Parallel processing in Renoise: a short illustrated review

[untilde]

Hello, everyone! Yes, another parallel processing thread.

As you probably know, native parallel processing is somewhat limited in Renoise. Some DAWs implement it with “racks” (such as Ableton Live and Bitwig) or even containers (Reaper). In Renoise, however, a few tricks must be used in order to achieve such thing, the first and most obvious one being the Sampler FX tab - now hang in there.

After a short discussion with some folks in the Facebook group chat (yes, some people still use Facebook), I decided to build a couple example projects to explain how parallel processing can be achieved natively.

My goal with the current thread is to sum up that discussion, serving as a reference for the future - at least until proper “effect racks” are (hopefuly) implemented in Renoise.

Feel free to complement this post with your own thoughts. And devs, check this thread for more ideas.

–

Method #1 - Sends and Returns

parallel processing example #1.xrns (778.6 KB)

Limitation 1: Cannot send signal to previous groups/tracks, only from left to right.

Limitation 2: Requires an extra Return channel for summing/bussing.

Explanation:

1. Create a Return channel (I’ll call it Wet).
2. Place your desired effect with 100% wet (if possible).
3. Place a send in Dry track. Keep the source.
4. (Optional) Create another Return track (I’ll call it Sum) to process the Dry+Wet signal together. Place a send on the Return #1 (Wet) AND another on the source track (dry). Mute source on both. Continue processing in Return #2 (Sum).

–

Method #2 - Sampler

parallel processing example #2.xrns (778.7 KB)

Limitation 1: Not compatible with VST plugins, only instruments/samples. You can also render your VST to samples to bypass this limitation.

Explanation:

1. Create a new instrument
2. Create a FX Chain in the Sampler window (F6)
3. Create one “lane” for your dry signal, one lane for your effect (wet), and one for summing. That’s a total of 3 FX chains.
4. Place two sends in lane #1 (dry): the first send with “Keep Source” enabled (goes to lane #2) and the second one with “Mute Source” (goes to lane #3).
5. Insert the desired effect in lane #2. In this example, we are using a compressor. Insert a send after the effect with “Mute Source”. Route it to lane #3.
   a. Lane #3 is going to be the sum of dry + wet signals (lanes 1+2), and your main output. Adjust sends in lane #1.

–

Method #3 - Sampler + Groups [my favorite]

parallel processing example #3.xrns (778.8 KB)

Limitations: Same as Method #2.

Explanation:

This is a variation of Method #2.

1. Insert two tracks in the mixer. Name them “Dry” and “Wet”. Group these.
2. Create a new instrument.
3. Create a FX Chain in the Sampler window (F6).
4. Create one “lane” for your dry signal and one lane for your effect (wet). That’s a total of 2 FX chains.
5. Place a send with “Keep Source” in lane #1 and send it to lane #2. Keep the second lane empty.
6. Route each lane to a separate track (the ones you created in step 1, Dry and Wet).
7. Place the desired FX on the “Wet” track that is receiving from Lane #2. If it has a dry/wet control, set it to 100%.
8. Adjust the faders to determine the balance between Dry and Wet. In this example, I reduced the Wet track -10db to match the volume with the dry uncompressed signal. Mute the Wet track to bypass the FX. Peak volume stays almost the same, but more ‘body’ is added to the signal.
9. Profit.

–

Suggestions? Critique? Notice any problems? Feel free to discuss.

Cheers.

[t35513r (tessier)]

Noice. Think I’ve probably used all of these variations at one time or another. #8 under the third method is handy - getting the right levels sussed sometimes is a bit challenging, this is supremely helpful.

Thanks for taking the time to write this out AND provide examples. Also, a nice example of how flexible Renoise is - some things it doesn’t do “natively,” but there is often another way to get the same result…

[esaruoho]

hi, i’ve sent you a message. there might be a way to script the samplefx chain method with tracks - into Paketti, it could be really interesting.

[TNT]

@untilde

Limitation 1: Cannot send signal to previous groups/tracks, only from left to right.

Yes, but you could do this as a workaround if necessary for whatsoever.

@untilde

Limitation 2: Requires an extra Return channel for summing/bussing.

In Renoise we should call it “FX track” to avoid misunderstanding.

[untilde]

I’m gonna peep that workaround soon. Thanks for the suggestion!

[untilde]

Just wanted to add something interesting:

The Paketti Toolset (by @esaruoho) now has pre-configured parallel compression in the Sample Loader. You pick the samples and it automatically assembles the FX chains for that.

Is it possible to transpose a slice?

hi @subrez let me try and break this down… so… Paketti is one of the tools available for Renoise - which adds features to Renoise that aren’t there in the default Renoise install. One such feature, is a method of loading samples, so that they get automatically modified to user settings. Meaning, when you use the Paketti PitchBend Multiple Sample Loader shortcut or menu entry - it does this: It reads your settings in the Paketti Preferences, which looks like (for this area of Paketti feature…

[ffx]

I really would love to see a solution here for Renoise… This is really is so far the only major drawback in mixing/routing possibilities in Renoise. I wish I could simply use the instrument structure also for VSTis, saving a nice sound with perfectly adapted fx processing into a setting, and reuse it in a new project, ready to go. And parallel processing without using send channels…

This is my major concern in Renoise… Is there any intention to improve this? Are the plans here? Please…

[BatBoy (ragequit_fetishists)]

what is parallel computing: nobody heard of cray before tron legacy and the word cray appears in the disc games room on an above scrolling screen. thinking machines too, whose company symbol appears on various character chest costume pieces. the story is that thinking machines was a super computer company in the early eighties and the story is backed by those who have read surely you’re joking mr feynman, as he was supposed to have been there. besides that the company asssets were funneled to sun microsystems which had a building sign location near a john deer tractor company. oracle which owns java, who owns oracle larry ellison is john mcafee, john deere might be norton, norton either way seems to be java, jave is androids native programming language. norton/john deere/mcafee seem to be android or own it. this makes thinking machines look like bait to bring coders to write apps for the playstore which might otherwise be a struggle. parallel computing works like this, it’s already possible and being adapted by companies who decide to construct them using tech specs like how the average phone jack might have specifications to it that let wireless communicators stimulate a part that can treat you like a hub or waystation unknowingly. in the end the simple way to execute an antistalk on supercomputer fanaticism is that parallel computers are motherboards daisychained and housed in a case, then those cases can be daisy chained, then buildings which house cases can be daisy chained, then continents which house building complexes can be daisy chained, by then synthetic planets will be daisy chained, then in a simulated universe they will find away to daisy chain from hardware to virtual somehow. just don’t go there

[untilde]

Thanks for the meaningless babbling, ChatGPT!