Does posting that you bought it make you feel warm and fuzzy too ?
Yes, as I’m a HUGE fan of Renoise; it changed my life.
1 Like
@ TheBellows
Don’t feel bad, all it takes is a little bit of incongruity for humor to occur.
God bless that kid, the news station, the guy or girl who edited it, all the way down the pipeline of youtube.
Update spotted NOW in the backstage area, 3 times hurray for Taktik!
1 Like
Shame on me, I searched the backstage link for more than 2 minutes before to remember where it was :lol:
I use a multitude of daws, -at the same time-, routing one to the other, for my productions. My ears are picky for each process,…
I also have a fair amount of producing and audio engineering experience and formal qualifications. (conservatively 37-14=23 years of recording tunes of which 37-17.5=19.5 are through computers).
I am saying this because :
a _ I’m a pretty informed demographic that uses renoise very seriously,
b _ I already use renoise in my studio a lot and would love to use it further and deeper.
c _ I tried to go over most previous posts but at some point i was like ok this is pretty much uninformed and someone should say something and couldn’t keep on reading.
[so excuse me if i’m repeating anything previously mentioned.]
In semi-artistic terms, renoise is very TRUTHFULL in its essence.
As a tracker it deals with info as info and tick as tick. it also allows you to VERY VERY ACURATELY define that info, and it reproduces it with a pretty outstanding CLOCK (for software)
Also, wtf, music when i hear it does not travel from left to right 
Not to mention that the info modulation when typed is more than decent…
SO…
Assuming that music is PARTLY definition of TIME, DYNAMICS and REPETITION, Renoise is an amazing tool!!!
Nevertheless, by PARTLY i mean PARTLY and to be honest i am ok with that.
Renoise’s analyzer paradigm might be exquisite for a native analyzer, but it is certainly inferior to specific multianalyzers out there. and that is a good thing because that’s not its point (to be the best multi analyzer) !
Renoise’s envelopes are tight but not the tightest and not the most user friendly in terms of inputing accuracy.
Renoise might have decent summing but it does not have amazing summing, nor of course horrible summing)
SO…
bout 7 years ago i realized it is impossible to work with 1 DAW because X does this better and Y does that better and i had had enough compromising and disrupting my workflow to go from one to the next.
i use X daw for the main programming, Y daw for the editing, Z daw for the summing, XYZ daw for recording and monitoring…as much as possible this is real time with routing…
EVERYTIME I WANT TO HAVE RENOISE DOING MORE! - BUT IT CANT AND IT BUGS ME CAUSE OTHER DAWS DO…
SO I’VE ALSO BEEN FUMING FOR AN UPDATE TOO!
I suppose we would each love to see that next update suiting us…
so here is what i would need from renoise’s next update for my circumstance.
.Proper through-track audio infrastructure and routing/ proper 4channel sidechains
.Rewire Master
.User friendly Swing settings per pattern per track
.Midi vsts
.ablity to see structure from left to right or XML structure somehow or ideally to get in-touch with the other rewires[:)] and figure out how to communicate the fking project markers from one DAW to the next…
.a DEEP sample editor in terms of actions (like x40)
and now that i think about it i would pay an extra 20 easily to have renoise and redux in the same package so that i can pick and choose the tracker phrase paradigm however i want…
In general i think there are beautiful ideas in renoise that i use every day,
but it needs to open up so that it can coexist realtime.
ok it’s a tracker and we all proud of that, but it don’t need to be an isolated tracker DAW,
Speaking of my use, it could be the center of my studio, but it is not because of details, and i’d love it to be…
be well all,
it’s my day off so i’m a bit loose forum-ing [:)]
be well all,
I wish Redux was expanded to host VSTi and also support various kind of MIDI, so it was a real replacement to have Renoise inside another DAW. As mentioned here, this could be the base for Redux then.
I use a multitude of daws, -at the same time-, routing one to the other, for my productions. My ears are picky for each process,…
I also have a fair amount of producing and audio engineering experience and formal qualifications. (conservatively 37-14=23 years of recording tunes of which 37-17.5=19.5 are through computers).
I am saying this because :
a _ I’m a pretty informed demographic that uses renoise very seriously,
b _ I already use renoise in my studio a lot and would love to use it further and deeper.
c _ I tried to go over most previous posts but at some point i was like ok this is pretty much uninformed and someone should say something and couldn’t keep on reading.
[so excuse me if i’m repeating anything previously mentioned.]
In semi-artistic terms, renoise is very TRUTHFULL in its essence.
As a tracker it deals with info as info and tick as tick. it also allows you to VERY VERY ACURATELY define that info, and it reproduces it with a pretty outstanding CLOCK (for software)
Also, wtf, music when i hear it does not travel from left to right
Not to mention that the info modulation when typed is more than decent…
SO…
Assuming that music is PARTLY definition of TIME, DYNAMICS and REPETITION, Renoise is an amazing tool!!!
Nevertheless, by PARTLY i mean PARTLY and to be honest i am ok with that.
Renoise’s analyzer paradigm might be exquisite for a native analyzer, but it is certainly inferior to specific multianalyzers out there. and that is a good thing because that’s not its point (to be the best multi analyzer) !
Renoise’s envelopes are tight but not the tightest and not the most user friendly in terms of inputing accuracy.
Renoise might have decent summing but it does not have amazing summing, nor of course horrible summing)
SO…
bout 7 years ago i realized it is impossible to work with 1 DAW because X does this better and Y does that better and i had had enough compromising and disrupting my workflow to go from one to the next.
i use X daw for the main programming, Y daw for the editing, Z daw for the summing, XYZ daw for recording and monitoring…as much as possible this is real time with routing…
EVERYTIME I WANT TO HAVE RENOISE DOING MORE! - BUT IT CANT AND IT BUGS ME CAUSE OTHER DAWS DO…
SO I’VE ALSO BEEN FUMING FOR AN UPDATE TOO!
I suppose we would each love to see that next update suiting us…
so here is what i would need from renoise’s next update for my circumstance.
.Proper through-track audio infrastructure and routing/ proper 4channel sidechains
.Rewire Master
.User friendly Swing settings per pattern per track
.Midi vsts
.ablity to see structure from left to right or XML structure somehow or ideally to get in-touch with the other rewires[:)] and figure out how to communicate the fking project markers from one DAW to the next…
.a DEEP sample editor in terms of actions (like x40)
and now that i think about it i would pay an extra 20 easily to have renoise and redux in the same package so that i can pick and choose the tracker phrase paradigm however i want…
In general i think there are beautiful ideas in renoise that i use every day,
but it needs to open up so that it can coexist realtime.
ok it’s a tracker and we all proud of that, but it don’t need to be an isolated tracker DAW,
Speaking of my use, it could be the center of my studio, but it is not because of details, and i’d love it to be…
be well all,
it’s my day off so i’m a bit loose forum-ing [:)]
be well all,
-midi vst’s are there since 3.0
-Rewire host , same
.a DEEP sample editor in terms of actions (like x40)
Personally I think the sample editor in renoise is one of the best sample editors out there. What actions would you add to it?
1 Like
Personally I think the sample editor in renoise is one of the best sample editors out there. What actions would you add to it?
Auto #wow&flutter - Wobble #sample
Auto #wow&flutter - Wobble #sample
Can you elaborate what you mean with this? If you mean some kind of pitch wobble, you know you can for example render in track dsp fx/vst through the fx button in the sample editor?
1 Like
so! is renoise complete yet? :rolleyes:
Personally I think the sample editor in renoise is one of the best sample editors out there. What actions would you add to it?
I think it misses editable volume, pan and pitch curves/automators for making destructive changes to the sample. It could be solved by adding one curve/line in the middle, which you can automate just like in the automation editor, and when you have made the curve look the way you want you just push any of the pitch/pan/vol buttons to apply the automation.
I’d also like a shrink/stretch feature, just place the marker anywhere and drag it to change the pitch to fit, either as a part of the selection or the whole sample if nothing is selected. Overwrite mode, expand mode and squeeze mode would be very useful.
I also want logarithmic/exponential fade in and out, though that would be possible with the first suggestion.
Another thing i very much would like to be improved in Renoise is the automation editor, or any automation curve really, like in the custom LFO and such. I want it to behave like vector points, that would make it ten times easier to make the curves the way you want them. 
Can you elaborate what you mean with this? If you mean some kind of pitch wobble, you know you can for example render in track dsp fx/vst through the fx button in the sample editor?
Yea…like a 0.001% wow&flatter with a new knob called the ‘1200er’ & a new wobble fx called either ‘vhs’ or ‘betamax’…
yo yepp i am pretty happy with renoise as it is, even the older versions sometimes working better for me,
depending on what kind of weapon me needs…with that said: laughing is good for you, too 
damn 
happy me now 
Renoise should Be renamed into:
Rejoice (the final version)
Or else, Renoise v3.2 should be renamed into :
ReReNoise :rolleyes:
I think it misses editable volume, pan and pitch curves/automators for making destructive changes to the sample.
While dedicated quick editors for this could be handy, you can of course just set up the desired modulations in the sampler itself and then simply render the resulting C-4 note to a new sample.
A little more work, but a lot more power.
I also want logarithmic/exponential fade in and out
Logarithmic fade in/out is already possible, there simply aren’t icons for it on the sample editor toolbar.
See: Waveform context menu > Process
While dedicated quick editors for this could be handy, you can of course just set up the desired modulations in the sampler itself and then simply render the resulting C-4 note to a new sample.
A little more work, but a lot more power.
I would of course not swap them out for modulations or anything, that would just be silly. The suggestion is about which features could be nice in the sample editor. I could also automate a gainer in the pattern editor and render to sample or whatever, but that would be a lot less powerful that watching the sample waveform itself and where to put the automation points right on top of it. Of course it would also need a prehear option, so you can render when you’re happy with the result.
Logarithmic fade in/out is already possible, there simply aren’t icons for it on the sample editor toolbar.
See: Waveform context menu > Process
I had forgotten they were there. Wouldn’t it make sense to have these swapped out with the linear ones that has icons in the editor? A little drop down menu like the macro curves could be an idea perhaps?
but that would be a lot less powerful that watching the sample waveform itself and where to put the automation points right on top of it.
I would go the other way around and put the waveform behind the modulation.
For it to make sense, a special timing model would be required, “modulation speed synchronized to sample playback speed” - that in itself would be awesome to have
What would be really nice is a roland rompler style routing, as found in all their romplers .from thejd 990 --to the jv 2080-xv-Integra
It’s a verry simple principle where 2 signal paths ( in renoise case instrument lane ) are combined , merged …sometimes adding a router or a ring mod in between.
Also , as mentioned before .the filter stage should be before the amp stage …and not as it is right now .( amp—>filter )
The filter drive messes with the amplitude curve