NEWS: BUZZ SUPPORT!

General Discussion
1

Finally we made a deal with Oskari Tammelin, author/creator of Buzz plugin format. In near future version Renoise will be supporting Buzz plugins!

It will be offered as “separate version” (read:“more expensive”).
Although these prices may change, here is a full list:

$66 for Buzz-enabled version. This will be called “Pro” version, but you can call it “Enterprise”, “Intergalactic” or whatever you like. This version includes all the benefits of the normal version - upgrades etc. Includes all the features. This is price for first-time registration. This is also a “bundle” price.

$45 “Normal” version (current), call it “Budget” version although it is not a budget at all :) It includes all the current features except Buzz support.

$26 Upgrade to Buzz-enabled version. Does not extend registration period of registered version. (yes, your math it correct, $26+$45 = $71 :)

$20 - Upgrade fee to Buzz version only for current registered users and only for a limited time. (true it’s $65).

We will of course announce if there are any price changes and when we will start with distribution. First it needs some testing and development time.

We know many of you simply don’t care about Buzz, however we need to offer a choice to people that want Buzz otherwise they would feel limited and Renoise is everything but limiting piece of software (we sincerely hope).

Note:
Buzz version will NOT be offered at all in free version of Renoise. Therefore only registered users will be able to enjoy the benefit of this one.

We hope the price is fair, we’re still below 3 digits unlike some “professional” music software…

If you have further questions feel free to post it.

2

i know nothing about buzz! … and in w.i.p.??? it seems that nobody needs it!? … DirectX is more interessting (4 me) - or protools-effect support …

but i will inform me about buzz … maybe it’s useful … B)

3

When will it be ready & how do we upgrade? (I don’t expect you to answer these questions, they’re supposed to show how excited I am)
Also, just to be clear, this will provide support for both generators & effects?

Alexander: To learn more about buzz, go to buzzmachines.com or buzzXP.

4

Also, just to be clear, this will provide support for both generators & effects?

yes, we will support both …

5

to be honest I think this pretty much suck!
where will it end? how many separate versions will it be in the end? renoise buzz edition, renoise standard edition, renoise mp3 edition, renosie buzz+mp3 edition etc. etc.
And I think it is pretty insane to pay 50% extra just to get support to an interface!!! Does all this money go directly down into the pocket of our dear Mr. Tammelin??? I think the whole thing sounds very suspicious. Does he have patent on his interface? Or why else shall you pay such amounts to him? If he don’t have a patent he will pretty sure never get one, I’m pretty sure about that you can’t get a patent for an API, only for the full sulotion.
And do NOT call the standard edition “budget”. That is the one that shall be called enterprise edition… the other version shall only be called buzz version… else, whatever you say, people will think the buzz version will cotain more things than just buzz support and buy that version instead of the standard edition… And I realy do not see any good thing in encouraging people to buy that version instead of the “normal” one… I know how I think myself: I want to have the whole cake, and even if I’ll never use the buzz-support I do not realy like to sitting a “standard” edition when there is a “enterprice” edition, so I will probably be one of thouse who will pay thouse extra dollars to get the upgraded version… gasshh… ;)
And btw, do you have to pay the extra amount every time you upgrade your registration? If so it’s even MORE insane… case the support is only added one time and will not be different in further versions…

An boycott of buzz would have been so much esier ;)
Do the buzz-support but change the name of the methods in the interface to something similar so it will be easy for buzz-plugin-developers to convert their plugs… And then you do without doubt not neeed to pay any singel penny to mr Oskari… come on!!

6

Hmm mixed feelings… Last time I checked, Buzz was free, last time I checked there was a whole community of coders making machines… surely oskari doesn’t have copyright/control over all of these machines - which were generously contributed by other coders… Supporting Psycle machines would be better. Sure, there aren’t as many as there are for Buzz, but that will no doubt change with time, and the current ones are pretty good ;)

I’m not bitching, it’s not a bad idea, but if I really wanted Buzz machines that badly, I’d use Buzz - for free.

7

I assume that Oskaari will earn money on a per-copy basis, so if you don’t want to support him, don’t complain about ReNoise supporting Buzz: just don’t buy the “Pro” version.

btw: yes, “pro” is quite a sucking name for such a version: I don’t think that what could turn ReNoise into a professional tool is Buzz support.

Call it “ReBuzz”, “Buzzoise”, “BreUnoZisZe”, “Buzz-enabled ReNoise”, but please don’t call it “ReNoise pro”; “ReNoise Pro” should load Akai and/or Giga and/or FXP/B and/or NKI.

8

I agree that “Pro” isn’t an appropriate name for this, “Buzz-enabled version” would be better. There is nothing more professional about Buzz-plugins than VST(i)-plugins which is already supported, quite the opposite.

9

just my 2 cents : this will open the warez-market for renoise … different priced/featured versions will attract those crackerz like flies. I am serious.

10

Instead of having loads of different ‘versions’ - why not have the standard Renoise executable, and then DLLs for things like Buzz support, MP3 import, DX plugin support, etc. that can be purchased as add-ons.

Just a suggestion.

11

Haven’t the Buzz developers already done deals like this before for other software packages? Not just for Renoise?

12

Wow excellent news! Buzz generators and fx are a huge ressource :)

13

Oscar has the copyright for Buzz, but does he have the rights for the buzzmachines? That other people made?

Photoshop has a plugin format, but other programs like Paintshop Pro use their plugins for free I think.

Check with a lawyers first.
They usually have like 30 minutes of free advice…

Isnt many of the machines made to be used by buzz? Because you program patterns on the machines…

Or can the machines be programmed by the automation device?

14

I think talk to some of the machines developers before rushing headlong into this Buzz deal. People want the machines, NOT Buzz, Buzz without its machines is nothing but a clever idea. Tell me this, do people really want to be able to import/export .bmx files in renoise? I highly doubt it, they just want all of the great machines. If it were a matter of Buzz compatibility with Renoise then it’d be a different story, but since most Renoise users don’t use Buzz anyway it’s kind of pointless isn’t it? We want the machines, and the machines (on the most part) were not created by the Buzz’s creator. I think developers have every right to charge money for software that they create, but making money from the efforts of others is not on. I really think you’d be better off talking to the machine developers, rather than the Buzz developer.

15

can anyone point me to a website where this whole thing is explained ? I dont know much about it, but what I read here is just … hard to believe. while reading this I went “huh ?” several times.

16

zephod, I understand your thoughts, and Oskaari’s behaviour is a shame… but after all, when you coded that machines you did not want to earn money, didn’t you?

he can ask money for his program, and your machines won’t work without it, so in the end I think that what he’s doing is legal (but not fair).

anyway, all developers should check the ReNoise API when it will be released. It has a lot more potential than BUZZ’s one, just because Renoise IS better than BUZZ as a tracker.

ReNoise developers should also be aware of the fact that someone could want to develop a non-free generator or effect using that API, and then make it possibile to do it.

This would be a lot more fair and clear than coding a free and open program, and then asking money to support it, as it has been done for BUZZ.

17

Reading the comments (especially those from Buzz plug developers) makes me thinking of skipping this.
Of course its great to be able to use tons of new plugins, but doing this for money that goes to oskari and not the developer itself is not fair.
I would like to hear more comments from Buzz plug developers to decide this. Couldnt we have something like a poll or dicussion on www.buzzxp.org ? maybe someone who is into this community could help us organizing this ?
The other possibility would be to make an API as soon as possible, giving the plug developers the ability and choice to support Renoise or not.
I also dont like the idea of calling this version “pro” or “enterprise”. “buzzed Renoise” would be more apropriated.

18

If the buzz plugin developers are mad at Oskari for this, many of them will probably be happy if we don’t do this and this will make them more interested in porting their plugins to the renoise API. IMO that’s a better way to go. The renoise API can take advantage of renoises features much better than a pluginformat designed for a very different tracker. We should make this format completely open to assure plugindevelopers the same thing will not happen here.

19

I agree. It’s far better to put the development-effort into Renoise Plugin API than Buzz-machine import, which we have to pay for!

I say skip the Buzz support. If the Renoise API is done properly, it shouldn’t be too much of a problem for plugin-developers to convert their existing Buzz-machines to Renoise format.

20

I made a post at the buzzmachines.com forum, asking developers there for comments.