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!
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!!!