Load Mt2 Modules To Renoise?

Why not? I think Renoise have all dsp effects and have compatible dsp ideology for that.
I think in present time MT2 project is near to it’s dead, and I’m not so like use of this editor, even for play & view my old mt2 modules. And MT2 project have very big collection of the nice and high quality tracked modules. Maybe Renoise can support convert MT2 to xrns in the features of next versions?

Most likely a feature like this would not appear in Renoise, but there might be a few trackers that can load MT2 modules and save them as .IT or .XM which can be loaded by Renoise.

Import features for IT and XM and MOD have been there from the beginning just to support the most favorite tracker formats. Most other formats like S3M are very easily convertible to .IT / .XM or .MOD in Modplug tracker without too much loss of compatibility. That is a good reason why not. In terms of progress and renewal, development time spend or better said wasted on past import formats is another good reason why not to support dead more formats.

See also:

vV Madtracker can convert mt2 to xm optional, and Renoise can load XM modules. But this is not interesting way for me. MT2 format more complicated than XM, I hope you know this. MT2 format have comparable possibilities with xrns format, and this is more old project, which have very good modules collection. I hope one day Renoise developers will want have possibility of listen and edit true mt2 modules in Renoise tracker. With help of integrated high quality converter mt2 to xrns.

not to be an ass here, but did ever MadTracker allow to load Renoise files? After all, XRNS is an open format…

seriously, if we support MT2 load, then why shouldn’t we also support Psycle? Skale? Why didn’t Skale or Psycle ever supported XRNS format?

I understand that many users would like their favourite format to be imported in Renoise, but the best thing to work on for our developer is the coding of the application; there is already a lot to do…

Sorry, but Skale and Psycle is not have many handreds of good modules in original format. As I know. And as I understand MT2 format have very similar to xrns song and mixer structure. It’s just a question…

I may be wrong, but MT2 is a closed and undocumented format, isn’t it?

this dramatically reduces the chances of seeing it’s import implemented, even if the structures are similar. Maybe Yannick, MT2 developer, if contacted, could enlighten us about the feasability of such a task.

this should really require very few work in order to be implemented, since we are currently in the middle (read: at the beginning) of so many changes that developing time is more precious than ever.

No, check this link:

And, as I know, author of Mad Tracker try to make his project opensource…

huh, good that the mt2.txt has been released, didn’t know that, thanks.

anyway, as far as I know, only MT3 is going to be released to a restricted set of choosen developers on sourceforge.net.

check out its project page, being quite inactive at the moment.


For example I think mt2 compo modules can be compared with beatbattle modules and site admins can check how many times beatbattle modules is downloaded from the site. And amount of this compo modules more then in beatbattles, and quality&technique of they is not worse. :walkman:

Wow, so the spec is right there, eh?

So, nothing’s stopping YOU, EternalEngine, from writing a conversion script.


Seriously, if you really want it, then you should really want to build it. Renoise’s XRNS structure is XML so a conversion script can be accomplished. Yes it might take you several years if you don’t know how to program, but in reality, the only thing stopping you is you.

The rest of us, who could probably write a conversion script, don’t care enough to do it.

If you have the passion, then write the script. If you have the money, then pay someone to write the script.

Otherwise, the reality is, this isn’t going to happen. Sorry.

Man your politenes can be better. As I said before it’s just a question and this question is not for you.

I may be wrong, but you are not Renoise developer. Why you speak for them?
I think more interesting tunes can make renoise more popular. And can entice more users to Renoise from another dying project.

I’m not speaking for them, I was making a prediction in the form of a statement.

If you can have an opinion that this should exist, then I can have the equal opinion that it shouldn’t.

Also, if you really want this, you could code this yourself. I was trying to light a fire under you. I think this would make a great third party application. It’s a shame that so many users ask for stuff to be done for them, like royalty, when if they made a little effort could do it themselves.

Sorry, didn’t mean to offend you.

Conner_BW Please not make flame here, this topic is not for this purpose.
And I’m not interesteng in your opinion, and hope developers is not interesting in it too.

I’m ignore rude and not adequate persons. You are not offend me you offend you if you say what you say.

Flamewar sucks ;)

But seriously: No one stops anyone to write a MT2->XRNS-Convertor but I understand that this is not really an easy task to do, especially because MT2 is a binary format AFAIK.

On the other hand it’s really quite simple to load MT2 in Renoise. Export to XM in MT and reload this in Renoise. In fact, there’s always some stuff to fix when converting from one format to another.

I think, the devs really should concentrate on optimizing and adding some usable features instead of importing old formats.

Most other tracker-projects simply died because they tried to import stuff from other trackers and everytime there were rants about the lack of quality the import had. As I work as a developer myself I can understand that I would prefer new features instead of being “downgrade compatible”.

MT2 had its time, MT3 is coming soon and for XM/IT we have the fantastic Milkytracker. For cross-converting there’s modplug (even DMF, S3M and 669 are possible).

I can understand the point that somebody might want to load MT2 in Renoise but I think that is the same direction as “I want a renoise VST” - it might be useful but at least it goes against the logic. No one would even think about Cubase as a VST or Logic…

Just my 0.02 Euro

Out of curiosity, what would be a good enough conversion ?
I can imagine some people migrating from other less active tracker projects and want to continue on their music in Renoise. The reason I’m wondering is that it might not be needed to do an as “perfect” conversion as might be possible, but perhaps something more basic could do. Not that I have any plan on doing the conversion software but it might be interesting for anyone that might want to give it a shot.

(With basic conversin i mean just the note data and sample data, volume and panning and such, no automation or other note-data that might require lots of tinkering to get right in all situations)

– codec

indeed your question is a good one, codec.

we have learned that, whatever you offer, users will always demand for more; I’m not complaining about this behaviour: it’s simply a fact.

the perfect conversion should for example convert MT2 filter commands into Renoise similars, retain mixer settings, and so on.

since XRNS is an open format, and the other projects are labeled by most people as “died” or “dying”, it would be quite more reasonable if some users of the dying project would work to a 2XRNS conversion tool, instead of Renoise developers working at all the conversions.

Also, since Renoise clearly has the biggest set of features amongst all trackers, and has an open format, it would be reasonable if any new tracker project would at least have the ability to import XRNS files, if not even base its own format on XRNS.

In present time for me Renoise have all what needed for fine music creation. And I think developers can add some “not main” functions. Just for fun. For example support of the mt2 format. :D

P.S. I’m not programmer in present time, I can’t make convertor be myself, and I think developers of Renoise can make it better than other peoples. And I think integrated converter is more useful. :)

That is for you, i for one could thing of a few features that would be quite helpful thats currently not in Renoise (MT2 import is not one of them). Noone is stopping you (or anyone else) to make the import.

I for one feel that the renoise developers could spend time on rather than doing MT2 import that is one thing that could be done as a standalone 3rd part application/script.

As i said in the previous post, i can understand that people that migrate from other software want some way of converting their work to Renoise but requesting that and then go on and say things that Renoise have all functionality for me and that the Renoise developers should add stuff that “I” require, well, i do hope you can see the absurdity in that. I’m pretty sure Renoise wasn’t coded just for you.

But what would be good enough MT2 import ? If i where to try and do the import i would not even try to get everything imported since that would take “forever”, but would lets say basic note-data (note, volume, panning), patterns and sample/instrument suffice ?

– codec

I really doubt that. In fact, coding a convertor is more complex than writing a new feature because you have to analyze the old fileformat and “upgrade” all the oldschool-stuff 100% XRNS-compatible. And even though the MT2 format might be documented, there’s always missing some important stuff in the docs.

DMF (old Xtracker) was documented as well but NO tracker/player was able to reproduce the desired effects on that. Even MOD-Files are not played 100% accurate nowadays. XMPlay or milkytracker get bugfixes now and then because one special XM is not played the way it sounded in FT2.

Format-docs are nice but too theoretical. The coders ALWAYS use some undocumented stuff in their formats. That’s not intentional but sometimes coding is more important than writing a file-documentation ;)

N00B’s, you can already open .MT2 files in Renoise.