I know that you can use the effect code 1000 (or 2000, 3000, 8000, etc) to program parameters on plugins in the DSP chain. What I noticed was that due to hex numbers, you can’t reach parameters over 16 (1100, 1400, 1f00, etc) on whatever plugin you’re using. Is there a way to reach the higher numbered parameters when using such plugins? Like Heizenbox or KT Granulator?
The Automation tab would theoretically be one way, but I would find it a lot easier and more precise in the effect column, right next to the notes I’m working with.
I agree, this has been quite a limitation for me in Renoise on several occasions. From what I understand (what I’ve picked up from other forum threads) it will be difficult to change this limitation without restructuring a large portion of the pattern code.
Other people have speculated the idea of a new parameter automation meta device which would get around the limitation. It would be something similar to the VSTi automation device, but you’d have 15 sliders which can be assigned to any other slider in the DSP chain. So you would still be limited to automating sliders 1 to F of the automation device, but each one of those sliders could be mapped to any useful parameter you need, rather than just the first few you normally have access to.
Of course it would be nice to simply access any parameter directly from the pattern itself, but I would gladly take a new meta device as a workaround. If restructuring the pattern system is a huge hassle, but making a new meta device is relatively simple, then let’s do that instead. Anything to get the job done really.
I understand the limitation of the parameter control in the effect commands but “more precise” is not true.
You can type in the exact parameter value in the slider-box whereas Renoise doesn’t always translate this value to a precise effect value unless the maximum value would be 255 or less. As soon as the value goes over this range, Renoise devides the range into blocks that are near the exact value.
If you type the exact value in the box behind the slider, then create an automation point, the exact value is put in the node.
More information how to exploit this can be found here: http://www.renoise.com/board/index.php?s=&…ost&p=74035
Thanks for the tips, I have yet to clear away a few minutes to work on this more.
When I said “more precise” earlier, I didn’t necessarily mean more precise for parameter tweaking, I was thinking in terms of where the parameter changes happen in reference to the notes. When I work with granular synthesis plugins, it would be extremely helpful to SEE the note that I’m granular synthing (especially with beats and tempo specific snare roll type things) right next to the plugin codes, rather than in the bottom automation window.
Has anyone ever thought of putting the automation envelopes vertically into the track itself? So that it would be 50% transparent and in colors or something? Maybe it would wind up being too confusing after a while.
What dBlue said - a VSTfx Automation Device would do the trick.
What I’m thinking is one exactly the same as the VSTi Automation Device, but the dropdown menu for VSTs lists all VSTfx in the same channel as the device.
Shouldn’t be too difficult to implement should it?
@xciourescant:
Presuming “more precise” in the manner you meant otherwise still doesn’t make a correct intepretation either: Automation is just as precise as effect column because each row represents a position in the envelope window.
The VSTfx parameters are already automatable, the only reason the VSTI automate device exists is for that purpose because the VSTI parameters cannot be controlled by automation otherwise.
The only extra usefull thing i can imaging with a VSTFx device is that you can pick 14 parameters you can automate that usually are above the limit of 14 for the effectcommand column, but other than that i rather praise precise value input in the automation envelopes as you can do exactly there what you can do on the effect command column and more (tick-interpolation which you can’t on the effect column).
This is exactly what I (and others) personally want. The precision of the 00 - FF range is totally fine for my needs right now but I would love to be able to access more/all parameters directly from my patterns, either with a VSTfx automation device or otherwise.
The main thing is that some methods of automation simply aren’t very well suited to an automation curve, so directly inputting the values into the pattern is more practical in these instances. For example, when rapidly alternating between values - for volume/filter “gating” or similar techniques - it is so much easier to just put those commands directly into the pattern itself rather than draw a complex curve. Making a parameter alternate between 10FF and 1000 every row over the whole pattern took me barely a few seconds to do via keyboard in the pattern editor. Doing this via automation curves was definitely a more clumsy process which involved drawing the points themselves, adjusting them to the right values, then copy/pasting them over the whole curve. Even when using the very useful keyboard shortcuts it still took a noticably longer time to complete. It simply did not flow as easily as editing a pattern directly.
I really feel like we could have the best of both worlds available to us in Renoise. All parameter of an effect should be available in both patterns and automation curves. It really just comes down to the way you prefer to work with these things - and of course each person’s tastes are different. But if this VSTfx automation device idea is relatively simple to implement, and it’s possible to provide 2 different methods to achieve the same result which will keep the different types of people happy, then I think it should be done? I mean it can’t hurt, right?
Okay but why an extra device instead of changing the layout of the current VSTFx in a manner that the first 14 supplied parameters become droplist options which allow you to manually select your specific >14 parameter numbers for pattern effect-command control?
Well, as I said earlier: either with a VSTFx automation device or with another concept, anything that would get the job done really. I like the sound of your dropdown idea as well, it would definitely be a big improvement. My only concern with that idea is we’d still be limited to a max of 14 parameters overall.
Now I can tell what you’re thinking already: “You can’t even automate 14 parameters at once from the pattern!”, hehe. But as usual, it’s merely a question of having access to the extra parameters I need, not necessarily wanting to automate 3642376 things all at the same time. The benefit of the current VSTi automation device is that we can simply add another one if we need to use more parameters. That was the main benefit I had in mind for a VSTFx automation device.
But I’ll say it once more, your dropdown idea would definitely be a big improvement and a step in the right direction. I could easily see myself using this method to automate the most important 14 parameters with pattern commands, then using automation curves to modify other less important stuff.
Looking at the old poll accessible from the menu, there was the request for a “MIDICCFXDevice (Easy)”, i think that would be the way to go, it would allow accessing the additional parameters as discussed and as a bonus, also allows one to send notes to effects, that’s really great for vocoders, playable comb filters or whatever.
This idea can be extended to a concept of a “rack” as found in the new version of Ableton Live. Basically, a rack is a chunk of effect chain, with or without an instrument, with only 8 parameters visible to the outside, which are of course assignable.
The Renoise way would be to simply save a DSP chain with the ‘VSTfx Automate Device’ in there. I think, however, that the Ableton implementation is nice because it reduces clutter.
So, I suggest an ability to group a series of effects, along with a “VSTfx Automate Device”, and have only the 16 or whatever assignable parameters visible. Of course, one should be able to “expand” the rack in order to tweak it’s insides…
I see it kind of like the way midi-mapping works in renoise, but instead of assigning midi controllers to s
liders you assign sliders from this specific Meta Device to VST parameters.
Think about a DSP chain of VST effects, where each Audio Unit (pun intended) has dozens of tweak-able
parameters. At most, I’m probably only interested in controlling 8 of them at a time.
The idea would be to have a Meta Device that assigns it’s own sliders to any parameter of any VST in the chain.
By having this Meta Device, it reduces clutter and makes it easy to see what’s going on in the chain because I only have to focus on one thing.
Off topic:
I can’t help but notice the growing similarities between Renoise and Live. Renoise now has searchable plugins, just like Live does. The renoise mixer view looks very similar to the main Live clip view (although the functions are totally different). The whole DSP chain implementations in both programs are VERY similar, with the exception of Live’s inclusion of the instrument in the DSP chain, as well as the possibility of MIDI effects.
Now I only wish Renoise’s built in sampler/instrument was extended to have some of the features of Live’s new sampler, namely the EXCELLENT implementation of key zones and velocity layering … much better than Renoise’s IMO.
Anyway… an effect rack and also a rni device with similar parameter outputs would simply rock.
I also wish the pattern column system was much more flexible.
That you could add whatever column you like in the same manner that you add automation. Just rightclick track to get a list of track devices. Then choose a parameter from a device and you get a new dedicated 2 digit column (with a small name on top of it). Also drag drop the columns to rearrange them. And finally save your setup as DSP chain (with the track column setup as well).
And the automation really should show the same info as in the columns in the pattern editor and vice versa. But thats another story.
I think some sort of effect rack implementation would be great… especially if there was a way to route inputs/outputs across channels… so we could do things like SIDECHAINING! … I’d love to be able to string “cables” from one plugin to another
… I’d love to be able to string “cables” from one plugin to another