First off I want to congratulate the devs on 3.0, a stunning release with tons of potential. I’ve been diving into it for the last few days and like what I see. So naturally I can’t help but get exited about the future of Renoise. I’m under the impression that with 3.0 they’ve created a more modular codebase, and I believe Redux is an example of this. So what’s next ?
I’ve been using trackers (ScreamTracker2 and 3, it3, ft2, buzz and Renoise since 1.26) for rather long time, and the last few years I’ve ventured into signal processing and created music with Pure Data and Reaktor, experimenting with sound creation and algorithmic compositions. And in my day to day job (vfx) I use modular tools like Nuke, Houdini and TouchDesigner, and I’m very much a fan of the node/schematic based view. Its an incredible flexible way of working and creating new content. I believe Renoise’s future lies by having a cross-platform node based way of creating, manipulating and mangling sound, as well as working with event based tasks. The abstraction of the pattern seen in 3.0 as “Phrases” has tremendous potential in a nodal context, not to mention midi and osc routing.
I already own Reaktor/max, why should I care ? The very reason I got into Reaktor was because of the enormous user generated library (3500+ instruments and effects), the same is true for Buzz and all its crazy Machines from way back. Imagine what the Lua scripting language have done for the Renoise community, and imagine what a framework like this could do. Right now, Renoise runs on all three platforms, has a great sound engine, and a very powerful sequencer (the tracker itself) and not to mention a great sampler. Can’t say the same for MAX, Reaktor or PD. The next logical step would be tiny building blocks. Lots of them.
This has been dicussed for ages , and a lot of users would like it ( including me )
BUT
Renoise that has modular routing is realisable , renoise that would become a comptetitor for reaktor max/msp is wishfull thinking
It’s nearly impossible to compete with the big modular boys …being a heavy reaktor user myself …you can’t excpect renoise to become a fully modular environment from the beginning , I am talking here about modular dsp building blocks …
Reaktor has over 130 (irc) , has verry low level modules …core etc years of development by some verry verry skilled programmers who are specialised in this field of programming ( zavilishin ) ,
If you would say renoise that has modular routing + a few high level modules + a few modular arithmetic modules ( *,/,- ) and some filters that would be more reasonable …
Thanks for answering gentleclockdivider, it is the low-level hardcore DSP stuff I am after, because thats where the biggest potential lies. Not with simple modular track and fx routing.
Whilst I realize NI have had years to polish Reaktor, its age is showing in many areas, and while core was a welcome addition, its still very cluttered, dis-organized and confusingly implemented on top of an aging codebase in my opinion.
Bitwig seems to be the next player to go down that route, but I suspect we’re quite some time away from seeing it in public. But the potential for Bitwig to steal Reaktor/MAX/PD users is present IF; and a big IF the implementation of its modular framework is done correctly. Especially being cross-platform.
i like the idea. because with that modular design, one were free to chose if they run some component at all or not, so some stuff would be fast, some too slow for certain machines, some had experimental design, some be buggy, some would have been announced like connor_bw suggested today, some would be moaned and critisized to death… still it wouldn’t seem very problematic, aslong as the core system works good. and if one were able to create native components, would be cool. i mean, actually… lua gets always to slow for me. i just don’t try it anymore. yep, modular is cool. and of course there’s routing then. there would be even a little bit of a workspace system, since you have to place and dock components yourself. actually i could then fullfill my need to see a pattern 100% of the time
if then that cable stuff could be hiddden a bit, would just be unanimated 1 or 2 pixel lines that you tab in/out as in reason… then i’d find it cool
it probably would have to be designed and implemented from scratch??.. reusing renoise code. so that it’s name wouldn’t be renoise 4, but remod or modux or whatever…
what i dislike is non-integrated stuff. like searching the net for presets, components and wikis. it’s especially frustrating when the thing that is neglected is the core documentation.
I think you’re mistaken low level modules with high level .
Low level means :reaktor core …max/msp gen…it’s basically math /arrays etc…so low level means …on the lowest level possible ( in the environment .)= with low level modules you create high level moules like filters and osc’s ,just take a look how a reaktors core 'sine module ’ is created …pure math my frriend
Like I said …low level modules in renoise =wishfull thinking …high level modules , like basic building blocks :filters ,osc’s seem more realisable …
Now about reaktor , some modules are aging , like the standard osc’s ,samplers , but reaktor core whilst 10 years old is bassicaly reaktors take on a visual programming language and it goes deeeep …monark ‘s new zdf filters ( introduced by zavalishin in 2006 ) was built entirely in core …
So saying that reaktor is aging is far from true , maybe you need to delve a bit further in what reaktor is really capable off …sine/modal bank that can 10000 partials …I can’t think of any other instrument that can do this .
I wouldn’t count to much on bitwig’ smodular approach …
Also the reason why reaktor has become so big is because of their implementation of 'core ’ by hiring zavalishin …( previous sync modular) , renoise developers work on a freetime basis …
Ok sorry …reading your post again I see that you really mean ( know ) low level …sorry I don’t think that’s verry realistic
The only thing I have to agree is that the reaktor event system ( primary mode ) is a big pain in the ass .
Seen mock-ups similar to this before and although +1’d in the past, with Renoise current shape I don’t know if such a thing would be viable, the software becoming bloated. It would be nice to have a better visual representation of routings, something for Renoise 5.0 maybe?
I don’t have a beef with Core, that part is very impressive and parts of it are well beyond my understanding and capabilities. My beef is with how they’ve implemented it into the aging primary level of Reaktor. I think my illustration were somewhat misleading (or rather; unfinished), but the FFT node would be a wrapped up macro of something similar to what Stefan Schmidt did a few years ago for Core. For example, there is only one level throughout Renoise Modular, but you can wrap up networks into nodes (doofers?). But thats more of a workflow thing then a core functionality I would imagine.
Never tried AudioMulch, is it worth looking into if you’re a PD/Reaktor user ?
Renoise should focus on what its good at Redux is a great way for People to expand renoise into there workflow there are enough linear daws already and maxsp/reacktor do the job they are good at so use more than one thing its ok
Audiomulch is amazing , but high level modules only ,stepseq.filters , granulators, loopers, etc …creating feedback routings …or make amazing soundscapes from scratch
It’s absolutely awesome ,but t doesn’t have any seq.modules , for that you have to rely on 3 party plugins , altough some modules have integrated stepseq…( filter, arp ,
Every parameter has it own modulation lane + verry advanced xy field for automatin every parameter imaginable …called metasurface
Check out the demo .
It is really worth it
A long time audiomulch user is ‘fourtet’ http://www.youtube.c…h?v=uOt6BPYGVoE http://www.youtube.c…h?v=w2ox16chbnY http://www.youtube.c…h?v=7K_RTS73jSY
for my taste renoise should keep his focus on TRACKING , that means be a music-tool, not a sounddesign mega tool. what you would like to have is just a extensive sounddesign tool, not a tracker/notation program.
are u dont be lucky with the vsti and vst compatibility ? in the last 5-7 years i never have had the feeling that i could not reach any instrument i needed with vsti or atleast as sample, if nothing helped.
but i think that leads into a phillosophic discussion about music and creation: it seems for many pple its more important to create sounds than melodies (i was in that trap 10-15 years ago too! so i can’t really argue against ^^). now i see/know that a good track works even with the worsest midi instruments you can imagine. if not, i personally try to invest then more time into the composition then in polish instruments/samples, but that is again part of the personal phillosophic taste about music creation.
back in time i invested hours about hours for a single instrument which should be THE sound and be the corner of the track. it worked, BUT it cost muuuuuach time. noadays i’m forced to work 10 times faster than i would do it for my self, because the budgeds for music are lower and lower- naturally i would spend up to 3 months / track. last month i was forced to create complex orchestral songs in 2 days each with 3min playing time each, 4 weeks long… to achieve that i was forced to learn in the last ~7 years NOT to base a song on a perfect instrument; the song have to be working of a set of half perfect instruments, (out-of the box sounds inbetween -.- ), which TOGETHER have to sound perfect. forced to that way of working i now can concentrate all musical spirit in to the song intself, and dont waste any time further with instruments. (ok, ofcourse i now have a really big library of all needed things i can imaginate).
/>