I will wait for FLStudio 12 OSX! And then maybe buy it as secondary DAW. I am looking for a Cubase replacement. What I like that image line seems to be consist of freaks like the Renoise team. That’s promising and ensures change and creativity. Also the v12 looks awesome, regarding features and flexibility.
I wouldn’t be to sure of that , it is well known that gol , (didier dambrin) pretty much ignores feedback from users .
Renoise is awesome, very comfortable and fast… until you decide to record some live performance. Then it start sucking ass very hard. I’m not blaming Renoise devs though, they’re doing great job and trackers werenever designed for that. I was trying Ableton and Reaper recently, guess I’ll stick with Reaper for audio recordings + Renoise for drum programming (through Rewire).
- Anything you play on a MIDI keyboard instantly turns into a mess. A lot of new note and effect columns are generated, aftertouch and stuff like that go to effect columns, and any note may become recorded into any column, there is no any system behind it. The result is an “unreadable and uneditable mess” (c) gova
1a. If you played a note a bit too early before the first line of a pattern, it will record into a wrong pattern, and sometimes it’s not cool at all.
Recording an instrument (e.g. guitar) is too much of a hassle. Multiple takes are not supported, editing a recorded sample is disjointed from editing the rest of a song.
For some reason automation recorded with MIDI controllers is discrete, one point per line.
I’m sorry! But I disagree with Iwpss.There must be some problem of the user.Or, you do not use either the metronome, notrightly the times, or have latency issues or something, or your computer is slow.
Renoise is so goodliverecording with a MIDI keyboard, which after recording, you press play and it sounds exactly what you touched. Exactly!Renoise is mathematical!
Record delay perfectly ineach pattern!If a note is ahead in the pattern, it is because you play too fast. Ifdelayed, it is because you play too slow,or hardware has latency issues.Renoise has twoliverecording modes.Keep in mind the two buttons live recording belowpattern (Quantize and DSP slides) (button “Q”). Is needed well control the metronome and compass.Then you can sort notes and delays.
Renoise uses multiple columns within a track (only a track) for live recording. If a note occupies a space, it can not be invaded by another noteand always recorded before in the left columnif it is free. Then, Renoise use another column in the same track,preventing overlapping notes.Renoise is not magic, simply do what he is ordered. Everything has a reason.In previous versions the live recording was a problem. Not now!
The principle is to dominate the live recording. It is essential to control the compass!!!you must configure the pattern well (BMP and LPB).Imagine an orchestra conductor with his baton.It depends more on his musical prowess.
Respect to FL StudiovsRenoise.I widely usedthe two programs.I am clear that Renoise is more advanced in many aspects.Renoise is likea"calculator numbers".You have control of those numbers literally.You do not have much control with other DAW.With Renoise you can do whatever you want with any note.If anyone still has problems with Renoise, it’s because you do not know to use it properly, still.
Vector GUI in FL Studio 12is far superior to other DAWs.Renoise carries blocked without evolution since birth.Need a radical change in interface for high screen resolutions.Moreover,Renoiseis almost perfect, can only add more features and improvements, details. Is extremely tidy.FL Studio is a chaos of small windows, like other DAWs.Renoise is a bullet for composing.Everything is always in its place.
I have tried using other DAWs too. And I always end up using Renoise for all.I’ll repeat: Renoise is a fucking tracker!That alone is already superior to other tools for composition.But Renoise is much more than an advanced tracker. We all know.
I’m sorry! But I disagree with Iwpss.There must be some problem of the user.Or, you do not use either the metronome, notrightly the times, or have latency issues or something, or your computer is slow.
Renoise is so goodliverecording with a MIDI keyboard, which after recording, you press play and it sounds exactly what you touched. Exactly!Renoise is mathematical!
Record delay perfectly ineach pattern!If a note is ahead in the pattern, it is because you play too fast. Ifdelayed, it is because you play too slow,or hardware has latency issues.Renoise has twoliverecording modes.Keep in mind the two buttons live recording belowpattern (Quantize and DSP slides) (button “Q”). Is needed well control the metronome and compass.Then you can sort notes and delays.
Renoise uses multiple columns within a track (only a track) for live recording. If a note occupies a space, it can not be invaded by another noteand always recorded before in the left columnif it is free. Then, Renoise use another column in the same track,preventing overlapping notes.Renoise is not magic, simply do what he is ordered. Everything has a reason.In previous versions the live recording was a problem. Not now!
The principle is to dominate the live recording. It is essential to control the compass!!!you must configure the pattern well (BMP and LPB).Imagine an orchestra conductor with his baton.It depends more on his musical prowess.
Respect to FL StudiovsRenoise.I widely usedthe two programs.I am clear that Renoise is more advanced in many aspects.Renoise is likea"calculator numbers".You have control of those numbers literally.You do not have much control with other DAW.With Renoise you can do whatever you want with any note.If anyone still has problems with Renoise, it’s because you do not know to use it properly, still.
Vector GUI in FL Studio 12is far superior to other DAWs.Renoise carries blocked without evolution since birth.Need a radical change in interface for high screen resolutions.Moreover,Renoiseis almost perfect, can only add more features and improvements, details. Is extremely tidy.FL Studio is a chaos of small windows, like other DAWs.Renoise is a bullet for composing.Everything is always in its place.
I have tried using other DAWs too. And I always end up using Renoise for all.I’ll repeat: Renoise is a fucking tracker!That alone is already superior to other tools for composition.But Renoise is much more than an advanced tracker. We all know.
And I have to disagree with you 
First of all, there is this bug:https://forum.renoise.com/t/new-note-columns-created-when-recording-one-shot-samples/41722
Second, even if you manage to record everything into the pattern editor and it sounds exactly the way it did when you recorded it (I never managed to do that with more complex things, e.g. an actual drum part played with my V-drums), then the notes are all over the place! For drums, for instance, the fist kick note might be in column 1, the second in column 4, the third in column 2, then next in column 1 again, and so on and so forth. The same with all the other notes. In a piano roll, if I look for a C-4 amongst all other recorded notes, there is exactly once place (row) where they can be. In Renoise, for every single note, there are 12 potential places they can be. In a piano roll, I look at the pattern, and I have a good idea what is going on. In Renoise, I need to study the pattern for several minutes to figure out what is going on.
So, yes, Renoise is great for composing/programming notes, but NOT for live recording them. And I don’t see why the latter shouldn’t be improved.
Raul: Hm, ok, if you do really, really multiple times record in very time you may get a good recording result even without live quantization. But somehow renoise lacks of standard midi recording features. Like in advanced editor quantization options, only live!!! (a.k.a. more intelligent raster matching). Or overdub/overwrite is missing. Or live quantization of notes + preserving length (live). etc.
Also changing the behavior of the delay column, like it was suggested some weeks ago (cannot find it, was like delay = 80 is normal + with negative values!) would highly improve post-editing time, imho.
I should mention that one solution for the column mess is, of course, to record into different tracks. But setting up your midi controller to do that everytime you want to record something is quite something. It would be great to be able to have a template for that or so. So that you can switch between “record into current track” and “record into this specific configuration” with a single toggle, for every connected midi controller.
I should mention that one solution for the column mess is, of course, to record into different tracks. But setting up your midi controller to do that everytime you want to record something is quite something. It would be great to be able to have a template for that or so. So that you can switch between “record into current track” and “record into this specific configuration” with a single toggle, for every connected midi controller.
Yeah, and while that approach probably makes sense for drums, it doesn’t make sense for when you’re playing chords. Of course, there’s always ledger’s note reorder tool.
And I have to disagree with you
First of all, there is this bug:https://forum.renoise.com/t/new-note-columns-created-when-recording-one-shot-samples/41722
Second, even if you manage to record everything into the pattern editor and it sounds exactly the way it did when you recorded it (I never managed to do that with more complex things, e.g. an actual drum part played with my V-drums), then the notes are all over the place! For drums, for instance, the fist kick note might be in column 1, the second in column 4, the third in column 2, then next in column 1 again, and so on and so forth. The same with all the other notes. In a piano roll, if I look for a C-4 amongst all other recorded notes, there is exactly once place (row) where they can be. In Renoise, for every single note, there are 12 potential places they can be. In a piano roll, I look at the pattern, and I have a good idea what is going on. In Renoise, I need to study the pattern for several minutes to figure out what is going on.
So, yes, Renoise is great for composing/programming notes, but NOT for live recording them. And I don’t see why the latter shouldn’t be improved.
Of course, everything can be improved,evenlive recording with Renoise.Unfortunately we can not have a piano roll on each track,equal to FL Studio (132 notes).And frankly, I prefer Renoise not include a piano roll. I prefer the virtual piano can be placed beneath the pattern editor,as a visual aidand also as a tool for editing with the mouse (click in virtual piano and recorded in the pattern,even in the live recording).
You canplay each line separately, and know exactly what happens immediately, isolating each track.In the new version 3.1, each track will accept up to 12 columns (12 notes, 1 octave)Yes, there is no relationship between the note and the column.
The only thing I can think of is to allocate 9 tracks each associated one octave (would be ten octaves, x12 notes each octave, 120 notes).When recording every note was in place.But this would be a mess for me.
Another idea would be for each note, regardless of the eighth, always write in a column.Then you need to overlay notes.A scheme:
_____________________________________________ TRACK 01 ____ (120 notes, 10 octaves) ____________________________
| NOTE 01 |NOTE 02 |NOTE 03 |NOTE 04 |NOTE 05 |NOTE 06 |NOTE 07 |NOTE 08 |NOTE 09 |NOTE 10 |NOTE 11 |NOTE 12 |
| C-0 | C#0 | D-0 | D#0 | E-0 | F-0 | F#0 | G-0 | G#0 | A-0 | A#0 | B-0 |
| C-1 | C#1 | D-1 | D#1 | E-1 | F-1 | F#1 | G-1 | G#1 | A-1 | A#1 | B-1 |
… …
… …
| C-8 | C#8 | D-8 | D#8 | E-8 | F-8 | F#8 | G-8 | G#8 | A-8 | A#8 | B-8 |
| C-9 | C#9 | D-9 | D#9 | E-9 | F-9 | F#9 | G-9 | G#9 | A-9 | A#9 | B-9 |
_____________________________________________ TRACK 01 ____ (120 notes, 10 octaves) ____________________________
(virtual piano below the pattern editor**)** https://forum.renoise.com/t/keyboard-in-edit-mix-tab/44501
Perhaps there may be another button to activate the tracking function.
To play live with a MIDI keyboard,each note is written in the corresponding column.The problem would overlapping notes (note OFF): eg C-4 with C-6, or F3 with F-4,in each column…
I really like this idea!So I think that has no felt a pianoroll, but something like this (track automatically organizes the notes, no the octaves).
Apart, only this form of liverecording will allow each track to also use an octave (you would play only an octave at a time).
Someone has talked to taktik or dblue about this theme?If this were possible, it would be great!Everything can be improved in this life! :lol:
Does this idea you like?
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Perhaps this idea should be suggestions forum…but overlapping notes will be a problem (Note OFF).
HopefullyRenoiseevolve into this idea, and not adding a pianoroll.
I’m surprised people are oblivious to another form of piano roll commonplace in more than a few daws.
It can only get more tracker than this if the notes would be put into a single column, like in a tracker.
It has been much discussion about adding a piano roll vertically.I think I prefer something simple, similar to the previous idea.
Now there are 12 columns per track (R3.1), it would be very interesting to arrange the notes in live recording, without developing a pianoroll or something similar with the horizontal route. In other words, integrate the composition in the tracker, simply ordering the notes in the track,without adding anything else.and this would be an optional feature, not conditional.
@gova, do you agree with this?
There were 12 columns per track since longer than I can remember. 
Simple ordering can be done with toolrealtime and has been done with tools offline. Wanting to have a major design change optional is in the nature of any major design change, isn’t it though :P?
What I would like is an optional text-free tracker, with selected automation lanes right near the track etc.
But making it so would probably alienate previous piano roll users and the new feature would loose some of its purpose.
There were 12 columns per track since longer than I can remember.
…
And remember well.Yes, I know.But now,the novelty is that the new versionevery column says “Note” (12 notes, 1 octave is supposed).You can change the name and everything,column name, orassociate it with the name of an instrument ora note.This makes sure that people talk more about recording the notes.
I think as an idea it easy to add, without changing almost nothing inRenoise, can be welcomed.Making big changes itself already is a problem.
Sometimes I thinkhow is possible thanRenoiseTeam does not go crazy with so many suggestions from people. 
Each suggestion has to have a big justification,otherwiseit will never be added.But there are also small additions that do not change anything, and do a great job, for example, split the pattern.Another might besort thenotes natively,that works well integrated,live recording, or after recording,an addition that involves including a button;something simple as associating the same note of all octaves to a single column within a track (each column, only accepts ten octaves of each note, eg: Column 01: C-0, C-1, C-2, C-3…C-9)…But there is a problem, overlapping notes.This problem makes the idea is discarded.And so with many ideas,some because they cost too much work, others because they do not work well at 100%…
Raul: Hm, ok, if you do really, really multiple times record in very time you may get a good recording result even without live quantization. But somehow renoise lacks of standard midi recording features. Like in advanced editor quantization options, only live!!! (a.k.a. more intelligent raster matching). Or overdub/overwrite is missing. Or live quantization of notes + preserving length (live). etc.
Also changing the behavior of the delay column, like it was suggested some weeks ago (cannot find it, was like delay = 80 is normal + with negative values!) would highly improve post-editing time, imho.
I do not usually ask overly.When I compose, I use a lot of live recording. I need.
I like the soundtrackstyle music, orchestral,with many nuances,also new age, trance and progressive.Therefore, I use the live recording many times.But I have enough.I justregisteran instrument 01, I record with keyboard Midi and metronome, live. Then I grab other instrument 02 and other track separatelyand I repeat the steps.After I fixnotes, delays, velocitiessetc. adjusting.But before we start I already know what will be the resultin most occasions.With R3.1 I can already do this.
But add more MIDI controls would also be interesting. I think they’re working on it in this days.Secondly, atracker (Pattern Editor in live recording) who can identify the notes and order natively would be great!Renoise can still improve a lot.but I am very satisfied with what is already there.Renoise I just hope it does not become a heavy DAW with thousands of things, some redundant.
I proposed this idearight now:https://forum.renoise.com/t/idea-intelligent-tracker-in-live-recording-with-midi-notes/44744
This idea has to do with this too:
Yeah, and while that approach probably makes sense for drums, it doesn’t make sense for when you’re playing chords. Of course, there’s always ledger’s note reorder tool.
Sometimes I thinkhow is possible thanRenoiseTeam does not go crazy with so many suggestions from people.
I can only speak for myself, but I started to categorize ideas & suggestions a while back.
And I update the topic whenever features are actually implemented - 3.1 and Redux are looking quite good in this regard:
https://forum.renoise.com/t/list-of-feature-suggestions-for-renoise/40515
I should mention that one solution for the column mess is, of course, to record into different tracks. But setting up your midi controller to do that everytime you want to record something is quite something. It would be great to be able to have a template for that or so. So that you can switch between “record into current track” and “record into this specific configuration” with a single toggle, for every connected midi controller.
Yes, in Renoise, instruments are bound to the MIDI controller - not the other way around. So if you load an instrument, it might specify a certain input. That’s cool, but it leaves room for the opposite approach:
This tool (which is 2.8 only, AFAIK) examined that type of workflow:
https://www.renoise.com/tools/midi-management-console
Would be interesting to revisit that idea, not as much for voice-doubling (although cool), but more for a quick overview and managing “performance templates”, like you point out.
I can only speak for myself, but I started to categorize ideas & suggestions a while back.
And I update the topic whenever features are actually implemented - 3.1 and Redux are looking quite good in this regard:
https://forum.renoise.com/t/list-of-feature-suggestions-for-renoise/40515
Yes, in Renoise, instruments are bound to the MIDI controller - not the other way around. So if you load an instrument, it might specify a certain input. That’s cool, but it leaves room for the opposite approach:
This tool (which is 2.8 only, AFAIK) examined that type of workflow:
https://www.renoise.com/tools/midi-management-console
Would be interesting to revisit that idea, not as much for voice-doubling (although cool), but more for a quick overview and managing “performance templates”, like you point out.
Yes, it’s nice that someone made a tool. But things like this should IMO really be core functionality. Why? Well, because it guarantees functionality over time. The link you posted is a perfect example why the tools fail in this regard. The API is broken (read: not backwards compatible) with pretty much every update. If tool authors do not update their tools, the functionality is gone.
So, what I am trying to say is that tools are a great addition, but important functionality should not depend on them. And I am afraid I do get a bit the impression that as soon as something has been made available as a tool, it does not get much attention anymore by Taktik and crew (because: the functionality is kind of there…just use the tool). This is a subjective feeling I have, and might not reflect the real situation, though.
Anyway, just thought I’d share this thought.
I can only speak for myself, but I started to categorize ideas & suggestions a while back.
And I update the topic whenever features are actually implemented - 3.1 and Redux are looking quite good in this regard:
https://forum.renoise.com/t/list-of-feature-suggestions-for-renoise/40515
…
Hi Danoise
Yes, I think you’re making a huge effort chasing and ordering ideas and interesting suggestions there in the forums.I guess the whole Renoise Team which will visit forums, noting the interesting ideas to implement as soon as possible, if they are suitable within the own project of the program,ordering priorities…This is great because we all participate in some way contributing things,each with what he can,although some things are ignored…
The feeling is mutual.We are lucky to have the team Renoise, keep going for arrangethings, help and listen to ideas.At the same time, RenoiseTeam is lucky to have users disinterestedlycontribute ideas.This is great!!On the other hand, other users with their tools complement Renoise.
I think the path traced is good. The Renoise project has an owner, and should remain so, with very clear ideas of what to add and what not to add.
All this reminds me of the TV series "Halt and Catch Fire"in the second season, the blonde protagonist refuses to sell his company for $5 million. She feels that your project is powerful, is largeeven though no money.She (Cameron Howe) believes passionately in your project,despite the time, despite the money. But ultimately Cameroncommand!For me, Cameron Howeis like Eduard Müller.He is creating a piece of art, and your project will continue to grow, with the help of us all,despite the cryings…Of course, this is just an impression.I recommend you to see the show,is about hardware and programming, also.
Even in these forums existbig ideas, terrible ideas, joys, cryings, tension, disappointment, passion, art, discussions, community!All this is good, and this does not exist in other forums where everything is locked with closed source.
I only ask that yourselves continue!
I think if there was a mandatory selection of category tags for a submitted feature request, the search for doubles and summary would be much more easy. currently the tags are used totally random.
just like in a bug tracker software.
Yes, it’s nice that someone made a tool. But things like this should IMO really be core functionality. Why? Well, because it guarantees functionality over time. The link you posted is a perfect example why the tools fail in this regard. The API is broken (read: not backwards compatible) with pretty much every update. If tool authors do not update their tools, the functionality is gone.
So, what I am trying to say is that tools are a great addition, but important functionality should not depend on them. And I am afraid I do get a bit the impression that as soon as something has been made available as a tool, it does not get much attention anymore by Taktik and crew (because: the functionality is kind of there…just use the tool). This is a subjective feeling I have, and might not reflect the real situation, though.
Anyway, just thought I’d share this thought.
Once again I think similar to you subjective feeling.I’ll remember this comment:https://forum.renoise.com/t/idea-add-a-new-models-type-menu-in-automation-editor/44559
Here I reflect my feeling about some things related to the development of Renoise. For example,when an external tool is created and is very useful, it is because something is missing under the hood of Renoise.Here are many examples: curves in Automation Editor, tool for order notes in track in Pattern Editor,great features that speed up and clarify the composition.So if any use is created automatically seems to ignore by theTeam Renoise.So I think the really useful things, should be native, and delete external tools,precisely the most useful. Because it would be good if they were integrated natively.
The best example is the tools natives in Automation Editor. The Automation Editor isused to modify any parameter DSP.It is a very importantEditor.He deserves special treatment, with large native tools, not external.
Theexternal tools are magnificent,have value and cost of encoding:
But it is so great, it makes the native editor automation, is almost deserted. Aletdown!
Other eg:
Most do not work properly.If all this were native, it works perfect forever.
However, it is in thePattern Editorwhere Renoise still not exploited enough.WhyPhrasesEditor has a beautifulVirtualPiano, and thePattern Editor does not?Whythe Virtual Pianonot write with the mouse? (also a work tool,not only visual)
Of course, we must always think to work with one monitor, and 2 monitors.
And now comes the greatest…When the tracker either"intelligent", and help the composer to automatically agree to arrange the musical scale notes in the Pattern Editor, Renoise will reach the end of the road. (Now, only collects pretty stones of the road).The pattern editor has enormous potential.Foul squeeze the maximum, and letadditionalpianorolls and bollocks. One only trackcould be a pianoroll with one octave musical (multiplied by 10). Indeed it is, only that it is not automatic.Many people have messes with the tracker (in Pattern Editor and the notes), because no ordersautomaticallyto writenotes according to the musical scale.There is no relationship between columns and notes.Maybe there could be an added option for this…If I have time I will try to develop some screenshots unifying ideas, something like an advanced editor to automate notes and order patterns. We just can do that,provide non-destructive ideas.
I’m sure the team Renoise knows all these things, and others that would like to have insurance and can not, because it’s hard work.The conclusion is that there are priorities.But it’s about time that profits are implemented natively, expanded and improved.We can only provide good ideas, and support each other. If an idea is good, we must study it and support it.On the contrary,all this is useless.
I for now, happy to enjoy R3.1!!! 
I think if there was a mandatory selection of category tags for a submitted feature request, the search for doubles and summary would be much more easy. currently the tags are used totally random.
just like in a bug tracker software.
I think the same. Yes, there may be tagsmother.Take Renoise areas and divide all. Eg: Installation, Control Panel, Menu Primary, Pattern Editor, Matrix Editor, Automation Editor, Track DSP Panel, Instrument Editor, Instrument Box, Samples Box, Phrases Editor, Keyzones, Virtual Piano, etc etc, Manual User, Help, etc etc…With a handful oftagswe cover all Renoise.
But of course, with mandatory tags.
I would go into a forum that only call"PatternEditor".
I would go into a forum that only call “Keyzones”.
Things like that…
I know this is an ancient post but I couldn’t agree more with the original posting. I have used Renoise for years and I have just given FL Studio a second try… and I just cannot be bothered with FL Studio! The thing that makes Renoise (or any other Amiga tracker tool clone) great is the fact that you can use your computer keyboard and see/hear things. Being forced to use a mouse or MIDI keyboard to enter/record notes is so painful in my experience. I love Renoise.
The only reason I had another look at FL Studio is because my new MIDI keyboard is “FL Studio ready”. The FL Studio knob detection is cool… I think I just need to spend more time with Renoise learning how I can map my MIDI controller knobs to different controls on my VSTs - that’s the unknown area for me.
