meow:
That’s because you can only go from 00-ff (totaling 255 markers). Cut your long samples (keep the original) down shorter, lets say into quarters, now you have 4 samples that can go 00-ff (totaling 1020 markers).
It’s just a workaround, not a real solution (just like in the case of sidechaining fx).
meow
(meow)
April 14, 2009, 8:00pm
22
It’s solution enough.
Whoa! What’s the workaround for sidechaining?
meow:
I’m not trying to start a fight or anything, but…
I never said that beat slicing is for n00bs. If you read what I wrote, then you would see that I was just saying that I don’t like recycle for the fact that you have to use it before you can open it in the program. FLStudio’s fruity slicer (and more recent SliceX) does the chopping without some other piece of software.
Why is it good to have a piano roll? Idk, people want their programs to resemble a DAW. I can ask the same question again about the beat slicer. I don’t get it, you protect the beat slicer, but then turn around and bash the piano roll (both of which are dominant in the DAW world). Trackers have that to them that they don’t have piano rolls or beat slicers.
As for the video, when I first started using RNS (and tracking in general), I found that video VERY helpful. I too was wondering why there wasn’t a beat slicer (like in FL). Idk if I would’ve figured out something as SIMPLE as cutting/pasting a loop into multiple smaller instruments. Now, I’m glad that I don’t use a beat slicer, and after doing it for a bit you become efficient and fast at it.
And just to let you know, my fingers don’t hurt.
No fights bro. I talked about Kaneel in this video, thats it. ) not you.
I`m not really bashing pianoroll. I dont understand why this in renoise, when you can type notes by keyboard. In standart DAWs, as much as i know, you cant do this. So, thats why there is a pianoroll or external virtual keyboards.
meow:
I don’t get the beatslicer thing either but i have to say that i am not against it. Even if i don’t feel gaining
anything from it, someone else might. (seems like many would) In the end it’s not about terms or names
of things. Yes we can do beatslicing already in renoise but the main thing is the workflow which is different
for different people. I think same way about piano roll. It’s fine addition even tho i’m more into tracking.
And i bet i would use it sometimes too.
Something i REALLY would like to see is some kinda sync solution for long samples . Audio track or
maybe just a button to keep it sync once you have played it. I don’t really care what is the solution if it works.
(without external software) It sucks to start the track from the beginning if you are tuning something in the
middle of the song and you need to hear the vocals or any other long audiotrack.
Of course there is option to render the song into patters but doesn’t feel attracting when you have lets say
16 or even more tracks as audiofiles and who knows how many patterns. I have some mixing projects for
friends and they don’t use renoise so tracks need to be rendered into audio.
oh yes, +1 for synced audio tracks.
wow. thanks. it works.
p.s. same thing for VST `ll be great too.
this sounds like a good solution really.
meow:
The optimal workflow for a native beatslicer would combine spectral/velocity auto-detection with manual adjustments. None of this is rocket science.
The tricky part is how to deal with a sliced sample with, say, 1600 parts?
On a sidenote: last time I checked, a standalone beatslicer cost 6 times as much as a Renoise license
check this, its very good.
http://flstudio.image-line.com/documents/edison.html
and costs like 2 RNS licenses.
but no version for os x YET.
meow:
The optimal workflow for a native beatslicer would combine spectral/velocity auto-detection with manual adjustments. None of this is rocket science.
The tricky part is how to deal with a sliced sample with, say, 1600 parts?
On a sidenote: last time I checked, a standalone beatslicer cost 6 times as much as a Renoise license
or this, even cheaper.
http://flstudio.image-line.com/documents/slicex.html
holy shit. it still in stock nowadays… i thought its a dead dinosaur. holy sh… i think for this money you can afford the same but in hardware today.
meow:
That’s because you can only go from 00-ff (totaling 255 markers). Cut your long samples (keep the original) down shorter, lets say into quarters, now you have 4 samples that can go 00-ff (totaling 1020 markers).
sample offset is useless in the situation i`ve described. its not a workaround or solution.
benJam
(benJam)
April 15, 2009, 5:36am
24
i appreciate the idea of sample position pointers. i guess, 255 of them per sample would be enough.
for addressing the pointers via pattern command we could sacrifice the “0B00” command (0B00 = no nothing, 0B01 = play sample backwards), which is ridiculous, because it wastes $FE possible effect values and can also be accomplished via “B0 / B1” in volume or panning column.
Johann
(Johann)
April 15, 2009, 7:50am
25
benJam:
for addressing the pointers via pattern command we could sacrifice the “0B00” command (0B00 = no nothing, 0B01 = play sample backwards), which is ridiculous, because it wastes $FE possible effect values and can also be accomplished via “B0 / B1” in volume or panning column.
Heh? And what if you’re using the volume and the panning column already? for, uhm, volume and panning?
I’d rather see effects go beyond “F”, that would allow for twenty more effects without “sacrificing” anything…
Would I then be able to run Mac plugins from Mac and Tux plugins from Linux into CP host?
Theoretically yes, it depends mostly on how this useful technology will be implemented in Renoise. But i think it`s a hardest way.
tmt
(TMT)
April 22, 2009, 8:45pm
29
I’d not like a certain file format for slicing,
what I would like is the option to distribute parts of the original sample (wav) over to sample slots logically (so 1/16th x 16 samples)
Renoise standard instrument format has sample slots. You can even chop the samples quite easily even though it’s not automated.