Should Renoises Internal Effects Get Updated

General Discussion
1

looking at the internal effects of some of the other major music software out there,would it be smart to update renoises effects??

what do you think

2

They just did.

3

yeah, but that’s what vst is for.
what would be nice is more pattern effects.

4

I like them as the are, but making them better is never bad offcourse, as long as the new fx don’t eat more cpu power. When I open a vst, my cpu usage increases much more then when I use the internal fx.

5

I’ve edited the poll, because the way s-n-s did it was wrong.

6

thanx

7

There’s a problem with the low-end frequency range on some of the Internal Effects and EQ. That should be updated (fixed).

Otherwise, the effects are good as is.

8

I miss the option “I don’t mind, but i am satisfied with the current set of effects” any other choice is not something i fully stand behind.
What is defined as “today’s standard” and does this apply to all plugs or only just a few?

9

Perhaps “Today’s standard” is analog modeled multiband bloatware… but I personally would prefer to use VSTs for that, and keep Renoise’s internal effects simple and to the point.

more MetaDevices would kick ass though ;)

edit
… and where’s the “I love the current effects” option? … are we not allowed to like them? The second option seems to imply that we don’t even USE Renoise… and the 3rd one that we never use the internal effects…

… I HAPPEN TO USE THEM ALL THE TIME!!! … your poll is highly flawed, good sir, and is structured in a way that will garner a majority of “Yes, update them” votes no matter WHAT people think

10

I use only Renoise internal plugs and am quite happy with them.
However, updates and grades are always welcome.

I guess that pretty much sums it up ;)

11

im sorry for that my good man,im not as good at making polls

12

yep, ‘send - receive’ like devices as in Max/Msp for parameter abuse would be sweet, same for algorithmic controllers (+ / - * )

  • amplitude & pitch demodulator.
13

in a private discussion, taktik has said that the control rate (the update rate) of the DSP device is currently bound to tick frequency: if you are using speed 6, the value of a DSP is evaluated six times per row.

though I would find reasonable for some uses, it would definitely not usable for the majority of the users, who would like to have it for sidechaining

14

I dislike the delays - I really want inertia for delay times. A send/return loop would be nice too, or at least better routing between left and right channels (still can’t do real pingpongs)

I don’t like the reverbs either but I have yet to find a software reverb I like. That’s what I use my quadaverb for.

I definitely like how lightweight the internal effects are, though. Basically my issues are just with routing and control resolution.

Yeah, this kind of a thing. If you could set subticks… or better yet throw vertices in the automation envelopes wherever you want (not time-quantized), that would ruuuule.

The chorus RULES. Don’t change it one bit (please :) ).

15

I personally vote for attention to the arranger / clips / pattern zoom… however…

Perhaps what people are really wanting is a standard set of VST(i)s.

Better idea: a way to point Renoise to automatically download VST(i)s you don’t have…

You know, like vst.renoise.com/redirect_me_to?my_vst_somewhere_out_there.dll :)