Multiple Outputs Routing For The Internal Renoise Sampler ?

[vvoois (vV)]

@subskan

“renoise internal instruments” ? you mean vst?

Nopes, i mean internal sample based instruments.
Your english is powerfull enough, my English is quite often too ambiguous, so apologize for not being a little more clearer.

[fladd]

@vV

Renoise already processes each internal instrument stream individually no matter which track they are used.

Each instrument, right. But we are talking about single channels withing each instrument here. Like a drumset, which should be Though there are plenty of other uses for this, so you get my +1one instrument, but with different output channels, such that you can record the whole drumset per midi or whatever in one go (and thus, due to the way Renoise works into one track), but still have the ability to process each drum differently. (Like adding a reverb on the snare only, but not on the kick). Basically, just the way a hardware sampler would work, it has different audio outputs so that you can route different samples to different channels on your mixer.

fladd

[subskan]

@fladd

Each instrument, right. But we are talking about single channels withing each instrument here. Like a drumset, which should be Though there are plenty of other uses for this, so you get my +1one instrument, but with different output channels, such that you can record the whole drumset per midi or whatever in one go (and thus, due to the way Renoise works into one track), but still have the ability to process each drum differently. (Like adding a reverb on the snare only, but not on the kick). Basically, just the way a hardware sampler would work, it has different audio outputs so that you can route different samples to different channels on your mixer.

fladd

hey fladd!!
that’s the best explanation i’d say

thanx… maybe should i have to change the topic title so it’s clearer to get directly understood…
i also thought about saying: “A new option near the interpolation/NewNoteAction/Sync for each sample so you can fix an assigned audio output routing, or let it free… regardless to the fact that it’s a multisampled or single sampled base instrument”… but it was too long for a title

also, just as you also sayed about adding reverb on a snare in the same instrument, we can easily imagine some sampled synth layers, sound effects kits, splited synths, etc… all of these played with a single keyboard, but with the audio moving in different traks or sends…as you say, just like hardware/vst samplers do…

@fladd

Nopes, i mean internal sample based instruments.
Your english is powerfull enough, my English is quite often too ambiguous, so apologize for not being a little more clearer.

lol,
i think i wasn’t enough clear… but your english is powerfull too!
… your answer about the sampled base instrument confused me… check at the fladd’s answer so it’s gonna be clearer i think … as i sayed, maybe should i have to change the title?

[subskan]

once upon a time everybody here was happy to discover multi out for some vsts… (like myself)… using stuffs like drumatic etc was a little bit frustrating 2 years ago (with only 1 output)…
i still feel the same frustration for the internal renoise sampler actualy…
i really hope i won’t have to wait 2 more years to enjoy this “SIMPLE” added option…!

[subskan]

@BitArts

I get your point, but I can’t really get the practical use of this. When I use a drumkit with 10,15 maybe 20 samples I can’t see the advantage of messing all these sample up in one track, only to route them to empty tracks then. Even if you arrange really organized and disciplined within your drum track then the only use would be you jump from subchannel #1 to subchannel #14 instead from track#l to track#14.

Yeah, you may stone me now…

Edit: In fact it is an ADVANTAGE you don’t have to route them, because you currently can use them in a most flexible way on each and every channel and route. So routing in the instrument editor would rather be a huge step back.

A multi-out on any device is a solution for the logical problem of using a single device producing multiple signals which you want to handle independent. You don’t have this problem with XRNIs in any way, because you are not bound to a single output/track. And now you want to be!?

i want the “freedom” to decide witch sample go on witch track… just the freedom… i don’t mean changing the allready existing renoise way of composing, but just ADD a new “OPTIONAL sample TRACK ROUTING” or to simplify, “default or fixed output”… i talk about drumkits but it’s not the only potential use…

using 60 traks for the SOUND but ONLY 5 traks FOR THE STRUCTURE is, for me, a huge step in the future! and prevent to get lost by looking for a sample during hours…

thanx for your answer

btw, congrats 4 your 303 emulation

[subskan]

Layers / Instrument-Container

a new internal instrument but not to generate sound itself but to contain, combine some other instruments, internal sampler or vsts… so you need to fix audio from each “children instrument” contained in this layer before composing… about the internal sampler, that means adding a “fix / free” audio out for each sample… but it’s possible i think… or just only to use vsts…

[vvoois (vV)]

@subskan

once upon a time everybody here was happy to discover multi out for some vsts… (like myself)… using stuffs like drumatic etc was a little bit frustrating 2 years ago (with only 1 output)…
i still feel the same frustration for the internal renoise sampler actualy…

Frustration? Why? I mean, i can see some advantages, but i don’t really miss it. You can go anywhere with the internal instruments without needing that function if it regards routing.

[fladd]

@BitArts

I can’t see the advantage of messing all these sample up in one track, only to route them to empty tracks then.

Then you probably don’t have a midi keyboard, drumpads or an e-drum kit.

When you record from one of these devices, all notes go into one and the same track (except you record each drum on it’s own, which again kind of misses the point of playing them anyway )

fladd

[subskan]

ANOTHER EXAMPLE???

imagine more than 30 different wavs (drums or whatever)…

and you want them to be played ONLY ONE AT THE SAME TIME!!!, with CUTS BETWEEN THEM!! so no release (or maybe one from time to time)…

but you want more than one single track can offer (ex: random pan from time to time, moving filter, dist, different eqs, lfo-ed vsts, sends, etc.)

isn’t it simpler to open 1 track for the structure (with the ability to make quick changes between cloned new patterns, NEW NOTE ACTION!!, insert/delete, pattern commands, etc.) and 30 traks for the receiving audio containing the effects/filters/random pan etc…

than opening 30 traks, starting to jump between them to be sure that there are not 2 samples at the same time, (be sure to go on pref and choose “tiny fonts” )sure to apply a note off before the next starts on the next channel, then press tab, insert the new one, note off, tab again, new one, note off, tab, new one,

oops, i made a mistake,

shift tab, delete previous, rewrite at the good place, re-note off, then press tab again, insert the new one, note off, tab again, new one, note off, tab, new one, …then press tab again, insert the new one, note off, tab again, new one, note off, tab, new one,then press tab again, insert the new one, note off, tab again, new one, note off, tab, new one

(with the “copy paste”, i can assure we’re not in shining )

[fladd]

@BitArts

Heh… nice one.

Sorry, I can’t follow your argumentation. The fact it is the way you described (you have to get used with the limits that hardware handling brings) makes it an advantage for everything else? Nice joke. Further more we’re exactly NOT talking about MIDI devices.

Sorry, I don’t get what you are saying there. But to re-explain my point: In any other sequencer I can record a whole e-drumset into one single midi track, but still have the actual audio output routing on single tracks for each of the drums in there, such that I can put a reverb on the snare, but not on the kick, although they are all in the same midi track. That is what we want from Renoise as well, record everything into one track (this actually is a limitation of Renoise! If I could decide which midi notes go into which track and could record them simultaneously into several tracks, that would be just fine as well!) and then route the sound from the sampler which is played by the note information in that track to different output channels (or other tracks), depending on which note value/sample they are (or whatever criterion).

Hope that makes it more clear.

fladd

[subskan]

@BitArts

The fact you don’t have the limitations of MIDI hardware in Renoise is a limitation of Renoise, because it doesn’t have the solution available for a problem that it doesn’t have. I understand. And talking about output routing you actualy mean input routing. I understand once more.

If you ever find a serious, professionl producer arranging his drums within one track - without being in need for it - let me know.

arranging track = drummer’s seat and body

receiving audio signal tracks = microphones on toms, snare, etc

[kickofighto]

It took me a while bu tI see why this makes perfect sense. In the meantime I’m gonna try using keytrack on send destination. Should be tolerable so long as nna is cut and there’s only one hit at a time
I wonder if scripting will allow one to modify this? Probably not, looking at lua, but what so I know…

[subskan]

@vV

Frustration? Why? I mean, i can see some advantages, but i don’t really miss it. You can go anywhere with the internal instruments without needing that function if it regards routing.

Frustration? with renoise!!!???

never!!!

just a suggestion i just’d really find this feature usefull… i often miss it when i’m lost jumping between tracks when there is only one sample every 2 patterns…
don’t know if (hope) you understand more now…

[subskan]

@Tehnik

another weird topic…

why cant you just record what you want in one track, and then just move notes to individual tracks? so every sample has it’s own channel and you can process them any way u like

because it can be done with too much manipulations and it soon becomes boring…

[kazakore]

It’s pretty much an extension of this idea, but rather than tieing whole instruments you can tie notes (samples) within an instrument.

Dedicated Instrument Tracks

Hi, One thing that sometimes irritates me, is that I loose track of my instrument when jumping from one track to another. I know there is the capture instrument option, but that only works when there’s note data. I don’t know how you guys are working, but I’m always using a single instrument per track. Making the tracks dedicated will also improve the usability of the p-matrix. The option could be showed as a drop-down containing all instruments per track in the new “commands”-tool bar. By de…

I can see how it would be useful, especially for those that play their drum parts in live or have been using a keyboard split but I don’t think it’s something I would personally use.

And it can’t currently be done. Sure you could write something to edit the offline xrns data and then reload the song and once scripting comes in you should be able to do it (almost) live but I can see why people might like Renoise to do it automatically, if asked to do so.

[fladd]

@BitArts

Again… you want to split up what you put together before without any need. If not necassary no single producer/audio engineer in the world will put things together to split them up again later.

I still can’t get the problem of putting a snare into a snare track and a kick into a kick track. Specially not if you organize your track order with a little bit of discipline.

You want to use a DAW, but you don’t want to arrange like a DAW user. Question: Is it a DAW problem or a user problem?

Oh come on, now your are just trolling! You know exactly that it is not possible in Renoise to input into several tracks simultaneously! I actually said it before, the problem could be either fixed by the input OR the output routing (so don’t tell me I confuse them with each other). So what do you think serious DAW-users and producers do? Do you think they first play and record the kick drum, then in the next take they record only the low tom, then the mid tom and so on? Because if this is the case, then you are right, I wasn’t aware at all that this is how the pros do it and I apologize! But in that case, I just don’t want to do it like the pros

But on a more serious note: You do understand the issue at hand, right? (I am not sure you do, especially when you start talking about the limitations of MIDI…) I mean I appreciate that you don’t care for that functionality, but you should at least be able to see the usage (and you should also be aware that this is the way practically all other DAWs work).

fladd

[Moonriders]

Ah, separating the pattern editor’s tracks, from the dsp routing and a tracks input method.

In many ways I would like to see the dsp routing join with the actual instrument also, be it vst or sampler instrument.
Association of many effects commands in the pattern editor could also be instrument specific, instead of the current track only specific implementation.
While having the instrument tied to the dsp routing directly, we would still need the track effects along with this, as some effects commands are track specific.

This is pretty big, as the current pattern input method for the pattern editor is track specific, it’s why we can’t record multiple MIDI-IN’s in real-time.

+1 I enjoy OP’s idea, I don’t know if it could be as simple as previously stated, but I see the merit.

[subskan]

@BitArts

Again… you want to split up what you put together before without any need. If not necassary no single producer/audio engineer in the world will put things together to split them up again later.

I still can’t get the problem of putting a snare into a snare track and a kick into a kick track. Specially not if you organize your track order with a little bit of discipline.

You want to use a DAW, but you don’t want to arrange like a DAW user. Question: Is it a DAW problem or a user problem?

thank you

btw, i’ve never sayed that it’s a “problem” placing my kiks, hats, chords etc on their respective tracks, … (that’s what i do since my first e-mu with cubase on atari, i was discovering the “more than 4 traks limitation of the amiga”, and later in logic… ) so once again, thank you

i just suggest. so please keep your “user problem” for you…

i think you consider my request like some kind of critic about renoise… not at all, but i still can’t understand why refusing a simple “added feature suggestion”

If this feature ever happen one day, and if you don’t like it, JUST LEAVE THIS OPTION OFF and continue your way, nothing will change for you!

[subskan]

@Tehnik

BitArts totally right - why overcomplicate things that work well now ?

complicate? as i allready sayed, if you don’t like it, if ever it’s added one day, just leave it off… that won’t change anything…
just an additional feature… on or off, free or fix…

[fladd]

@BitArts

Well, in case we’re talking about a live-drummer everything is recorded with specialized microphones for each drum/percussion group, so each and everyone can be EQed, compressed etc. separately. Which means, each of them will have its own track.

I am talking about recording midi inputs live. Something that is done in probably every studio production nowadays. Think of any hardware synth, drummachine or whatever. No one is recording only the audio of those things. At least not in the beginning. You play your synth, sampler, drummachine, whatever and record midi first, just in case you need to fix something afterwards. You know, a “sequencer”, be it in hard or software, is a piece of gear that is only made for exactly that thing, namely sequencing and controlling other electronic instruments via MIDI which will then produce sound that is then recorded into a multitrack recorder for mixing.

Anyway, I think you know exactly what I am talking about

fladd