This is the way I would expect it to be…pretty much like the mixers in most other sequencers that have them. It should also have the aux sends and amount of send for each channel available too.
You would probably be better heading over to kvr and searching the instruments section for samplers. Some of the best known ones are: Kontakt, Halion and Vsampler3…VS3 is the cheapest of those, but you sacrifice a little in slickness of GUI (imo) with it. These will all import a lot of different sample formats and allow you to map out your own multisamples should you wish to do so. Obviously, if you only want to trigger one sample, then you may as well use the Renoise sampler, but if you want to use any of the free (or purchased) multisample formats, then one of these samplers is the way to go…
Yeah, but using these bloated externa VSTi-samplers to do what a tracker was originally intended to do (ie. replay samples in certain musical order) is just insane.
You loose most of the tracking felxibility with these external VSTi samplers, no ‘easy’ way to do pitch slides(from note to note over longer ranges than specified within the program inside the VSTi sampler), no easy way to trigger a sample at a certain offset, the list goes on and on and yet another ‘interface’ for programming/editing sounds arrgghhhhh.
So i for one vote for improved RNI structure and built in ‘Sampling’ as this gives renoise the same ‘streamlined’ prodcution process trackers were once known to have.
I guess a better way to get ‘tracker like editing’ into Cubase or whatever is to contact Steinberg and let them make a ‘trackerlike’ editor for parts.
Think of the ‘overhead’ you’ll be creating with RenoiseVST if you use VSTi’s inside Renoise, just plain insane and waste of cpu.
I agree with samu: Kontakt and other samplers are surely great; me myself am a massive Kontakt user, but having an extended RNI format would probably reduce my usage of Kontakt expecially for drums tracking.
And extending RNI does not only mean multilayering, but also giving the ability to automate RNI properties, via MIDI or via a VST or via another RNI.
I am not saying that an improved RNI format is not a worthwhile thing to do, just that I believe there are more important areas where Renoise is lacking that should be done first. I would like to be able to do all my sample related stuff within Renoise, but until the sequencer is improved, Renoise will never suit my working methods and I am sure I am not alone in this view.
I registered Renoise a long time ago to support the program developers and also in the hope of what would be added to advance it beyond what Modplug/FT2/IT2 were doing years ago. VST support and some other additions have helped in that cause, but it still has a long way to go. Look at all the other major sequencers out there and you will see that every one of them has multipattern sequencing…most users want and expect this of a host and I have little doubt that most people will reject Renoise as an alternative on this basis alone.
It will never happen. There is not a big enough demand for this facility and none of the major players in the sequencer market will bother to spend development time on niche features with limited appeal to the masses.
Two things: Firstly, I doubt the idea of using Renoise as a VST plugin would be for people to use VST’s within Renoise, otherwise, why not just use the Renoise standalone. Like I suggested earlier to Kricke, the likelihood is that people would want a Renoise VST to do their drum work and basic sampling in and then use the host sequencers facilities to do the rest of the melodic work using synth VST’s.
Secondly, I don’t know if you are aiming this Renoise VST question toward me, but I only gave it a 2 in the poll, as it is not something that I am particularly interested in…
that’s my opinion too … but maybe we get both new features at once in future release - who knows what the devs think about the next most important new feature …
some words about the voting results from the devs would be interesting.
Only 255 users have voted… And the results do only show the direction for the future Renoise development.
I dont know what i can tell you more? Those results reflect the opinion of 255 users which participated in the survey.
Furthermore, voting results can not make everyone happy. Every user has his very own prefered feature, but this does not have to reflect what the common user base wants.
Again, we will focus on the top scoring features now, perhaps not exatly in that order as the results showed.
A Mixer view
An Arranger view (visually arrange PatternSequences and Blocks)
Audio recording in the SampleEditor
Sub-tick timing
Improved Instrument (RNI) structure
A Better and bigger disk browser
More Modulation Meta Devices
More (and more complex) MIDI mappings
A Renoise VST plug
A Piano Roll view
Renoise as ReWire Slave
DirectX Plugins support [Windows]
Renoise as ReWire Master
Audio-Units support [Mac]
Why would anyone want audio recording in the sample editor? Isn’t it better to use a dedicated app for this? If it were streaming audio recording of, say vocal tracks I’d understand. But then, rewire might be faster to implement.
Disk browser? It works just fine IMO, but if there is something to improve, fine by me.
Maybe there was too little information on each choise, or Renoise users simply have some strange priorities?
i think there is a big number of users that still makes tracker musik only with samples … and there is a big number of VSTi users … that’s the main difference of users and their demands. (e.g. a bigger disk browser for big sample libs - not needed by the VSTi users)
but there are things needed by all users. e.g. a mixer and high note resolution (etc.) - this things should have the priority.
Like: 20x30cm?!