re a modest, nice and interesting fella’. Best wishes and happy new year! 
Bit wig is the new Renoise! Only missing: The tracker view. Let’s flood the bitwig forum now with this feature request?
Haven’t used Bitwig, but yeah that’s a kinda interesting idea. The same could be done for any high quality DAW for that matter. If the market demands it, it will arrive sooner or later.
Niche product, please put the program more expensive, the people of renoise will pay for it.
…
We’re doing little work on Renoise right now, mainly small clean-ups and bug fixing and have started some other project a while ago too. That we’re doing something else doesn’t mean that Renoise is dead. I think it will benefit Renoise and Co in the long term. We always have been working on/off Renoise in the past.
There are also no plans to change this: Renoise is a niche product in a niche market. Trackers never will be THE way of doing music. And honestly, they should not: they make a lot of sense to some, none at all to most. Adding a piano-roll on top won’t fix that. Making Renoise open-source also won’t fix this: this would simply create a new bunch of other problems.
…
I do get that many of you here are getting more and more frustrated because “their” THE MISSING feature isn’t implemented - after all those years. But we really never will be able to fix that under those circumstances.
…
This wasn’t meant as an excuse to NOT implement this and that feature into Renoise, but we know how much time it takes us to bring new stuff into Renoise, so that was meant as an offer to be more free in the choice of tools that you can !now! use and combine. Hard to say if that plan really worked out at the end. But that brought phrases into Renoise too - which surely makes things more complicated in Renoise itself but also offers a big bunch of even more nerdy tracker alike things again into Renoise again.
…
I do understand though, that the lack of information is causing such threads too:
If it helps to write more “what’s currently happening here” blog or forum posts, we will try doing that in future. Right now there’s not much happening though.
I really don’t get your immense amount ofstubbornness here, Taktik. Really seems that nobody can convince you for another perspective.
Renoise is not that bad (as you call it), and also could be more than a niche product - If you would sell it differently, by changing the marketing. But if yourself say even, that it is not worth to develop head a head with other DAWs - well, all is lost then. Also a tracker view is not so much limited in comparison to a piano roll. And this is really mostly the only drastic difference, Renoise is already a good DAW with lot of unique features. Really good features.
Also that you now tell me, that all my feature requests are “very individual wishes” and you simply could not fulfill all those millions of individual wishes - sorry, but it is not true that it’s so many different requests or that those are so individual.
I really tried to give you some motivation/inspiration esp. in improving the already existing structures in Renoise. And besides this, of course suggesting obvious things like “side chaining” or obvious missing parameters in dsps. Those kind of requests exist here in the forum for about a decade now. It is repeated over and over again. But it is still only one feature request, in different variants.
New users come here to the forum and of course requesting lot of individual stuff or piano rolls at beginning, because they don’t know for years, whats going on here and a feature request section really implies that somebody cares about all those requests. On the other hand, most long-time users request the same stuff over and over again.
Ok, thanks for answering at least. Happy New Yearfor you and your team.
I really don’t get your immense amount ofstubbornness here, Taktik. Really seems that nobody can convince you for another perspective.
Renoise is not that bad (as you call it), and also could be more than a niche product - If you would sell it differently, by changing the marketing. But if yourself say even, that it is not worth to develop head a head with other DAWs - well, all is lost then. Also a tracker view is not so much limited in comparison to a piano roll. And this is really mostly the only drastic difference, Renoise is already a good DAW with lot of unique features. Really good features.
Also that you now tell me, that all my feature requests are “very individual wishes” and you simply could not fulfill all those millions of individual wishes - sorry, but it is not true that it’s so many different requests or that those are so individual.
I really tried to give you some motivation/inspiration esp. in improving the already existing structures in Renoise. And besides this, of course suggesting obvious things like “side chaining” or obvious missing parameters in dsps. Those kind of requests exist here in the forum for about a decade now. It is repeated over and over again. But it is still only one feature request, in different variants.
New users come here to the forum and of course requesting lot of individual stuff or piano rolls at beginning, because they don’t know for years, whats going on here and a feature request section really implies that somebody cares about all those requests. On the other hand, most long-time users request the same stuff over and over again.
Ok, thanks for answering at least. Happy New Yearfor you and your team.
I think you are right. A lot of my friends never heard about Renoise and when they’ve seen it they were very surprised how powerful it is.
There is at least one genre where Renoise excels → Grime. And this genre is very hip right now.
Classic grime tunes were made in old Fl Studio where everybody just loaded samples and they pitched them.
Nothing more, nothing less. No automatization (Renoise is the worst DAW in this manner), just short weird samples that are pitched and effected.
Example:
old
or
new
I don’ t know about any other daw than Renoise (and FL Studio) that are so good / effective in this… But nobody in the east London knows about the Renoise ;).
If renoise has reached the point where adding new stuff is always going to be a mountain to climb I think the best way is to offer renoise as a VSTi. I understand about Redux but it would not be the same. This would require decent (flawless) drag and drop of MIDI and audio to work well, but offers a ton of usefulness:
-Multiple Xrns loadable into host, bring your disparate xrns ideas together easily!
-Access to Piano Roll/ notation etc with fast D+D to and from Rns_VST
-Easy long sweeping automations over Rns_VST(chords), or chopping glitchy automation over Rns_VST(beats)
-Use hosts pitch shift; render down sections, drag back into Rns_VST for instant tracker treatment
-Track freeze; Split different parts of your xrns to different tracks and freeze as required
-Use the output of Rns_VST as a sidechain source or destination
-Lua scripting included so that current tools work and new host specific helpers can be coded in the future (maybe two way MIDI mirroring could be achieved here)
+Im sure lots more that I havent thought of
Better than rewire; no driver priority issues, all self contained and multiple Rns_VST allowed.
I know this might be a lot of work in itself but it seems that a ton of stuff can be leveraged that would take years if ever to fit into renoise. Will it stop future feature requests, no, but damn! it`ll keep us busy for a long time!!!
Ledger, I couldn’t agree more!
Redux is a nice thing, obviously - but Phrases are of little interest to me … my work flow is soundly rooted in Renoise. Now, if I had Renoise inside whatever DAW I chose (without the vagaries of ReWire) I’d be a happy man indeed.
As it stands I can ReWire Renoise into, say, Live or Reaper and have a workable system in place. But I’d rather have the total-recall in a single session of the host DAW and forget about all the rest of it.
The host automation possible with VSTi would also lend a lot of flexibility. I would rather forget about the automation curves in Renoise completely and have those available on the tracks inside Live or Reaper. That would make a lot more sense there.
In total though, and above ALL else, Renoise still presents me with the tools to edit note and effect data in a tracker format which for me is the most compelling aspect.
Youve got further than me with rewire. Had a lot of problems with Studio One v2 and v3 on my system but that wasnt just rewire problems with S1, so I sold it in the end.
I have Bitwig now which has no rewire (now or planned) and a dusty older copy of Samplitude
Renoise VST would be great of course in Bitwig, and might even tempt me back into the menu maze of Samplitude which has a really useful notation editor.
From bitwig FAQ: https://www.bitwig.com/en/support/faq.html
ReWire? There is no ReWire support planned, but if you want to route audio and MIDI between different applications, you might want to take a look at the JACK Audio Connection Kit, which is available for OSX, Win and Linux.
I got Renoise working with Bitwig using Plogue Bidule. Unfortunately I could not get bi-directional transport working.
But it wasn’t bad, pressing play in Bitwig started Renoise at the correct place and all the looping stuff worked flawlessly in that direction as well.
It was not, unfortunately, as good as the ReWire linkage I get between Renoise and, say, Live which is just about perfect on a moment-to-moment basis. Not great obviously when it comes to bouncing/freezing/loading and all those more off-line things.
Still, Bidule is a way forward if you don’t mind not having Renoise be the daddy and control Bitwigs transport. That was a show-stopper for me unfortunately because of the way I like to work … Renoise being the primary tool for jumping about, fine-tuning and making the meat of the track (Bitwig being used more as a sampler/piano-roll/mixer/comping thing). So having to flip back to Bitwig to play a section rather than just pressing space or whatever in Renoise is a big sucking deal.
Still, Bidule is a way forward if you don’t mind not having Renoise be the daddy and control Bitwigs transport. That was a show-stopper for me unfortunately because of the way I like to work … Renoise being the primary tool for jumping about, fine-tuning and making the meat of the track (Bitwig being used more as a sampler/piano-roll/mixer/comping thing). So having to flip back to Bitwig to play a section rather than just pressing space or whatever in Renoise is a big sucking deal.
Thanks for the tip, nice to know about but I know I`ll probably get as annoyed with the clunk as you 
Will be worth a demo at least though.
Yeah, I just couldnt get any ReWire options to show up in Bidule if it was loading into Renoise.
When loaded into Bitwig the ReWire options were there. I can only assume that is because Renoise has ReWire natively and Bitwig doesnt … but thats just a guess,
If it were true though, disabling ReWire in Renoise might solve the overall issue and allow Renoise to be the Master in a Bidule-based ReWire network.
I did try deleting the Rewire dll in the Renoise dir but that didnt seem to have any appreciable effect … on anything actually. Rewire seemed to function as normal without it 
No idea what it’s for then.
Niche product, please put the program more expensive, the people of renoise will pay for it.
Why ?
You getting a percentage ?
Probably the stupidest post i have read today.
Charging more money does not mean faster updates haha
If renoise has reached the point where adding new stuff is always going to be a mountain to climb I think the best way is to offer renoise as a VSTi. I understand about Redux but it would not be the same. This would require decent (flawless) drag and drop of MIDI and audio to work well, but offers a ton of usefulness:
VSTis/AUs can not control the host’s playback, so you’d need to switch back from such a Renoise plugin to the host every-time you want to start playback in the host. ReWire was invented to solve exactly this an other related problems (running two fully fledged DAWs with their own time line side by side).
ReWire indeed can be a pain to setup. But once it’s running, it’s running. That you constantly need to switch between applications still isn’t ideal.
That you can’tcontrol the host’s playback in a plugin really is a deal-breaker. Try the FruityLoops VSTi for example to see how that “feels”.
Redux actually is the result of the idea of “a Renoise VSTi”: it is a compromise between the “limitations” of how plugins work and Renoise for the above mentioned reasons.
VSTis/AUs can not control the host’s playback, so you’d need to switch back from such a Renoise plugin to the host every-time you want to start playback in the host. ReWire was invented to solve exactly this an other related problems (running two fully fledged DAWs with their own time line side by side).
ReWire indeed can be a pain to setup. But once it’s running, it’s running. That you constantly need to switch between applications still isn’t ideal.
That you can’tcontrol the host’s playback in a plugin really is a deal-breaker. Try the FruityLoops VSTi for example to see how that “feels”.
Redux actually is the result of the idea of “a Renoise VSTi”: it is a compromise between the “limitations” of how plugins work and Renoise for the above mentioned reasons.
Ok just had a very quick play around with FL in renoise. To get around the play issue I mapped the renoise transport to a couple of keys on my MIDI keyboard. If I was going to turn this into a setup I could see buying a small MIDI device with a few buttons just for this --(as a side note to self maybe this can be incorperated into thalamus` Bitwig/bidule suggestion a few posts up).
As a workflow I think I could live with that, where obviously the host transport has to support transport MIDI mapping. In fact I could see it having its uses, or at least not getting in the way; working on the content inside rns_VST is like having it soloed in the host, You want to hear the whole lot together or record, then use your midi controller to start and stop: As renoise is pattern based, it is likely you`d be working in a looped area anyway so the host transport would surely not be too far away. Obviously as with all workflows this would need testing, but at least there is an avenue there to discuss/ think about?
***brainstorming: Could there be a hackaround where you could MIDI map transport controls to a renoise VST? so pressing play in Rns_VST sends MIDI to hosts transport?
The other main issue with the FL is the lack of Always on top with the main FL window. This seems to be a choice as the main window is opened as a sub window of the initial VST window . However with energyXT the sub windows remain on top of the host window. I`d prefer it if the FL window did the same.
***further brainstorming: Could a renoise VST even control rewire stuff. (I think I know what your respone will be to this hackaround but could it work? at least in theory…)
This thread:
Hi
As a potential customer i want to know official answer for this question:DEVs on what you are currently working on? Redux update? Just simple Yes/No. I guess it would be honest from your side to confirm (or not) something about Redux.
Regards,
AM
“I would like”
Now when i know official answer i just don’t care anymore because know that developers don’t care about simple things for improvements. Just don’t want to think about my FR that i wrote here at the beginning of the year, already forgot about all this suggestions… Saving money for other DAW now.
renoise is fantastic stop crying like a baby - renoise is a solid DAW making it vapourware would kill it renoise 2.8 is still a great tool the current renoise is also fantastic and there’s no rush to update it all these whinners demanding piano rolls and the such can go away and use other DAW’s
***brainstorming: Could there be a hackaround where you could MIDI map transport controls to a renoise VST? so pressing play in Rns_VST sends MIDI to hosts transport?
You mean, that a plugin directly instructs the host to change position? Because, if the host allowed MIDI mapping of transport you wouldn’t need this workaround…
Well, I believe it’s technically possible for a VST to (request) control of the host transport, but I think only a couple of DAWs allow this. So in most cases it just won’t work.
You mean, that a plugin directly instructs the host to change position? Because, if the host allowed MIDI mapping of transport you wouldn’t need this workaround…
Well, I believe it’s technically possible for a VST to (request) control of the host transport, but I think only a couple of DAWs allow this. So in most cases it just won’t work.
Was more thinking the transport buttons, play/stop etc but if position worked then yes that would be even better. My thought was that renoise would pass MIDI commands to the host like an external controller does. Simply have the transport controls sending CC`s like a virtual MIDI surface that can be mapped using the hosts mapping ability.
I may be complicating things too much here but to try and clarify:
-rns_VST acts as both a vst and a MIDI device, or has a secondary component that acts as a MIDI device rns_virtual_MID, selectable along side your keyboards and controllers in host X.
-You map the hosts transport buttons etc. to rns_virtual_MID as you would to say your launchpad .
-rns_virtual_MID shares data back and forth between rns_VST and the host. So when you hit play in rns_VST, play starts in the host.
I realise we are getting out of APIs and spec here but the rewards for managing something reliable like this could be pretty big IMO. With the request way that you mention that it is possible with the VST spec if hosts supports it but maybe this is another avenue to get round hosts that don`t, or to create something more powerful?
thank you Bungle.