I cannot replicate this; however, I have added some control code which should prevent this from happening in version 0.34
I tried to make the dialog modal before, but I had one problem: since “show_custom_prompt” requires a button array to be passed as a parameter, I had three options:
-
put the “Generate” button in the array, which has the drawback that you cannot visually preview the sample since, after you hit “Generate”, the dialog will close, while now you can generate samples at will until you find the one which fits your needs; you can also preview them by clicking on Renoise GUI and hitting a note key
-
pass a void array {} to the function, which works good but has two drawbacks: the generated wave will be only visible when you close the dialog, and a void space will be created at the bottom of the dialog which should contain the buttons of the array.
-
pass an array containing only {“Close”}, which is a bit ugly and still has the drawback that the visual preview is not possible
Ic. Let me add some
“song.instrument_list_changed_notifier” and song.sample_list_changed_notifier
to the API then better soon than later…
to the author of the magnificent Generate Custom Wave tool:
i believe a small detail might be of use. could you make it so that a new sample created with this tool does not get the name ‘New Sample 33’, but instead recieves a composite name based on the given parameters (for example ‘Sine A4 dB10’ or something like that). that way, if you created a couple of waves with this thing, you would know without having to rename them what each sample is.
your idea id good, but it would be very hard to write in a short and understandable way the parameters of a 6 operators synth. any real scenario idea?
yes i realised that when looking at the parameters. that’s why my example had only the kind of wave (sine) and the note (c4). i believe those are the real important things. however, i notice now that i did not realise the amount of options for this tool. i thought it could create 1 wave (sine,square,saw,pulse,etc), but upon closer inspection, it allows you to create composite waves as well. and you are absolutely right that generating a filename from all those options is difficult. so to answer your question: no, i have no real scenario idea. it might be possible to just add the note (c4) to the sample name, as that is only a single value.
A text box where you can enter a name before creating the sample, rather than having to rename it afterwards?
solutions can be so simple. that is a good idea.
yet another upgrade to v0.80.
two new kind of operators have been introduced:
-
Variator: at each step, this operator adds noise to the signal by variating the value its previous stepby a definable range. Unlike noise generator, then, does not give completely random results but gives a sort of “random path” to the signal.
-
Morpher: it takes two other operators as mandatory parameters: it will gradually morph the signal of the first into the second, completing the transformation into an user definable amount of time. of course, the two source operators will be considered as modulators and then their original waves will not be rendered
also, some bugs have been fixed. in order to avoid issues with modulators and the GUI, now the dropdown menu containing the operators will always show all 6 operators, regardless of if they can be used as modulators or not, but if you will select an operator which is not available, the selection will be reset to “NONE”
Cool, great work!
I hope i have not oversee it. Would it not nice to select a range say C-2 to C-6 and generate all ocatve one sample by adding a step feature?
Bambooli: I have not understood your message completely. If you are looking for a way to generate one sample per each note of a range with a single operation, then there are the two dropdown boxes at the top of the dialog (“First note” and “Last note”). There is no way to decide how many samples to generate in the range, if this is what you are missing. It is not difficult to make it, but I decided not to add this in order to avoid to crowd the interface too much.
Yes this is what i mean. 
why exactly do you would want to have such a feature, by the way?
in the end, the aim of the tool is to generate small samples, so there should not be any problem in having several small samples instead of some. Please convince me to add this feature 
I dont need a sample on every key. On the other side i think small samples dont explode the size of a song. You dont create large pad samples on every key with your tool.
Hm… 
this is exactly what I said indeed. I think that the way it is now is a good compromise considering the idea behind the tool