And of course e.g. an automation next to the notes is a great workflow speedup for ANYBODY, even for you people who obviously cannot imagine such difference.
Inb4 the real piano roll?
EDIT: The color theme, as requested: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/6812754/joule_best.xrnc
o.O Joule for president! This is a nice color scheme, can I have?
I understand Airmann your point of view. I’ll never say than a piano roll has not its workflow for editing recorded music. It’s “visually closer” to a “traditionnal way” of entering notes and then editing them.
I’ve got a master midi keyboard, so I understand remarks of anyone that would like to see the verticality of the pattern editor, and the midi virtual keyboard melted in a pianoroll vertical interface that makes more sense to them. Some musicians develop music with a physical interaction with an instrument (a piano is a frequent example), and even if it’s a virtual instrument that they cannot really touch like a piano, they need to keep this interaction, to compose, to imagine and finally build parts of their music.
But there are other musicians that work in a different way, they do not have a physical need with an instrument, to imagine the music in their heads. Composers sometimes, just need a score, they write their music and while they write the score, they “hear” the music in their heads. Well they need to hear it really at some point of the process. And in this particular situation, Renoise, as it is, is a kind of “interactive score” that lets you hear quickly the result. You enter notes faster and you produce fast results. Is it human or not ? Both methods are human methods ! Some are more rationnal and intellectual than others. But both are human methods.
Considering “Humanization” it has never been the main strength of a tracker, but Renoise - on this point - is one of the best to bring some pretty good workarounds. When I speak about humanization of music, I’ve got 2 things in mind (1), the humanized music input that finally creates a robotic / mechanical output - quantization of keyboard inputs is the main example of it, and (2) the humanized output of copypasted boring robotic & repetitive music.
If renoise only was able to record quantized keyboard strokes, it would NOT be my favourite tracker. But since it’s able to record notes, chords, and most of all, with “subtle delays” (remember the precision of the delay command) : honnestly I cannot complain on this point, because in the end renoise successfully grabs my litttle mistakes. And if I’m have no real humanity with the way I express my ideas with my keyboard, the groove settings, can help, also, rnd buttons, random lfos, advanced editing options, plus some tools, also, the maYbe command, all this adds a slight touch of humanity in the end.
For humanizing the music from the start, a QWERTY keyboard and a mouse, (pianoroll or not) it isn’t really my best option, anyway it’ll never be spontaneous enough. There are better instruments than a qwerty keyboard and a mouse any musician will agree ! The only way I’ve been able to add a true authentic human feeling to my tracked music FROM THE START, has been with the help of my MIDI master keyboard. Once the result is produced, I’ve got bunch of tracks with lots of delays and notes-off. Saying that a piano roll and a mouse would be better then to move notes to transpose them, than the pattern editor as it is… could be true if renoise wasn’t the beast it is in terms of editing, copypasting, moving transposing notes, instruments and parameters. Both approaches are producing the same results in the end.
What method is more efficient ? I dunno. The more I’m using a method, the more I’m efficient with it. I spent countless hours and days on renoise interface, and on cubase, and on FL, and so on… The more I use a DAW, the more I become efficient with it. It’s not sometimes a question of interface, it’s just : me. My ability to learn, to optimize the way I use things. It’s often a question or psychic reactions, habituations, motricity, memory, learning, reactivity : all human factors that taktik and the devteam won’t code.
Maybe the efficiency of a pattern edition is an illusion that comes from the fact that I have just more hours spent on a pattern editor than on a pianoroll. Finally there is no rationnal reason to use one method instead of another. Maybe a good experienced pianoroll user could go as fast as an experienced tracker boy with the pattern editing features. I’m not sure but let’s assume that it’s possible. Even if it’s possible, all that matters is music : what are the benefits for music itself ? Being able to hear faster the results I imagine and reduce the time between what I imagine and what I’ve reall got to hear in the end.
If you focus on the resulting music only, instead of focusing on production time, you can instantly see that a pianoroll has its own workflow limits too, and that it will NOT really resolve the pattern editor weaknesses, but will tend to “replace” it, with its own weaknesses … and not because it produces new musical and interesting results, but just because it’s the result of habituation of the market.
“Replacing” is not “improving”.
Improving the tracker paradygm is what renoise has tried to do from the start, for more than a decade. Adding a pianoroll on the top of it, would only resolve the question of a “niche market” but would not resolve exactly some weaknesses in its interface and workflow.
There are two ways, at least, to compose music, regardless of the DAW used:
In either case, any help that gets you to compose faster is welcome, of the two cases, the most effective is the second case, using your mental capacity.So this is an ongoing process, which happens throughout the entire composition. You can imagine a melody instantly, without composing it, and you need at any time that your tool (your DAW) will not stop you at all, do not brake.That is why you lose your effectiveness, your productivity.This is why some people complain about the slow workflow in some details.
Basically it does not depend on the learning ability of each person in learning and using a DAW. It is taken for granted that most of us here dominate Renoise.What is desirable is a DAW with easy learning, even for the dumbest.A DAW that does not brake at any time during the entire process of the composition.Then any visual aid or any tool that helps to speed up the process is essential. Otherwise, you find yourself losing mental melodies, because you are wasting time configuring or using a slow tool. Your head goes faster than your own tool, and that can not be.This situation occurs with any DAW. With Renoise, it happens that there are many small details that can be arranged to improve the workflow.
A striking example is the automation editor, which, combined with a visual aid that resembles the look of a pianoroll that is able to help understand automation along with the placement of notes, would greatly speed up the composing process.You do not even need a pianoroll to enter notes. A visual aid, allows you to be thinking of something else, while the view is doing its job, resulting in greater efficiency, faster, less distractions.That is why this whole thing is so important.
A composer does not want distractions, he wants work fluency. I do not want to be translating things, you want to have the free mind to be creative. The DAW should allow all this, but, it is not a good DAW.
Examples of distractions:
Obviously, the more you know about your DAW, you can be more productive. But this is not the issue. If your DAW allows less distractions, you will be even less distracted. This is the subject to be discussed. In short, get to compose the same fluidly, with less time, because if you take more, you end up losing your mind, losing the melody.If you just try to try things, without a previous melody in your head, in the background you are not composing, you are trying results.In the end, you can have a composite song, but the process will be very different, and in the background you will enjoy less.
o.O Joule for president! This is a nice color scheme, can I have?
Oh no, a Swedish president? We can’t have that. :lol:
“Replacing” is not “improving”.
Improving the tracker paradygm is what renoise has tried to do from the start, for more than a decade. Adding a pianoroll on the top of it, would only resolve the question of a “niche market” but would not resolve exactly some weaknesses in its interface and workflow.
Kurtz, you stated that “nothing surpasses a tracker interface”.
Now, we talk about a music editor paradigm and not so much about philosophical questions. Most DAW’s can record midi in quite good quality. But I’d say that in almost all productions the recorded notes have to be edited after recording. Move and shift things a little here and there. So keyboard and mouse are still important in all DAWs.
Personally, most of the time I just use keyboard and mouse for note input/editing. I do this since the 80ies when the first trackers came up. The tracker interface was invented for being able to edit really simple scores with arpeggios, pitch and volume slides. The first trackers had no midi support at all. This is were trackers come from. Yes, Renoise supports midi, but it doesn’t excel in being a midi editor and so do all pure tracker interfaces, because they weren’t designed as midi editors.
All I want to say: Renoise’s interface could be quite improved by adding a simple piano roll view/editor. Not as a replacement for the classical tracker interface, but as an addition. That’s a huge difference ! Why not just merge the best of both worlds and have a win-win situation ?
BTW: in Renoise it isn’t even possible to move/drag / microshift a note start/length on the grid using the mouse+keyboard. Or at least I haven’t found a solution for that. In all cases it’s necessary to enter delay values by hand, or use midi recording instead. And that is so cumbersome.
I would like to comment on a few things, but it would be very long.I’ll try to summarize it.Most pianoroll-related ideas I’ve seen in this past year have to do with visually assisting to detect notes, their position, start and end, visual help, even more than the editing itself.A similar tool, which resembles a piano scroll, which allows you to read notes neatly while they sound, a visual aid, would be more than enough to shut the mouth of all who protest.So far, the 3 best solutions that I consider are:
The three options are additions, and basically they are not a pianoroll, they are something different.A piano roll is a complete editor. This would be something halfway, simpler, with few editing options, but above all, would act as visual aid.Case three, involves the use of layers, a very effective solution to take advantage of the screen space, and implies valuing the use of colors.It is possible that the concept shown by Joule is the best, which fits most Renoise, and the mind of the majority, by the mania that everything has to be horizontal (any composer who has used another DAW will not see anything unusual).
But then come the problems. The first is the representation by blocks, and especially the completion of the notes.Renoise allows continuous notes, (the lower note does not stop the top note written in the same column), or notes with completion with Note-OFF (or lower Note).Therefore, translating the pattern editor into a visual tool similar to that represented by a pianoroll seems a complicated task, so much so that it has never been taken seriously.But please, go back and look at the Joule screenshot.The idea is perfect!To my way of thinking, it would include:
Maybe I miss something, but the idea is there, and it’s very big.Renoise has never used layer overlays. Underline this.Here is a great evolution.
Maybe everything together seems like a very sophisticated thing,but if you work separately, classifying the works, everything is possible.That’s why, when Renoise’s Team started with Redux, I did not really like, because it is a small team, and is dedicated to waste time on other software, rather than improving Renoise.From my point of view, now, instead of having Redux, we would have for example something like the screen capture of Joule. Time invested in improving Renoise work areas.But no. Obviously, those responsible will want to get money and do business. If there are benefits, Renoise does not advance.But hey, we can continue to comment ideas.
…
BTW: in Renoise it isn’t even possible to move/drag / microshift a note start/length on the grid using the mouse+keyboard. Or at least I haven’t found a solution for that. In all cases it’s necessary to enter delay values by hand, or use midi recording instead. And that is so cumbersome.
Right on this topic I have no problems.I do not know if you mean the pattern editor. Using only the keyboard you can select, cut and paste very fast.Using only the mouse, you can select and drag, with just two clicks, very fast.On the other hand, if you need precision, use more lines per pattern, and higher playback speed.If you still need more precision, you have the delay parameters, and even the general delay / advance control per track.
If you talk about the Matrix Pattern,I have enough fluency with the keyboard + mouse. You can select and drag to change location, multiple tracks and patterns.In fact, thanks to the Matrix Pattern, you can compose with Renoise like a bullet.The problem is that I can not give you an overview of the song, but small pictures, even zooming in on them.To improve it, it is best to have a higher resolution screen (more vertical space).
Then you find an impassable wall. And is that renoise is not made for High Resolutions. The HD resolution (1920x1080) is your limit.More resolution is unreadable, a serious problem.So, I’m at the point where, the clearest step to keep Renoise alive, is to change the GUI now, to support higher resolutions. And then, only after, add the rest of the things that are needed to improve the workflow.But I think this is not going to happen.Soon (I think) we will see a version 3.1.1 with bug fixes and nothing else.In 2018, maybe a 3.2 version with some new things.
But the GUI will remain the same.Because changing it involves having a serious programmer dedicated to this task.Changing the GUI is an expensive task. And of course, you’re not going to be stupid and build an identical GUI. You will build a better GUI, with the possibility of matching areas to the composer’s taste, taking advantage of the maximum resolution of 1, 2 or 3 monitors.Meanwhile, we will continue to lose time with Redux or other things unrelated to Renoise.Many programs with a long history have already had to pass through here, a serious update of the GUI for much higher screen resolutions.
I would like to comment on a few things, but it would be very long. I’ll try to summarize it.
That was the best mate 
!
And no, I meant dragging (microshift) of note start position and length(=OFF) to non-grid positions via mouse, so that I don’t have to edit delay values. Higher LBPs are just a workaround, not the solution. Why is it so difficult to understand that this is a weakness of Renoise and a strength of a piano roll editor ?
Well, meanwhile this thread is pretty off topic … and piano roll has been discussed 1000x before. I suggest we all save our time. All this discussions lead to nowhere.
That was the best mate
I know! 
And no, I meant dragging (microshift) of note start position and length(=OFF) to non-grid positions via mouse, so that I don’t have to edit delay values. Higher LBPs are just a workaround, not the solution. Why is it so difficult to understand that this is a weakness of Renoise and a strength of a piano roll editor ?
I was just pointing out that I do not need more fair dealing with this subject, to adjust the exact start and end position of a note, even using the delay parameters (the numbers). In fact, it is the very essence of the pattern editor, that is, the launching and stopping of notes using boxes and parameters.Each box o cell has 256 points of delay inside.Are you comparing this to the control of a pianoroll and its zoom?Then you are talking about a specific thing.Is better?I did not say no, neither yes, there is nothing to understand here. I at no time compared nothing of Renoise with a pianoroll. But I have pointed out and accentuated the idea marked by joule in his screen capture.In the background I think that is not necessary a super pianoroll, but rather something similar as visual aid and with little editing ability, something feasible. These are things that are not summarized with a few paragraphs. But of course, everyone has their problems or their hobbies when it comes to composing.
With your comment, I imagine a vertical zoom of a single cell (the selected cell), with 256 points of delay, with the ability to adjust with the mouse to your liking, for example.
You may think it is useless to talk about these things.I do not believe it.We all end up learning something.Everybody.
«With your comment, I imagine a vertical zoom of a single cell (the selected cell), with 256 points of delay, with the ability to adjust with the mouse to your liking, for example.»
… It’s indeed well spotted, … it’s one of the weaknesses of the tracker interface, it would be like a “microedit” feature in the pattern editor, as it allready exists in the automation enveloppes editors when you click on ctrl+ left mouse and it finetunes the posision of points, the same could be done with selected drag+dropped notes, you should be able to finetune their positions with something like that. I dunno if zooming inside lines or cells would be necessary in all situations…, just automatically creating the “delay values” in the delay column, without zooming, would do the job for me. It would be a usefull improvement anyway.
I’m not against a GUI that allows higher resolutions with sizeable fonts and icons, however I would not like to see too many “windows” overlapping other “windows”. Renoise is good at being “pattern centric”, so we should not loose the focus on the pattern editor when we compose. It’s always better to create “usefull panels” moving around the pattern editor that stays in the center of the screen. Some panels could be resizable or you could “detach them” but only to put them on a “secondary screen”, for example, the mixer panel, everybody would like to detach it and to keep an eye on the mixer.
BTW: in Renoise it isn’t even possible to move/drag / microshift a note start/length on the grid using the mouse+keyboard.
AE (advanced edit) has the Nudge feature, which can microshift notes.
It’s not perfect, though. AE unfortunately has the disadvantage of being a little tucked away, and only works with the mouse.
I guess you want something which is even more intuitive, e.g. holding some keyboard modifier while dragging a selection in the pattern.
«With your comment, I imagine a vertical zoom of a single cell (the selected cell), with 256 points of delay, with the ability to adjust with the mouse to your liking, for example.»
… It’s indeed well spotted, … it’s one of the weaknesses of the tracker interface, it would be like a “microedit” feature in the pattern editor, as it allready exists in the automation enveloppes editors when you click on ctrl+ left mouse and it finetunes the posision of points, the same could be done with selected drag+dropped notes, you should be able to finetune their positions with something like that. I dunno if zooming inside lines or cells would be necessary in all situations…, just automatically creating the “delay values” in the delay column, without zooming, would do the job for me. It would be a usefull improvement anyway.
There could be a cell control pane, a lower pane next to the automation editor.This panel represents only the first selected cell.In it, you would have control of all parameters using vertical scroll bars.In addition, it would have a check box for multiple editing, which will affect all the boxes selected.This would be possible with a problem. The tool does not allow to read the parameters written in the pattern editor,only overwrite them.To be perfect, it should be under the hood of Renoise. Unfortunately, the Lua API also has its limitations, and this is one of the big ones (not being able to read the parameters already written in the pattern editor).I do not know, it may not exist for some performance-related topic.
I’m not against a GUI that allows higher resolutions with sizeable fonts and icons, however I would not like to see too many “windows” overlapping other “windows”. Renoise is good at being “pattern centric”, so we should not loose the focus on the pattern editor when we compose. It’s always better to create “usefull panels” moving around the pattern editor that stays in the center of the screen. Some panels could be resizable or you could “detach them” but only to put them on a “secondary screen”, for example, the mixer panel, everybody would like to detach it and to keep an eye on the mixer.
I think the same. I do not like floating windows. I like contiguous panels. But that does not mean that the contiguous panels are fixed, although they allow some modification of the size.One day I indicated a program that defines how Renoise might work.Just is an image editing program: “MIR” “Multiple Image Resizer . NET”.This program allows repositioning the position panels, without invoking new windows (prevents overlapping windows, but also allows you to turn panels into windows). See the concept.Keeping in mind the use of up to 3 monitors and a vectorial or scalable GUI,I can not think of anything better than this as a whole.
[sharedmedia=core:attachments:7201]
Inb4 the real piano roll?
Click to view contents
EDIT: The color theme, as requested: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/6812754/joule_best.xrnc
Nice one. Kinda reminds me of an idea I presented (6th paragrah) here not too long ago. The only difference being audio-tracks instead of piano-roll, in the automation-window. However the piano roll / audio tracks / automation could of course share the same window.
Just like any other DAW with other words? I think we’re just inventing the wheel again, guys. 
But that can be a good thing sometimes.
[…]
BTW: in Renoise it isn’t even possible to move/drag / microshift a note start/length on the grid using the mouse+keyboard. Or at least I haven’t found a solution for that. In all cases it’s necessary to enter delay values by hand, or use midi recording instead. And that is so cumbersome.
Speaking of the delay column, to begin with, I’m quite convinced it has to be changed so that the notes has to be on the lines where they are closest to from a workflow pow (whichI’ve suggested before). Along the way, in the same topic, I was actually onexactly this subjectyou mentioned as well (3rd paragraph).
Still, maybe not as intuitive as a piano roll for this particular adjustments, but from a tracker point of view these two would make definitely make life easier.
Danoise seems to be running the show without showing off much. If he’s not annoyed, then why would anybody else dramaqueen?
Perhaps people should not spit in each other’s faces (no, don’t kid yourself that i’m talking down at the OP, i’m talking to the regs acting like they have shit in their ass all the time) and instead be like unto Danoise i.e. decent and goodnatured and an actual musician.
Let me just add: When somebody buys Renoise, they are promised an integer’s worth of updates.
utter nonsense
I bumped this stupid thread, my bad.
EDIT for wellard: not bumping again. get down on earth. It’s a 70 euro product. No one would write "don’t expect an update every half year, please see http://www.renoise.com/products/renoise/release-notes"on their product, and read taktik’s post again.
utter nonsense
I bumped this stupid thread, my bad.
Nothing constructive or relevant, just conceit. Do you even make music? If you were touched by the arts, you’d have passion and fire, instead, there is what, a cold dead technical knowledge, overwrought and complex like a tumbleweed. You’re not a musician. I’ll award you the last word in this matter though because this isn’t a fight as far as i’m concerned.
Danoise seems to be running the show without showing off much. If he’s not annoyed, then why would anybody else dramaqueen?
Perhaps people should not spit in each other’s faces (no, don’t kid yourself that i’m talking down at the OP, i’m talking to the regs acting like they have shit in their ass all the time) and instead be like unto Danoise i.e. decent and goodnatured and an actual musician.
Let me just add: When somebody buys Renoise, they are promised an integer’s worth of updates.
Therefore there is the implication that the project is moving, it is going somewhere, it is being actively developed. This is partly why people buy.
Otherwise, be fair and bark at prospective customers in your advertising spiel, about how they shouldn’t expect the world to bow to them, and how it’s a hobby project and you can cry a river if you don’t like that because me and my gang will upvote idiotic posts tee hee. Yeah, speak that crap upfront instead of burying it in this forum.
_ There is no counterargument. _
P.S. This is not to rubbish the efforts of devs. Danoise should be the director of this caravan of despair, he’d turn it around and we’d actually be going somewhere.
Hey wellard, no need to repeat points that you’re already made?
To answer you: Renoise is taktiks creation, of that there is no doubt. We’ve worked together for a few years now, and I can tell you that he has a very keen sense of what this software needs and doesn’t need. I totally respect that - but it doesn’t mean that he’s not prepared to listen to others.
And while there is no immediate new Renoise release it would of course be easy to say “just go make some music”, but I don’t think that’s entirely fair. It’s important to look to the future as well, and yes, perhaps Renoise (including me) could be more open about development. All I can currently say is that currently, I’m using Renoise 3.1 myself. Abug release will arrive in a not-too-distant future and after that, there is a 3.x as well (I know, because I’ve seen it). In other words, business as usual.
And to stay on-topic, yes - there is another project on the horizon as well. It’s under wraps for now, not directly related to Renoise - or Redux for that matter - but still in the realm of audio/music production. So if you somehow suspected that Renoise was taking time off on the Bahamas, unfortunately this is not the case.
I’m just hoping that the forum will continue to be a place of constructive criticism, a place to share tips/tricks/resources (I know I’ve learned quite a few things from this), or just a nice place to chill and hang out.
And it’s OK to disagree. Just be civilized about it 
Peace.
Had to log in to like 
It’s great to hear that there are plans for a Renoise future. This whole “Renoise put on ice” should perhaps be rephrased to “temporarily down-prioritized”, I’m guessing! 
Hey wellard, no need to repeat points that you’re already made?
To answer you: Renoise is taktiks creation, of that there is no doubt. We’ve worked together for a few years now, and I can tell you that he has a very keen sense of what this software needs and doesn’t need. I totally respect that - but it doesn’t mean that he’s not prepared to listen to others.
And while there is no immediate new Renoise release it would of course be easy to say “just go make some music”, but I don’t think that’s entirely fair. It’s important to look to the future as well, and yes, perhaps Renoise (including me) could be more open about development. All I can currently say is that currently, I’m using Renoise 3.1 myself. Abug release will arrive in a not-too-distant future and after that, there is a 3.x as well (I know, because I’ve seen it). In other words, business as usual.
And to stay on-topic, yes - there is another project on the horizon as well. It’s under wraps for now, not directly related to Renoise - or Redux for that matter - but still in the realm of audio/music production. So if you somehow suspected that Renoise was taking time off on the Bahamas, unfortunately this is not the case.
I’m just hoping that the forum will continue to be a place of constructive criticism, a place to share tips/tricks/resources (I know I’ve learned quite a few things from this), or just a nice place to chill and hang out.
And it’s OK to disagree. Just be civilized about it
Peace.
Hi there. I honestly don’t care what Taktik is planning next. The entire project is predicated on snide bitching. I honestly thought you were better than that and would be able to take a compliment.
Also, l was technically not repeating myself as l had deleted most of the original posting and reposted it on this page as my original comments were, i felt, being pushed off the page having not been visible for very long.
You should learn how to take a compliment.
However, one thing this reveals is that there are no decent people on the project and so nobody should feel bad about reverse engineering it - IF doing so were legal. Yes, that’s right, i expected you to f**k up and not understand a compliment thereby removing any remorse about taking over the project. What i mean is, there are no longer any ethical considerations - it’s a-okay if the law says it’s okay - forget the people on the project.
https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=is+reverse+engineering+legal
LOL @ sycophanting upvoting of the most basic post. A culture of fear and oneupmanship. Barely anything musical about this. No joy of life, you know? If there’s a blood moon in the sky, you get vampires on the ground. If there’s wankery in the management, you get cowardly talentless sycophants on the shop floor.
Fork this