Hi all i have read about freezing and now i am really interesting when this feature will be implemented in renoise?
because i am looking for good effect to buy it with this feature but i am ready to pay money to renoise team if they will implement this.
i have read about energy xt etc. but i am interesting when it will be in renoise or it will be.
thanks.
i dont think so that it is hard to implement if renoise have features separete tracks when you render file.
Don’t make too many assumptions about this. It’s easy for a user to say “this should be easy”, but for the programmers themselves it can be a completely different story. Sometimes even things which appear to be simple can turn out to be very complex.
Other people have suggested this feature before (please use the forum search before posting!) so there is a demand for it, and I’m sure that it will eventually appear in Renoise, so you’ll just have to be patient.
Saying things like “I am ready to buy Renoise if you add this feature” is never helpful for anyone, it’s almost like a bribe in fact. We all have ideas that we’d like to see, and we’re probably all willing to pay for them, but this is not the right way to get things done.
about it hard or not hard to implement.
i dont say it is easy to implement.
i dont write is as idea becouase i seen some topics about that i am only asking about will be or not and when?
second about money.
its cool that you pay some money and you have many updates but i think will be better if you should pay not big price but pay.
ok
maybe we talk about different freezing
i have found some effect http://www.fxfreeze.com/
as i understand it only record from this channel and after this play.
Belkin…
FX Freeze is 49 euros. Renoise is 50 euros (well, 49.99).
FX Freeze does one thing. Renoise does many, many, many things.
Renoise basically already has a type of freeze by using the “render selection to sample” function (only available to registered users). It’s a few moments of extra work, but you can really do the same thing with it. I used to do it this way myself many times on my slow laptop.
So if you have 50 euros in your pocket and you’re looking for something to spend it on… choose Renoise!
Your support helps to ensure that Renoise can survive into the future, and then everybody has a better chance of seeing their favourite features.
.
dblue i have choosen many some time ago)))
and because i am asking) about freezing)
PS I am registered not as belkin) but as my real name)
dblue i dont understand why you are angry?
i am only asking. and really i can pay money to reoise team or to this vst because it one of needed features.
I have bought renoise because its really nice tracker and will be the best in future but for this need some usefull features. like that.
Ok cool 
Well, perhaps you can experiment with the render-to-sample function before buying FX Freeze. It’s not quite as convenient, but it does work.
P.S. I’m not a part of the Renoise team, I cannot see who is registered and who is not.
P.P.S. I’m not angry at all. It’s just a language problem… it happens a lot on this forum, haha. But I still believe that paying money for features is a bad idea and will be unfair for many people. This has also been discussed many times in the past.
I could easily offer $1000 or something to get some features which are important to me… but is that really the best thing to do? The Renoise team only has a certain amount of time and energy they can use to develop the application, and every feature has to be prioritised. Should they stop development of other features simply because I want to throw some money at them?
.
ok small intro
i try to write some hardcore tracks and want start live playing till 2008 for this i need
- laptop
- midi key board
but when i use vst thay take meny resources and for this need really powerfull laptop(for this need big money, ps may for me it big but).
with this features you can save your cpu.
second features is run two songs in one instance but as Bantai say it will be in future.
if this two features will be implemented you can do all what you need.
PS really sorry english is not so good but if some body dont understand tell me and i will try to tell it
dblue paying for features is bad when you should pay near 100 euro
but if you should pay near 2-3 euro its bad? for implement quick features maybe this featuires is needed to many people i think 2-3 euro its not big price(in my country is 5 beers)))
yes i dont want pay for all features but for some special and most needed
ok i will try to tell you
for example version 1.9 has
feature 1
feature 2
…
feature x
you want you feature and some guys need it too you will pay this money only when renoise team say yes guys we can implement this one and all other listed features.
understand what i mean?
[offtop]
lets go visit me and we will drink good beer))) and not only beer)
we have cheep and very good beer))
sorry you can buy more than 5 beers) near 6-8))
[/offtop]
Yes, dude, I understand, don’t worry! 
But here is the problem… everybody is different, and everybody wants different features. A feature which is “most needed” by you might be totally useless to another guy (this is just an example, I am not saying that fx freeze is useless).
But how should the Renoise team decide which person to listen to? Should they listen to 10 people who are willing to pay 5 euros each to get “Feature X”? Or should they listen to 1 person who is willing to pay 500 euros for “Feature Y”? If both features are rather complex and will take a long time to create, how do you decide which is more important? You could argue that the feature which 10 people asked for is probably more important, but what if that 1 single person suddenly offers 5000 euros instead? Should the Renoise team take the larger amount of money and then ignore everyone else?
This is a rather extreme example, so it’s perhaps not very realistic, but hopefully you can see what I’m saying.
This idea of buying features can become quite strange when you start to think about it. It could possibly work, but it would have to be handled very, very carefully. But this is beside the point anyway… Taktik himself has said many times in the past, this is not the way he wants to do things.
Big features which take a lot of time and energy should be voted for. (which they already are)
Small features will be added if they are simple enough and make sense. (which they already are)
This democratic way of doing things is probably better for everyone, don’t you agree?
Now back to the original point of this thread… a freeze function.
I would like to see a freeze function myself. The reason it doesn’t already exist in Renoise is because it is not such a simple thing to do. As Bantai said himself: “Harddisk streaming and possibly plugin delay compensation have to come first before we can have an efficient freeze function.”
I’m sure these problems are already being worked on as we speak. We just have to be a bit patient
.
yes you are right and i agree with you.
to Bantai
when this feature will become to renoise as you think?
Understandable… because that just wouldn’t be a very fun way to program, would it?? Renoise is so great because it is a labour of love and oozes quality and style in every feature it implements. I’d rather have it stay small and not lose that solidness than Renoise eating Logic, Cubase, FL etc. and becoming a MS-style piece of crap.
(which doesn’t mean I don’t hope Renoise will make it big, just that it doesn’t lose the special sauce in the process)
Nice thread to mention pysj, useful indeed. thanks.
some body can suggest Freeze VST for try?
now i have FX Freeze, any other?
FX Freeze i dont know but it isnt good thing(
i need this fu… feature)
there are several ways to work around those really rare occasions where a freeze function would be handy.
i can’t imagine how this could be such a crucial feature for you when there are hardly any other requests from all the other users for it.
maybe you should rethink your approach to music production in the 1st place before desperately arrogating a freeze function, which is partially already there even, via “render selection to sample”.
so i am just curious…
why do you need it so desperately?
is there a tune which maxxes out your CPU because you’re using some CPU intensive effects or instruments on some tracks?
if so, why don’t you just render these tracks to sample and insert them in the track alongside to the disabled source tracks?
this way you would non-destructively gain a lot of resources again.
to me it appears that you’ve merely read about it, got all horny and wet and now think you cannot continue live without it, not knowing that it’s probably just a toy that might become obsolete the other day again.
it’s really not essential imo.
ok
because i am using too many vsts for generate sound
but i think now i will create sound after that get samples and use effects to samples it will save many resources.
i know that here are many other things to implement but its one of the needed features. or create sound in vst then get samples from it and wark with samples.