The slicer is more like a multitrigger device right now.
I would like to have the ability to use the slicer like it is right now, but
that the sample would really slice the sample in few slices, so you can cut/trim/fade the start/ends of the
individual samples and even copy sample to a new key in the same instrument slot if I would like to have a copy of a sample but for example pitched up or down.
Like the api slicer tool but not that the sample would be cut to equal parts but like put in with the markers.
Its like you use the slicer and all keyzone mappings and trim options are locked when making use of it.
Per sample in instrument envelopes would be a big +1 one to.
Again, I don’t want to be the party pooper for feature requests like this, but Renoise still has Lua scripting and all the slicer methods are exposed in the API.
Reminder: The feature is not called “Slicer” or “Beatslicer”, but “Slice Markers”.
Those markers will no doubt be extended by scripters in cool ways in the upcoming weeks.
it’s good to give this point some attention. i think due to the emphasis on ‘not a scripting update this time’, some users forget that each new feature is or will be accessible through scripting. as you point out, those markers make for some really cool new scripting possibilities. people should remember that scripting is still a key feature of Renoise, and not get too caugth up in feature requests now that the beta is out.
Sorry but I personally am not a fan of the scripting.
I don’t want to download each tool seperate, be on the lookout for updates, follow which updates there are what lua changes renoise goes trough so which tool works and which not with a new renoise update, assign tools to shortcuts, search where the tools are placed by the maker, have a endless list when hitting the tools tab because many scripters
believe their tool should appear there. I am not messing with lua because it takes my time from making music or doing other things.
I think it’s up to the renoise team to implement features and not users so renoise will not be a mess like reaper is.
I just want a single application that does the job. And that is why I suggest things and give comments.
Renoise stole my heart but there is always room for changes and features.
And I think this is the best time to do it since it is beta and not a finished product yet .
@CLAPZ: i’m sorry, my reply was not aimed at you, but more to the way people think about feature requests in general. as you have been able to witness the past couple of days (since the 2.7b release) there has been a wave of feature requests (better yet, the 2.7 feature requests forum was pretty full when the 2.7 bug reports forum was still completely empty, which says something about the way most people think, i think), simply because people feel now is the time to step in and shout your request because now the devs will definitely be listening. what they could’ve done instead was just try out the beta and try and help to find bugs and stuff like that (ofcourse i’m guilty here as well).
my point is not so much that scripting should be the way to solve the ‘problems’, it is simply that the dev team just pushed out a beta filled with new stuff, and people should chill out a bit and appreciate what they’ve just been given. when you look at the Release Notes for the 2.7 beta you will see the devs have implemented certain tools natively, and that is one of the things why scripting is great. instead of a visual mockup of a feature, you can do the real thing and have it working as you wish through scripting, and if its good enough it just might get implemented as well.
again, this was not aimed at you or your specific request, i made my initial comment more as a reply to Conner’s comment.
Like, instead of blurting out en masse, maybe a photoshop or two, or a script prototype, e.g. put some effort into the request so people underatand and the devs can implement it better…
The beta will go on a month or three, there’s time.
PS: Not directed at anyone in particular, just the phenomena of feature request flooding in general.
No problem. I do think ( most ) of my posts are more about finetuning some of the new features and bug reporting at the moment so I feel not offended or something and will try to keep it in mind what you sayed when posting.
I can see the forum is quite active at the moment and some topics ( also one of mine ) could be bundled with each other so it could be irritating sometimes.
Please stop pushing the API at anybody who makes a suggestion for the slice markers some of us are musicians not coders, or are we now just saying Renoise is a LUA IDE and should only be used by people willing to code ?
Just saying the more detailed the feature request, the easier it is to implement for developers. Easiest? Lua prototype. Then the dev can go “yeah, that makes sense” and port it. Second is photoshops.
3rd place is your fired… Or expecting everyone to know how something is implemented in some other app. See “photoshops” idea.
Well lets be honest here
1st place I’m a musician not a coder
2nd place I’m a musician not a graphic designer and don’t own Photoshop
3rd place If the devs haven’t used these basic features elsewhere before, how the hell can they expect to do it right ??? (This smacks of Cockos reinventthewheelery and look at the state of a bunch of the crap in Reaper, that they have to come back to later to fix) sometimes when something is done a certain way in every other app, there is a reason, because it is how it is supposed to be (That is not a slight at any particular feature in Renoise, just saying, without prior knowledge how can you possibly form a reality in your mind of what is best)
But you have just completely invalidated your own argument here by using the word references, because mentioning other apps is referencing no ?
And you missed my point a little too, I never said that any other app did anything right, what i am saying is that when there is a standard way of doing something that is widely accepted as the correct way of doing things (Most apps do most things exactly the same as each other, no matter how much any particular fan of any particular app will shout otherwise) it is normally because that is actually the best way of doing things (Again this isn’t a slight at any feature in Renoise because to be perfectly honest there is not much in Renoise i can see that has been done wrong, It doesn’t fit with what “I” want it to do much anymore because i am fed up with Rewire and would just prefer it as a VSTi, but my use case is very very rare, and what Renoise does and professes to do is done in a rather clever and very usable way)
This thread (a valid feature request with an unhelpful title e.g. “beatslicer not a beatslicer”) has been derailed.
I apologize.
I used it as springboard to give props to the API, part and parcel of the idea of “feature request civics” which was expanded upon by rhowaldt and now we’re debating the concept of “widely accepted” vs “developer is happy with what they did with respect to available choices and needs feedback.”
I will finish with I don’t disagree with feature requests. I just wished people put more time into them. It’s a new beta. The developers just finished a huge amount of work under a self-imposed deadline.
Of course my original “check the API” was flippant, and this is what caused the derail…
I’m bowing out gracefully as I don’t think, beyond Lua scripting, anyone actually disagrees with each other.
Actually i take some blame for the derail too, however let me just explain why quickly
Example
Reaper implements API
Following two years only useful features added to Reaper (besides some esoteric bullshit for people who post 8000 times a year on the forum) are implemented by 3rd parties (SWS and so on)
I am just hoping that Renoise doesn’t end up the same way
So i apologise for jumping on the API thing but recent experience has left me a little dry on that whole issue
The chained instrument feature looks suspiciously similar to what i whipped up by controlling multiple instruments through OSC.
The drumkit generator also has undergone some changes…
@Bungle: The api is to complement things, it doesn’t always mean certain stuff is not going to be implemented. the devs want to aim towards really big features that the API definately won’t be able to do.
So in that regard you don’t need to worry that 75% of the stuff will be shoved off towards the API. Why would you think that Taktik reeled in dBlue to the developer team and why do you think KraKen and Eric joined the team? So that they all could yell in choir:“Just script it!”?
and seems like I just made a topic on similar things…
I did not even yet get to the stage where I would need to detune a clip, when testing this Slicer for its features, but yes, that will eventually need to be solved.
these 3 things are now what need to be implemented, and then Renoise is 100% capable of competing in features with the likes of Cubase, FL Studio etc…
-Individual envelopes to slices
-Individual outputs for slices
-Individual tune settings for clips
Now there really is not much to do, and the slicer is… nearly perfection, but I agree with the poster - these things are important…
some of us are musicians not coders, or are we now just saying Renoise is a LUA IDE and should only be used by people willing to code ?