I’ve owned your software since the release of version 3 and have witnessed its neglect.
I’m asking you to consider the future potential for trackers and where/how you fit in. I think it would be best to be proactive about it and actually recruit some talent to scale the business,.or sell it.
Doing little to nothing is a slow death for the software
Yeah, livetime is limited! To limited for waiting Renoise versions cycles. On the other side, it is good to have a longyear developer/owner who is take care of his software. This is a very difficult thematic. For example i remind on the last audacity discussion for data collection abuse, after the Software was sold.
For me the best solution would be a limited open source release with access controlled repository for Renoise, so that third party developers can integrate new functions and features, but taktik as owner should have the codeaudit and decision last word. In similar on Torwalds Linux. There are killerfeatures that miss in Renoise as a DAW, like real Wavetrackhandling with dynamic stretch/shrink functions for syncing to tracker note information for instance, or a native pianoroll, or a fully support for custom fonts to increase the readability & ergonomics of Renoise. Bevor a few years i make taktik an offer for free developer hours i could give into Renoise. But i get never any Response on that sadly. If i see where Renoise is, and where Renoise could be, i always get a feeling of discontent.
Yes please sell the business to Adobe so we can get our tracker software on a subscription model. Or maybe Apple if they are interested, so we have to update our whole system with new spyware every time an update release comes out. I think this is a very good idea.
This would be awesome. The are such generous and talented coders in this community. I’m sure that renoise would evolve and mutate quite beautifully with this approach. Would be great if the dsp side of things could be codable/extensible, too. I’m sure there would be logistical challenges with this approach, but I’d love to see some acceleration in the development cycle. Been with renoise since 3.0… nearly a decade ago now…
As someone who uses Renoise every single day for work, I’m asking you to go and make your own software if you’re so concerned with the potential for trackers. No need to wait for pesky developers hogging their passion projects to see things your way, you too can pick up a couple books and become a dev! Your own tracker, however you want it, as free and collaborative as you want it.
I think an open source model may be great for Renoise as it may help add in the new features much faster like how NPC1 suggested. Renoise can continue to sell binaries while providing demo binary versions for free like how Ardour and Radium does it. But understandably, it can be potentially undesirable as it would mean that getting the software for free would be more permissible especially among Linux users who may end up having Renoise available in their package managers for free just like Ardour. But they can try to mitigate that by providing exclusive content for those who paid for Renoise through the backstage like samples, effects, and tools.
Ultimately, it’s up to the developers whether to go with this or not. It would certainly be a whole lot better than to sell Renoise to a company like Steinberg in my opinion. Or they can just keep things the way they are and have development time be slow. I’m fine with that to be honest as I’m quite content with the feature set Renoise currently has but new features introduced in newer versions are always welcome.
I’ve used Renoise for around 20 years. There is nothing wrong with the development cycle. Important things are kept up to date and running on modern systems, there is enough depth in the software already to last a lifetime. Selling it to some big, predatory audio company that would just shut it down is quite frankly ridiculous. Opensource can get extremely messy but would be a good option if the project was ever abandoned - which it isn’t. Long live Renoise.
I don’t get all this update hype. I buy software because i like it and use it as is. I used protracker 3.15 for 8 years as is and never saw a need to complain.
Don’t get me wrong, updates and improvements are great but what did people do before the internet?
The music tech industry is rife with investors acquiring audio companies and smaller dev teams, smushing them into some un-homogenised mess, ironing out the niche softwares and, quite frankly, works of art, in the name of staying in the maximum profit space.
Please no…don’t wish this upon Renoise.
No software is perfect. Stay in this long enough and you’ll realise there is no one tool (hardware or software) that ticks every box. At least in my experience. Then you learn to appreciate the strengths of each and how to use them together, and that’s all for the better in my opinion.
You don’t believe @Ryunocore that he’s using Renoise every day because he’s not active in this forum? Are you serious? I’m using Renoise since 2011 but I became active in this forum in 2020. So you must think that I wasn’t using Renoise within these 9 years. I can tell you, I’ve finished more songs during that time than most users in their life. Think about it.
Renoise is a niche product, and actually the only or few of the trackers that is referred as a DAW too, as trackers were originally just sampler/sequencers, I don’t know where you get that it’s going to “slowly die”, the world of trackers is pretty much alive, ex: polyend tracker
Any feature you are “missing” you can still get it from the DAW that has it (a daw, not a tracker+daw) and just render and sequence it in R, for me is timestretch and traditional audio editing for sample manipulation, GarageBand is delightful with Renoise
By the way, recent updates like ARM/Alsa support, Sidechan device were iconic, historic moments
Also when I feel limited by my tools I like to listen to 90’s songs to remind me that it’s me, not the tools
I think a bit of fundraising, or ongoing “bleeding edge” features subscription for owners to help fund dedicated dev time and have subs help steer some of the decisions made is a better fit. I love this software, I think that perhaps some more FX flexibility and new native FX are needed - pitch shifters, frequency shifters, parallel FX containers (just give us Dry/Wet on the Doofer, please), updated EQ with blow up frequency analysis overlay etc. Next up Native Synthesis - a modular building scenario in line with the Sampler FX chains or even Bitwig Grid/Waveform Racks/Carla Patchbay style GUI using some oscillator modules and then all the native FX.
My 2c - let the people who love it contribute, time or money, to it.