Dry/wet Controls On The Native Compressor

i was watching a(old news)video with rob acid,and the way he talked about using his compressors some ho "appealed"to me


i would like to see a dry/wet control on the native compressor :D


i’ve also seen that mastering gossip video of him. it was a very interesting watch, especially his reverb tube was awesome :)
i didn’t like his opinion about software plugins in general though… but i guess it’s true to some extent.

concerning your suggestion:
a wet/dry function can be very easily emulated with a send channel configuration where you keep the source and route it to a send that is equipped with the compressor.
the fader of the send will then control the amount of “wetness”.

i’m not saying integrating dry/wet into the comp. is a bad idea because there is a (very easy and straight-forward) workaround, but taking a look at the renoise compressor’s layout, there wouldn’t be any space for such a fader anyway… unless you want to broaden the effect’s frame in the chain, which in return would sacrifice space and therefore overview and consequently workflow.
so i think for the rare cases where users would want to utilize this special compression behaviour, the above routing config will be quite fine, won’t it?

routing?? another device???


dry/wet on all internal fx and all vst fx, just like the checkbox that enables or disables an effect… !

It could be a popup menu thing, but even if it took up half of the screen it would be worth it IMHO…

Have to agree also, I think this would be useful on all fx. Find myself using sends often for this purpose.

talking about IMHO:
we already have dry/wet on reverb, mpreverb, distortion, lofimat, delay (mute source->wet only) and chorus. all the other effects are rather untypical for dry/wet fading and most likely only rarely used for such purpose. setting up a respective send for those seldom occasions takes a few seconds. i don’t see any reason to probably invest a couple of hours on integrating such faders in the logic of the DSPs and the layout of the GUI just because of that. and i personally do care about the visual length of DSP chains, as they already tend to get long enough to make me scroll like a maniac way too often.
i’d have nothing to complain about a popup solution as long as it can be triggered from the same DSP frame size which we already have, but i think that would be quite a change of style and might lead to confusion for some.

Me too!
All native FX dry/wet!

So they could go, leaving more space for other stuff ;)

Sorry, I don’t mean that rudely, but that really is BS: you’re ignoring lots and lots of VST fx.

And before anything says it, yes, I’m aware that would probably add overhead in any position other than 100% wet or dry - but I’m pretty sure that’s at least as much true for send tracks!

1 second times a billion: 1 billion seconds.
10 hours times one: 10 hours.

It also takes more than the “few seconds” it takes to set up a send, consider added time for navigating around a song that is more complex, or the loss of having to say “I’d love to do X, but it’s too much of a PITA”… you can’t even measure that.

You can say that about everything… and I think here it’s not even applicable, why should a dry/wet fader confuse people?

noooo… I meant all fx, wether VST or internal.

actually… if all fx had that control in the same spot, it would be more coherent, no?

if it was done the “pop-up way” then, yes.

ofc i am ignoring VST, because this thread is about native effects (or namely, the native comp) as far as i was concerned.
and then again, most VST do have adjustable dry/wet parameters. at least those where it makes “sense” or where it is common.
i’m using a lot VST and never missed a dry/wet on any of these. i’m not saying i’m some kind of reference user, but nevertheless i think it wouldn’t be a popular option.

that’s some really interesting math there. :D
but still, compared to other more common operations like writing and arranging the actual song and score, the procedure of adding a send track for some dry/wet action is negligible - the relation is what counts, not absolute numbers and assumption that when you’ll turn 83 years you’d have done that operation a dozen gazillion times.

you just can’t be that lazy, can you?

as i said, because it’s a “change in style” or “incongruity” (oder kurz mal auf deutsch: “stilbruch”) in terms of how the GUI is structured and how it works. there is no other parameter in the entire program that has to be accessed by calling up a pop-up window.
it would just be odd / feeling wrong / lacking coherence.

anyways… we simply have a different opinion here which won’t be altered on both sides no matter how much we discuss it.
i think it’s a superflous feature and a waste of time for the dev to implement (he could use the same time for features and enhancements way more useful) and you think it’s an enormous time saver and workflow enhancement. it simply depends on how you work with renoise and we seem to be doing it quite differently. so … afterall, it’s taktik who has to decide anyways :)

The main issue I have is that extra sends can start to make a project more messy.

A mini slider would be fine or even draggable number box (like the global BPM one)

And that is the difference.

it seems the original poster was looking for a solution that keith303 provided. using sends is an industry standard for doing what you guys are talking about. honestly i agree with keith303, while it could be a tiny bit more useful to have a wet/dry knob on everything, i think the point was that there are far too many other issues for the developers to worry about than making it so that the user can save 2 seconds setting up a send.

i think it’s cool that renoise is so community driven and that the users have so much of a say in what does and doesn’t go into the program, but i think there’s a line where peoples’ wishes start to arise just out of pure laziness. i mean for fuck’s sake, i’ve got a Native Instruments Kore controller that i can’t even use with renoise yet because there is no plugin automation from within plugin GUI’s and we are arguing about the time it would take a user to go between one track and a send track vs. the time it would take to just turn a wet/dry knob? i would be seriously pissed if this feature were implemented ahead of some other very important ones.

i don’t think music should be as easy as you are thinking. i mean ya, it’s always great improving workflow, but if you are in such a rush that you can’t take the time to set up one god damn send track, then how can you be possibly putting in the time to write good stuff, mix properly, etc.?

glad to see that many people agree on this,i didnt start this thread to start a "flame-war"so please use a decent language :P

Who is talking about implementing it before something else?

And talking about lazyness, well whoa. If you have one effect you’d like to dry/wet with a send, yes… but if you have 3 or 4 in a dsp chain it IS a pain in the ass, and all patronizing isn’t going to change that…


early morning grumpiness after staying up all night. didn’t mean to come across as a jackass. this just isn’t that big of a deal to me but that doesn’t mean it isn’t for someone else. i apologize for patronizing. i too see the value in a wet/dry knob on all effects, just in comparison it is not something i would like the developers to spend their time on when considering other things i’d like to get done, but that’s just me.

I can live without the dry/wet slider… Won’t hurt either.
But please… No popup. I agree with keith303 on that.

What do you mean by that?

  1. if that were true - you have to start new stuff some day?

  2. what about VST instruments? those are called by popup…

Imagine a box the size of the enable/disable checkbox. It easily displays the amount of dry/wet, and when you click on it, a vertical slider pops up.

You see, I’d rather have it plain in the GUI, I think there’d be space even without popup. I’m just saying that if you never use it and don’t want it to use space, a popup might work also…

… geeeeeez.

having dry/wet control on a compressor is certainly not a stupid thing - this kind of process is called parallel compression, it works great on drums for example, where you set up harsh compression on them and adjust dry/wet to add peaks for punch et cetera… very usefull thing, and i would appreciate to have it pre-send because i still might like to send the whole thing to bus (send) …

dry/wet (at least on send meta device) would be great addition to renoise, and i feel that it’s missing there for a long time, you can live without it but it would certainly save millions of seconds, nerves not counted…

what i miss most though is to have true dry/wet when sending track to “bus” (send) where 100% wet would be really 100% wet and not just 100%dry + 100% send…