You know, except all those that will, and have been.
I can’t wait to see how gol handles you on the fl forums, bit.
There is nothing you can do in this concept, which you not also couldn’t do with the common concept. Absolutely NOTHING. Sorry. With on open envelope pool I could do all the same things. Just more efficient and saving a huge amount of time. Seriously, Taktik… It’s wrong the way it is. And it’s bad the way it is. And actually I’m pretty sure, you meanwhile know it yourself. However, it’s your baby.
Oh, you’re the guy getting special things out of Doofers, right?
Really? Try pitch modulation with random LFO in 2.8.
Slightly bad example, because that is actually possible in 2.8, hehe. It’s just a lot less flexible.
You just proved, you have totally no idea what this thread is about. “Experts” like you…
Actually, all it proves is that I have a hard time following your strange usage of English grammar.
Well, if your german is better, let it out. Or even better, go and search for a place to troll somewhere else. This a a thread about a serious topic. It’s not thought for the entertainment of bored wannabes.
Oh, I’m sorry… I thought you were setting a precedent for derailing threads by commenting on mine. My bad.
What would be the point of implementing this feature exactly as everyone else does it? If you want that just load a plugin that does it. Implementing it in Renoise wouldn’t allow us to do anything new and thus adds no value.
This implementation is fun and more unique. Also it makes much more sense for the crazy sample mangler that Renoise is.
That being said, adding something like Djeroek painted would be great />
There is nothing you can do atm, that you wouldn’t be able to do with a way more comfortable concept. It seems the problem is, there are just a whole lot of people, who don’t get, what this discussion is about. Anyone familiar with synths in depth wouldn’t have any problem, to identify the current issues.
Since when is Renoise a synth?
Well, everything you’re doing here with filters, pitch, volume and all that stuff is called “substractive synthesis”. Good morning!
Anyway, you’re going on ignore now, f*****g troll.
Do you try eating soup with a butter knife too? Renoise is a sample sequencer… it’s not meant to serve as a synthesizer. Hell, it doesn’t even have modular routing. Why on earth would you attempt to shoehorn a sample sequencer into being a full fledged synthesizer and complain at the devs when it acts too much like a sample sequencer and not as much like a synth?
somehow it’s the same as it has been with the effects, a channel strip, kinda
i always like it because i didn’t have to think about it much. then, when in need for free routing, the send devices / any “side” concepts failed to serve my needs, mainly because i just didn’t get it, not that it wouldn’t work somewhen.
both ways have their advantages
i don’t think r3 went the wrong way, but i agree that when someone takes time to do things, the free routing concent wins by far, since, in the end it allows everything
maybe (if it’s just this and not other problems) let everything be the “channel strip-way”, and later, r4 could offer a complete different view that allows free-routing and has cables initially plugged for the default routing, like reason: front = for dummies, back = for pros?..
i’m oversimplifying, sorry
but there are already many overlapping features: e.g. you can ramp in something destructivly in the sample editor, you can use adsr, envelope, fx commands. if you’re serious about the modular system, it cannot become modular, because actually renoise would have to remove features, in order to make it maintainable and keep documentation and user experience clear?.. lately i was using zebra often and urs heckmann simply started a new product that was more modular (ace and diva, dunno). that’s another possible way for the renoise team too, i guess.
i have my velocity -> cutoff now for slightly changing big acoustic multisamples, i guess it wasn’t possible in r2 and is now in r3. r3 has improved
beer/chips …get the moody right …
byte …you know what bit arts point is .
You know he has the skills to make some seriously crazy device chains …he is just pointing out that it could be better implemented in R 3.0 as it is now .
Yeah, great idea guys, let’s piss off the few people who actually know what they are talking about so that they leave the community…
We should actually rather focus on getting Renoise good on the rails here, R3 is just on Beta 2 and perhaps there may be several versions more. If bitching on each other in the wide open is a way of sorting out things for some people:now is not the right moment, please wait until R3 is final.
Btw… refering to this and the inefficient sample routing I mentioned here, this is what’s currently used in the background, when faking a single unison oscillator with just 8 notes:
- 512 envelopes, 1024 assigned parameters, 128 envelope modulators.
when a proper concept would only need
- 8 envelopes, 32 assigned parameters and 16 envelope modulators.
If I was going to fake a common 4 oscillator unison setup, it would be Renoise using for 8 voices
- 2048 envelopes, 4096 assigned parameters, 512 envelope modulators
And there are still no parameters like keytracking, velocity, LFOs and so on counted in yet. So it’s quite well possible, the whole Renoise usage becomes even a multiple of the above mentionend in the end. Using a filter, there would be running 64 Filters in Renoise, on a faked Sylenth1 setup it would be 128. When actually 8 / 16 would do the same in a properly designed concept.
What a tour de force. Happy renoising! You could also use your processor from 10 years ago with some other DAW of today. The result would most probably be the same or better. Just making way more sense for editing sounds. “Some redundancy”… what a bad joke.