Plugin MIDI routing and MIDI FX plugin support

I’m gonna quote a particularly narrowminded post here.

In two years time when Phrases comes back to have outgunned both Cthulhu, Tonespace, Cream and Thesys - That day I’ll come back and kiss your feet and apologize.

Support for plugins which are able to send back and forth midi data to and from plugs have been sought after for years, there are quotes from mods saying it’s one of the top wished for features. Unfortunately simple minded as I am, this gives me hope. “One day it’ll be here”. And while YOU dont need these tools at all (some even consider them toys), I rely on them. And believe me, there is a reason such products are available…

Cthulhu, Tonespace, Chordspace, Chordspace Playa, Harmony Improvisator, Thesys, Consequence (minus the synth), Bluearp, Cream, many various stepseqs and arps. And why are they here? Just to motivate userbase of renoise to copycat them? No. It’s because they work in just about every other daw out there and they have interesting concepts.

I’ll be trying the v3 demo thats for sure but using 3rd party software to make basic functionality in a daw 2013 available (energyXT, mini-vst-hosts, unameit). No, maybe I’ll see you in version 4 or 5 lol

Mods, devs, great job. I’m sure you know what you’re doing and this could very well be hard to implement due to the tracker sequencing style. This post is not for you, no, this post is for people who just cannot think “Uhhhhhhhhhhh I dont need that, who the bleep uses that” when there actually are people here who make this tools music making even more enjoyable than it already is. It’s one thing to request some groundbreaking sh-t that would shatter the daw-earth as we know it, but 2014 is coming and this has become STANDARD, like it or not.

Man, I have posted and seen posts about this from around 2007 or 2009!! Can’t mods just please say: “Hello mr cranky pants, I know you want to get back to the renoise scene but maybe Bitwig or Studio One is more suited for you because vsti->vsti just isn’t gonna come in here, sorry!”.

Yeah sounded negative but this isn’t a praise to the lords thread, I am merely venting my disappointment. Congratz tho devs, I know you spend thousands of manhours on this,

1 Like

its just a waste of time to write here…no dev is interested in that! these tools are important for any serious producer of electronic music and thats the point…renoise stopped with its evolution and instead of getting really useful features we have to waste our time using crappy envelope editing in renoise 3.0. or lets face the phrase editor…you simply see here what the devs are capable of. a tracker is just a tracker. everyone wants to get a tracker/ sequencer hybrid with top notch features …but…forget it. this will not happen! better save your time and focus on other daws! i know…hope dies last…but seriously, moderators only tell you that this is YOUR meaning and not the meaning of others… seriously…renoise is just for beginners…it is no professional audio workstastion and will never be!

As far as I can see it, Renoise’s architecture is just completely and strict track orientated. Signals “flow” from track to track to track, starting with the single sample, going to columns, building a track, building a group, maybe branch to another tracks. Tracks, tracks, tracks… Another good reason for the name “tracker”. ;)/> And actually the concept imo is very obvious. How to implement devices placed somewhere in the middle of those tracks now, suddenly creating more and own tracks out of nowhere, when a programm never was thought for something like that? I don’t know Renoise’s core and I’m not really enough of a coder, but I can imagine it’s anything but “Let’s just code a few lines, so we can have track to device, device to somewhere on the track and device to device routings, independent from the tracks.”. It’s core architecture might simply not allow that. No matter if audio or MIDI related.

Sometimes you read a thread and think to yourself, “wow, this guy really needs to buy an Access Virus.”

Man, I’m a friend of a good rant. Sometimes. But your postings meanwhile really start to piss me off. You’re constantly posting the same pseudo-competent stuff. If you were as professional as Renoise is easily, you wouldn’t have requested how to setup a simple trance gate just a few days ago. Give it a break, dude.

seriously…those examples, using an lfo and having no control over speed settings and no patterns for the gate makes you telling me that renoise is professional and me “talking pseudo comptetent stuff”? sorry dude, your just :clownstep:/>/> it seems that you never used any vst plugin…well sure…you can do a gate…but what gate is that? 1 from 1990!


Yup. It was exactly the crap you requested.

@ kolacell , you can have control over the speed setting of a renoise lfo device .
What dyou mean no patterns for gate …
Use volume slice command …for gating and beyond …;these are called effects command …Learn them
c3 ( trigeriing audiofile ) 0cff (play this line at full volume
… 0c03" ( this value will play this line at a much lower volume and give agating effect …you don’t have to insert a new note for this to happen
… 0c09
… 0c02
… 0cff again this line will be played at full volume …so now we have a gater that works at every quarter note , just copy and paste the effects commands and you have a microscopic gater

Yes internal midi routing would be awesome, but first I’d say you ’ ll need to understand renoise a bit deeper before saying it ain’t pro …
Combinig volume cut’s and offset /slide up pitch commands …well you’ll see what it can do …
Again …internal midi routing would be welcome

pattern commands… lol… as i said… i dont need tools from the 90’s. you can waste your time with that. i prefer fast results. in other words… i could use a dynamo to get some power and i also can use the power point… i prefer the power point ;)

Who send you?

Ban this troll.

you call me a “troll”?! you didnt know that this is a stigmata often used in forums by brainless kids? better think twice because what i said is the truth. you can use lfo’s and pattern commands and whatever i dont know… and you can simply use tools like kirnu cream or xfer cthullhu. why should it be a bad idea to implement such features in renoise?! if that is impossible, why not tell the truth and call those renoise tools “retro features”?! i know, its the same like running to the church, throwing the bible on the ground and tell the priest that is all shit…then i take the holy grail…

nice try.

Trying to make something constructive from this thread. Let me please rename this thread from “Version 3 -> With ancient MIDI implemented once again” to “Plugin MIDI routing and MIDI FX plugin support” and moved it to Ideas and Suggestions.

Maybe i’m only getting older, but i wonder why i’m wasting so much time trying to read those rants to be able to understand something constructive every time (and fail).

Thanks taktik for trying to make this a constructive discussion but after 6-7 years or so I have my doubts.

One reasonable reply here is the one about the architechture itself, this one I do understand of course. Maybe implemententing chordtools and such are impossible due to this? It would really put my mind to ease if the devs themselves could just make that clear, or even imply it.

When you don’t, it makes me wonder if this feature isn’t prioritized at ALL, even if it was possible, and even if if alot of people are requesting it. Call me crazy but I’m WAITING for this and has been for years. It’s all thats keeping from using Renoise.

Then the oneliners (yeah, I’ll get a Access Virus when budget allows, whatever you’re implying at), wow guys, really contributing. And we have the “fanboys” (sorry, but thats how some of you appear), I’ve heard them all;

Renoise already is topnotch,
Nothing needs to be changed,
F you for even coming with this absurd suggestion,
Why do you need toys like these, real musicians dont need them,
These tools are unneccessary because we already have x, y and z (manual timewasting methods)
Just use Midiyoke, minivsthost, energyxt - this is not a acceptable solution

On a side note, I bought a Pulse Controller which you attach to your physical desk to tap your rhythms with nails and fingers. Guess what, it required you to install their own software and they REQUIRED you to install asio4all. Asio4all! When I have topnotch asio drivers for my own board. Not even a VST version included. Well just had to get it out there…lol

I hope this discussion goes on, because every other thread like “How do I make Catanya work with renoise?” (You cant) dies without any further discussion whatsoever, super annoying.

Well, these are different opinions and solutions from various people within the community, they don’t set any policies though and does not need to be taken for granted if it is not from a dev-team member. The majority that provide a workaround are only trying to help the way they can.
Almost all workarounds do need a solid native solution as well as many lacking options, but on the other hand i personally can see Renoise has a fundamental personality which ultimately may no longer be possible to be changed at some point which will then also exclude possible implementation of specific features that would have to break fundamentals.

You can set a plan but while executing it you stumble against problems along the way which will enforce evolving the plan.
All that makes it hard to print out the course on a time-line when what option can be expected and it also makes it hard to promise anything.

We could go for Conner’s approach:promise one thing and that will be it. People however won’t stop being annoyed in that situation either since there will always be folks that were not waiting for that one specific thing but something completely else.

We could perhaps have another BeatBattle and allow the winner to prioritize one feature to be implemented in the next version of Renoise. We did that once, that’s how sample recording got into Renoise.
Or just bring back the feature voting list on the backstage and every registered user is allowed to divide 5 points across a list of different most wanted features, whichever reaches the top will be implemented.

In both cases, the user community will then have a strong voice in what should be really in it next to what the dev-team decides to implement.
The latter option of the feature voting sheet still seems the fairest to me.

Sorry for the slight necropost, but has midi routing been improved since? I couldn’t really find anything conclusive about it.