Instrument modulation concept

Ideas & suggestions
121

I really don’t see why the way things work in Buzz or Reaktor (for example) can’t be implemented in Renoise. Renoise has some of the elements in place already, with sound generators (samples and VST instruments), and modulations and effects. What is lacking in Renoise is a flexible and modular way to route audio (and MIDI) signals to create the sounds the composer needs to write their songs efficiently.

Yes, a modular approach might expose too much detail and complexity for some, but the new macro concept in Renoise deals with this nicely provided a good number of preset instruments, modulations and effects are bundled with the application. If someone just wants to just use samples with a few effects and simple modulations, they are not going to be dealing with spaghetti hell.

IMO the Sampler and Plugin tabs in Renoise should be combined into a single Instrument tab, where an instrument can consist of generators including samples, VSTi plugins and native Renoise synths (one day, please?) with a GUI that allows both basic (eg macros and presets) and deep and flexible modular editing and routing of samples and instruments (ala Buzz or Reaktor).

A modular approach is the only sensible way forward, and the weird way of doing things in the Renoise 3.0 beta offers no advantages over a proper modular system in my view.

122

lol. modular from people that seem to never have wrote down a modular patch (ever) or used an m1 (ever). lots of pontificating.

CURIOUS. What exactly has failed for you in the current system? The 303 example means little and can be worked around in a different way.

[specific examples, these are no knocks. i know they are there. just for curious consideration if you will indulge.]

123

I agree.

124

Of course agreed.

  
1: 16 [+Operand]  
2: 5 1/3 [+Operand]  
3: 8 [+Operand]  
4: 4 [+Operand]  
5: 2 2/3 [+Operand]  
6: 2 [+Operand]  
AHDSR --(* Target 1-6)--> Target

Would be the propper modular setup for this. That’s pretty much the same, just not shot through your knee, up the back into the eye. I still don’t get the point of sends. Really.

So, if I’d search for the trigger of (e.g.) volume, I’d probably have to search in cutoff, resonance, pan or pitch. That doesn’t make any sense to me. While at this point I have at least to admit, considering usability, this would also be a weak point of my own concept, as it there would make more sense to list triggers in the target domain, instead of listing target domains in the triggers.

Sideways, upside down, left to right, backwards, forwards. Do you really expect people to follow this? Who ever is going to use Renoise/Redux to setup instruments is expecting a conclusive signal and parameter flow. And it seems a bit, like there is some priority to make it different from everyone else on this planet. What is the sense behind this? I really don’t get it.

Let’s just talk frankly, please. What would currently be the biggest problem(s ?) of setting up a proper modular concept? Is it the GUI, the concept itself, the code behind it? Help me to understand your problems, pls.

125

For now, the best possible compromise between the actual modulation logic, and a “less redundant modulation logic” is to add a “#send” system in the renoise 3 modulation system.
BUT The only way to make it work for everybody is to create “post modulators”.

[¤] Here are the “Post” Modulators.

I see it like “independant instances” for sample Volume, sample Panning, sample Pitch (with range box), sample Filter Cutoff, sample Filter Resonnance. I’d call them “Post” because they’re always located after all the others modulators in the set chains. You can drag & drop one (or more) Post Modulators from a dedicated list. On the top left side, you can easily “see” where are the “Post modulators” are placed in all the full modulation set list. It could help.

1358×364 111 KB

As you can see, introducing “Post Modulators” implies that the actual Modulators become more “abstract”, I mean : independants.

Saying that, some simple rules / limitations could be coded here to make things work : you can’t get for example 2 or 3 Volume Post Modulators in the same modulation set. You’re limited to just 1 instance of it. Same thing for the other types of Post Modulators. Concerning the Filter post modulator : if you add for example Filter Res. when you’ve allready added a Filter Cut. before, the filter type (example, RingMod) is automatically set as the same as the type previously selected on the left.

[¤] Now we can introduce the #Out Modulator. (the same thing as a #send device but adapted to modulation sets)

1508×361 106 KB

You can see that with this, modulations can be routed to other modulation sets. The design is similar to what we allready use for DSP tracks routings so the “learning curve” won’t be a problem, no spaghetti hell here.

[¤] Then what about adding a *Hydra modulator ?

1512×390 117 KB

Okay it’s not a modular design at all, but we have better chances to see that kind of thing in the next release.

126

I need coffee.

127

looks like i picked the wrong week to quit sniffing glue

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lyhaTQseKTQ

128

I’d like to see what KURTZ suggested. Modulation chains with (almost) normal meta devices. LFO:s and envelopes could be global and/or triggered by keytracker device.

Everything hooked to vol, ptc, pan parameters on a “note device”. It’s consistent with how Renoise works, and it would be worth ditching the realtime envelope monitor for this imo.

129

Don’t worry, it looks like you are the only one in this thread.

130

I’m member of a small closed Synthmaster2 discussion group about sound design, features, issues and evolution. People like Aiyn Zahev and Rob Lee are members of this group. Rob just posted a clip there, designing a pad sound on Synthmaster. Who knows the name, will instantly agree, it won’t get more pro. Why I’m posting this video here is, because it gives you an idea of how much work goes into serious design for a single sound, even when you already know what you’re heading for and even if your name is Rob Lee. Synthmaster is a well prepared platform, but still requires Rob almost 8 minutes for a single sound.

Setting up this sound with the same architecture in Renoise atm would in best case take about an 1 hour, I’d assume. Probably more. And it would be redundant like hell, using a few hundred envelopes. A pretty good example for the problems caused by the current system, because Renoise “actually” has almost everything available to do sounds like that.

And patchwork like meta-sends are not gonna solve it.

131

While i Of course like the video and I thank you for posting it, I have to underline the fact that Renoise is not a synthesizer, so it cannot focus its attention to such level of details in the sound designing aspect of the composition, unless the development of other features will stop for months (I don’t think it took a week to create such a modular environment).

Also, because Synthmaster is a synth, its features are strictly designed to be used in a synth; there are oscillators (a maximum of two, I think?) of which you can choose the type and have their own interfaces, there is a modular scheme, and so on.

Renoise is not a synth; it is a sequencer whcih has a sampler inside which, because of or thanks to its more general purposeness, in some sense offers more freedom at the cost of more effort required. What I want to say is that, no matter the effort the developers will put on, I don’t think the speed and easiness of sound designing in renoise will be ever comparable to that

This said, a structure with per-sample and per-instrument modulation as you suggested is really important to add and I understand that the aim of your post was not to suggest to the developers to recreate something strictly similar to what you have shown

132

@ it alien

I already said it on page 2 …hear hear

Ok some people here assume that renoise is not a synth, but a sampler .
A sampler is bassically a subtractive synthesizer with the exact same modulation sources and desitinations ( except pulse width, but this can be mimicked .) as in a regular subtractive synth , subtractive filtering , layering etc.
The ony diffrerence is that a sampler uses a sample as a sound source , so why not give renoise all the modulation advantages a sampler has …instead of an arcane modulation scheme .

133

Still the OSC architecture of a synth and a proper set up sample player are the same. At least they should be. In fact the basic Synthmaster architecture is quite comparable to Renoise, as it works sample based too, just using additional resynthesis and additional modulations. It’s not an excuse to say “Renoise is not a synth”, because the new instrument features clearly imply, it can be used as such. I’m really not expecting Renoise to become an easy-workflow-platform for sound design. I’d just expect a properly working architecture of the OSCs and envelopes, which would bring Renoise way closer to a more fluent work with sounds. Withthe current state Renoise in the end is giving away a huge potential it has.

134

First of all , Bit_Arts, comparing the SynthMaster plugin software synth, with the “Sampler” within Renoise, is strange : why should we compare a software “synth” with a software “sampler” ? Even if there are relationships, this isn’t exactly the same thing. To be fair enough with Renoise 3.0.0beta we should first try to compare “other know samplers” with Renoise. Examples of big names :

Halion 3, Propellerhead NN-XT, EXS24, Avid Structure, Ableton Sampler, Yellow tools independance pro, Emulator X3 from EMU, MachFive 2 from Motu, and kontak 4.

Renoise, clearly, doesn’t want to be the best software synth of all times. It could just be a good competitor / challenger for those previous big names… in a short future. With Renoise 3.0, a “first step” has been made into this direction. The “sampler” tab only allows your favourite tracker to be compared to other samplers in the market no more no less. If the devteam wanted you to get a native synth they would have provided a native “high speed lfo” in it… And clearly, the devteam never promissed that a native synth would be included in this release. You see ?

Then, concerning my little meta-modulators mockups I’ve drawn yesterday : they’re based on “tracks modulations” that are successfull, and that everybody love to use. No ? You won’t say that this way of modulatiing parameters is the weak point of Renoise. It is probably one of the the reason why people like Renoise so much. Nobody would agree with the idea that Renoise-style cross track modulations are a “maldeveloppement”. Saying that, for now, since those meta-modulators don’t exist / aren’t coded, nobody can truely compare things and make experimentations with a chronometer. You say that building a patch would take one hour… ? … ? Maybe 30mn ? Maybe, 15 mn ? Maybe a complete day ? Nobody can truely and seriously test/compare the ease of use and integration in the general workflow.

Now, I recognise that the Synthmaster Plugin solution is quite amazing : a quality product, not that expansive. 213.85$ only for all those cool features. That’s a great deal. And Renoise, that has no built in synth : is perfectly compatible with it. People that want to build a patch in 8mn with Synthmaster can load it as a VSTi.

135

another thing I want to underline is:

don’t understimate the power of phrases: they not only provide a way to create complex arpeggios, drum lines, and so on, but can also help creating sounds.

take for example the sound attached to this post: here a phrase is used to create a per-instrument envelope using command 0Exx to move the instrument through the whole envelope.

other easy examples of phrase usages are combinations of waveforms, unisons, harmonics, detuning (01xx/02xx), phasing (delay column), gates (0Txx, Ocxx), probability triggering (0Yxx, Yx), sound morphing (one wave’s volume ramps down while another ramps up), granularity and scanning (0Sxx + 0Yxx, 0Bxx and Bx) …

136

@KURTZ

See my posting above. Synthmaster IS comparable. Beside that I doubt any of the samplers you listed is using a redundant concept like the one in Renoise or their developers even would consider or accept something like that. Also the argumentation of using VSTs fails, because then you could also drop the sampler, as there are lots of sampler VST out there. This is not a competition about finding excuses for something.

Yes, Meta-Sends are a joke to me and nothing but that. That’s like triggering the windshield wipers of a car from the exhaust pipe. What kind of concept is this supposed to be? Sound design by chaos theory? I really wonder about the fact, a suggestion like that comes from someone like you. I’d have thought you know better. Instead you’re defending an obvious mess of a concept and suggest to make it even more messy.

137

Oh yeah, ramp up the lpb and a phrase becomes some kind of wavetable oscillator. Similar to how I’ve used the variable function generator in the analogue studio of the conservatory in the Hague for controlling oscillators. The great thing about the variable function generator is that you can voltage control the speed of the steps through a lfo (for example run though a sample and hold etc).

If Renoise would let you control the speed, lpb of a phrase (through automation or lfo), have control over the trajectory, random, drunken walk etc, this open up much more soundsculpting possibilities.

138

My own room is messy. I live in a mess. And because it’s MY mess : I find it perfectly in order.

And when anyone would take an hour to find an object in my mess : me I would just take 8 minutes.

139

Well, why not give it a go then!? You’ve got 8 minutes. Looking forward to that sound. :)

140

I’ve lost the challenge in 8 minutes : I started my chronometer, and looked at the 8 minutes video, showing a Synthmaster master quickly doing a patch with Synthmaster in 8 minutes.

I hope that you didn’t misunderstood the subtle nature of my previous answer. I wanted to say that what you’re talking about is somehow more subjective than objective.

The “speed” you need to do things on a system you’re used to and that you like, and that you’ve mastered, can’t be compared with the speed you need on a system you “discover” or don’t know well, because you don’t use it all the time.

So if I ask one of those Synthmaster gurus, to look at a video in witch a skilled tracker guy uses all new possible phrase editor tricks to build an uncommon .xrni patch. Then if I ask a Synthmaster master to reproduce those “renoise specific phrase editor tricks” through Synthmaster, in a very short time, 8 min, as fast as he can, : imagine, he could take one hour… just to understand Renoise concepts behind the video. Would I explain then, that the Synthmaster interface is “messy”, because of a maldeveloppement ? Of course, no.

I’m talking about “fair” comparisons. Synthmaster looks good, but I’ve no real experience with it. This is not MY favourite software. And on the other side, some masters of Synthmaster will say the same about Renoise, they don’t use it. They’ll tell you they need some time to go into it. For lots of DAW users, Renoise is strange,uncomon, and requires time. People that come from the Ableton scene, that discover Renoise & trackers for the first time take 30 minutes to do things that a skilled tracker will do in 3 minutes, because it’s so uncommon to use trackers for them. Same thing about people used to Piano Rolls. They hope to see Piano Rolls inside Renoise, because they’ve discovered DAWs and are born with Piano Rolls. When for example, a user looks at a modular synth screencaps : two reactions (1) cool it’s like Buzz I used Buzz I know Buzz I want it in Renoise. Or (2) : “what a spaghetti hell”. And everybody has “good reasons”.

It simply shows that behind rationnal motivations, we’re all very subjective.

One day I’ve talked with a musician that revealed me that “programming music was’nt making true music”, he told me that “all my music was fake”. Because “true music is done in realtime, everything else is illusion”. The guy was a professionnal guitarist. One day I’ve met someone else, that said that the metal music that was performed by the previous realtime guitarist, was “noise”. And that the true music wasn’t noisy, that noisy music was some fake crap. After hours of debates, I realised that “noise” is a subjective term used by someone that fears some sounds and emotions brought by them. Noise can be heavily descripted in more scientific terms but behind the usage of this term : there is something totally subjective. One day I’ve realised a mockup about a multicolor vertical piano roll for Renoise. Just a mockup, because I was curious to see how it could look. People that liked PR totally agreed with it, and had plenty of rationnal reasons to like it. While other ones said that adding this into Renoise would be a complete betrayal of the tracker philosophy.

Who needs good reasons to add the highest levels of modularity into Renoise ? The only true reason I would accept is : because you like it.