.
.
.
.
.
… I would appreciate it a lot.
.
.
PS: It’s NOT a piano roll… and those pure audio clips are not visible curently (have to scroll down).
.
.
Edit: I am not a nice man. Still, I don’t think Renoise needs this.
-1
no offense your a cool guy…
I learned computer music with pianorolls but I like Renoise because it’s different and suits a need.
-1
lol, the first thing that came into my mind when I saw that pic is that you’re gonna get flamed. 
I personally dont mind pianorolls, playlists a la FL and so on… but some do, you know. 
Anyway I’m sure you meant good, but the arranger will have to look much less FL like to get the general approval.
Surely it’s a highly anticipated feature, tho. Even the conservatives will love it when they get their hands on it. 
IMO Arranger should be easy for live use - by now I can’t imagine how this FL-like arranger would make liveplay easier.
What you have there looks like a track arranger!? hmm Do we just need a track arranger and not a pattern arranger?
I don’t know.
I’d imagined Florians idea from the top 5 wish thread, a thing where you put whole blocks of notes in patterns, like combining a whole beat pattern, a whole bass pattern, chord pattern etc., then you only need maybe 5 patterns in a row. Then pack this idea in a very compact way, that could be interesting!!?
But one thing is for sure, there’s still plenty room for development in the Tracking world.
This looks like Fruity Loops…
Hmm… personally I don’t want Renoise to be like this…
seeing the rectangles on the FT-like playlist reminded me what I used to do with fruity… but… NO! I don’t wanna go back to that… Renoise is a tracker…
Where did you get this?
that’s just FL’s playlist photoshopped into Renoise guys okay :3
I wouldn’t mind something like that, but waveforms instead of blocks [and the waveforms would go vertical with the normal pattern data holy shit]
just to understand. simplyfied attempt. something like this for an audiochannel?
Well, this is a nice approach…
Obviously fake. What’s next, photoshopped nipples in Renoise? The original picture doesn’t look that intuitive; for every variation there is another row: I don’t know if this is the best way to arrange this kind of stuff. I’d rather see something like in Buzz: vertical arrangement. Trackers are always vertical; and this way the tracks have visually the same place (think muscle memory) as in the mixer and pattern view.
that’s hot
Sinatra: yeah! must have…
+10
This is useless. Why you need to display the sample data as a waveform in the track window itself? It should be on a seperate view which relates to arranging blocks (or patterns) and recorded audio data.
-10
EDIT: Ok, at least you can use the waveform as a guide where you can put your events on another track (for mixing premade drum loops, etc.). But this hasn’t anything to do with arranging.
So you are not up-to-date related to the FL Studio features… There’s a ‘live mode’ since version 6.5 but I don’t need it either.
A pattern arranger would be the most flexible solution… so you can decide how many tracks you put in one pattern: If you want the total control over your arrangment, you can put only one track (with subtracks) in one pattern and play several of those “single-track pattern” together.
Contrary you put all your tracks in one pattern a time but then there is nothing you can arrange anymore (besides when each pattern plays in time… like in the renoise case).
Usually you would take one pattern for every kind of instruments: a drum pattern, a bass pattern, a lead major pattern, lead minor pattern etc. and play them together…
I will side with man-at-arms. My short experience with buzz made me miss that arranger a bit when I registered Renoise. It was nice being able to combine different instrument parts freely instead of having them locked to patterns.
If there’s an easy way of doing this in Renoise, please enlighten me.
The ideas presented here doesn’t seem like something I would need, or even want.
But then you can only show one instrument at a time in the pattern editor. Because each pattern could have it’s own speed/bpm etc. Many ppl would hate that.
However, I see no reason why we cant have both track (clip based) and entire patterns (pattern based) arranger in the same arranger. You simply just trigger patterns inside a clip/track based arranger. And in that way you choose how you wanna do it. You would then just see the pattern as a block(or you can choose to view/trigger it as a instrument) in the ‘normal’ pattern editor (and thus also in the clip based arranger window).
You could also switch it to one row only for all variations of one instrument… it’s up to you.
Yes, but in the vertical direction there isn’t much screen space in opposite to horizontal orientation (think of widescreens TFTs get more and more popular).
But there could be an option to switch the orientation to match everybody’s needs.
It depends on how many tracks/instruments do you include in one pattern… you can choose between one and all… it’s up to you.
And who needs several pattern at DIFFERENT speed at the SAME time? This is insane but even that could be displayed on screen if implemented right (so you need coincide play positions).
Indeed… this is how it works in FLStudio since the current version 7. The screenshot from the topic starter only shows the upper part while in the (hidden) downpart you have Clip-based sequencing.
Ooooh, I get it!
Renoise 2.0 will let you play TETRIS, the same way FT2.08 let you play SNAKE!
it really doesn’t make any sense combining Fruity Loops or Cubase interfaces with something like Renoise.
Renoise has really got far more flexibility than that kind of dumbed down, timeline approach - plus it forces you to use your ears - especially being able to leave notes hanging, then program effects changes in sequential patterns and things. in Fruity Loops, if you’ve got any imagination as a musician at all, you end up spending hours trying to find ways to work around this with odd shaped bars and notes beginning in unusual places.
for a brief time i thought Buzz’s multitrack pattern arranger was a big improvement, but it just gets you thinking linearly again. it makes organising program changes and one-off fx so much more of an effort.
i really hope nothing like this ever happens.