Oldskewl Commands

h3110 tr4ck1n g00r00z!!

ok ok, some years have passed, but still we feel the need for some serious oldskool tracking techniques showoff, don’t we?

If you miss mysterious commands such as
Xxx, Txx, Lxx, Hxx, raise your hand!

which are the ones you miss the most?

Personally, I miss a lot finer pitch and volume ramps: 01xx/02xx/05xx/06xx/07xx are good, but I really think we need the finer versions of them.

After those, I would die to have Lxx back: for those who don’t know/remember, in FT2 Lxx gave us the ability to set an offset of xx ticks on the volume envelope, exactly as 09xx now gives you the ability to set an offset of xx percent on the sample playing position.

In conjunction with 9xx, Lxx would give us an incredible couple of tools for sound refinnement (f.e.: accents) and, in conjunction with ghost notes, great space for experimentation.

Let’s count how many of use there are!

So true, especially finer pitch.
I would also very much like a command - maybe 05gg - that would change the pitch of a sample instantly to another note (without gliding).

YES more patter commands please, we are trackers and need more levels of control in the pattern editor!!!


Yea… really miss them as well.

As most ppl know, there is not room for new commands in the current system.
Of course we could just break the ‘hex rule’ and start using letters in fx columns (I would not mind that at all!).

In a long term I think we should be able to expand the number of digits in the fx columns.
So instead of adding lots of new fine-pitch extra fine pitch etc commands, you simply add another digit or two to the fx column.

This is best done if we ‘split’ the fx index and the fx value from each other.
This could be done by using another color,font, or font size, space or something…



Now you can expand one or both the two parts of the fx column.
This could be done by the rightclick context menu or some buttons/arrows…
Expand to more parameter resolution:

092A0 <–extra digit, you can now offset much more accurate

another example:

0101 <-- normal pitch slide


01001 <-- fine pitch slide


010001 <-- extra fine pitch slide

To get rid of the ridiculous fx limit and get access to more advanced commands we could also expand the number of fx index digits:

0092A <-- can now add ‘endless’ more fx’s.

I also have some ideas about integrate automation point values and pattern commands. Also show dedicated fx columns without fx index digits etc… but thats another very long story for another time…

finer pitch would be handy.
but a faster pitch and portamento to note is what i really miss very often.

portamento to note will still slide “for ages” when compared to the protracker/ft2 counterpart even when at full speed (FF).

Sure. I agree on that one.
This really depends on what speed/BPM/resolution you work in also.

Thats also a reason why this is kinda complicated to discuss here, to keep in mind that some time in the future renoise can get better resolution and even pattern zooming etc…

We got two options to solve this one.
First (and easiest?) is to add another fx for ‘super fast sliding’.
Thats probably the most backward compatible way.
Another is to increase the initial maximum slide speed.
That could be bad as you would have to use more digits all the time to get more ‘normal’ pitch speed. But the biggest problem is backward compatibility… I think.

renoise is the only tracker i’ve used, but I do like the ideas.

How bot it devs?

eh… this could be done a lot easier:

01FF <-- the current max slide speed

Add another parameter digit:

01FF0 <-- this is the same as above

now increase the maximum slide speed replace ‘0’ with ‘F’:

01FFF <-- increased the slide speed with a factor of F?

Oh Hxx was the one I forgot about…! Gee it’s been years… I knew what the others did but what did H do in FT2? Hover? Help? Haha?

Yeah bring them all back, introduce new code other than 0-F. The extra res-pitch issue could be compensated if you had Xxx, being the fine pitch slider. Extra res in 9xx, well that’s a seperate code design issue that The Man has to decide if he wants to get into or not :P

Bring em back! I’d use them lots now.

Edit: With Lxx would you have it effect the position on all 5 envelopes, or just volume? Or just the ones that are engaged?

well, fine pitch/volume slide is way too basic command to need a script for…

I’m all for overcoming the 0-F range; I really see no problems in it. Renoise is not 4bit, is it? :)

Now this would be something. Being able to make a “script” of a command. Kinda like what you can do with kontakt 2. Though if renoise had some sort of script editor I don’t think I could be arsed programming it :P

actually i have forgot all the oldskool commands i had in Impuse Tracker :) in renoise i use mostly basic stuff like 09, 0B, 01, 02, 0E etc

i wouldnt mind though expandng FX column possibilities

Yes. please

Still needed, I think.

mind…blown…please elaborate on this idea :ph34r:

a wild stab in the dark:

  1. find a way to express the behaviour of all existing commands in script language
  2. allow for additional per-song defined scripted commands, which are get compiled or pre-interpreted or something (so it’s not, uhm, INCREDIBLY SLOW compared to what we have now)

no diff for the noobs, worlds of possibilities for the hax0rs… and a huge undertaking, sure. But from then on a lot of stuff could just be “hey, could you please expose X and Y to the scripting API, thanks” and swapping scripts on the forum, which the Renoise devs then can snatch up and incorporate in official releases if something seems to be worth it.

effectCommands[“09”] = function(value){ doSomethingElseWith(value); }

Old effects don’t need to be written in scripting language, but they could be overridden by scripts.

Would pay for this! :)

Would be great!

Did you also create a separate thread about this?

Those scripts must be placed in xrns to make this files moveable to another renoise instances, I guess.