Hi!
I made a comparison between Renoise and SX2 and the rendered/exported files sounded different. (Will have proof tomorrow, if you want…)
But I used a lot of effects: Glaceverb, Ambience x2, Wideboy and NyquistEQ. (Of course, exact settings.) It’s a lot of them, so it might be just normal…
Also: When I rendered a pattern/song in Renoise, there was a difference, even though there shouldn’t be.
It depends upon what conditions you used.
Just saying that you used exact parameter settings for your plugins in both hosts isn’t enough.
In Renoise:
There are settings like sound-dithering on the master track you should turn off and then there is the matter output is 6db beneath the usual amplifying aspect.
Don’t know exactly what SX2 involves.
For both hosts:
Also what rendering options are used: bitset and interpolation methods. Do both hosts share the same interpolation methods?
Do they really support the same type of 32-bit float? Because there are various 32-bit float formats out there (not my fault)
It is pretty much comparing peers to apples, but it isn’t necessary, those who need apples will eat apples and when they need peers they will use peers.
sounded different in what way? just curious what you exactly mean
Here are the two files:
download from Yousendit
…this might not last for a long time, though, so here’s another link.
(edit: don’t save as… open those links in a new eindow)
You don’t need a hi-end system to hear the difference. But, as I said, there were a lot of effects involved.
I used Battery2, same kit. Then applied effects to one track. Of course I never use dither in Renoise, why would I…
Then exported at 32bit 44.1kHz, (Arguru’s perfect, high priority) normalized and dithered&converted both files to 16bit.
Then tried again with just 2 effects and couldn’t notice a difference.
Another thing: I had 1 pattern in a song, rendered: 1. Whole song. 2. Only that pattern. The results were different… but that happens in Cubase as well sometimes, so…
Another question about effects on tracks in Renoise: are they pre or post fader(vol, pan…)?
How would the sound be if you turn off the dither on the master-track?
why is it good to turn dithering off?
Been on this issue for the last hour or so…
The problem was not in the effects, but in Battery.
I tried the same thing without effects and: The file from Renoise had the peaks clipped. So alltogether it sounded more compressed.
Lowering the master vol. in Renoise didn’t solve the problem. The volume in the instrument properties didn’t solve the problem. So the solution was to pull down the volume inside Battery… it must not exceed 0dB. I didn’t know I had to be carufull about this in Renoise.
As a matter of fact: when I rendered (two times), after the rendering I think the master vol in Battery went from 0dB to -4dB automatically. The next 2 times not any more. Could this really have happened, or was it just a dream? 
If you have any vsti automation devices and set a start-value somewhere, this will also happen real-time while playing.
Other than that i could only consider Battery used auto-declipping that you somewhere seemed to be able to turn off unawarely, but i don’t know Battery so that part is out of my juristriction.
In some cases samples are deformed in an undesirable way after rendering.
Or the renrdered output does not sound the same as when realtime played in Renoise.
Dithering may be one of the techniques that cause this.
By turning it off, you may resolve these undesired artificial side effects from appearing in the output.
Usually the first place to look when you have a difference between rendered and realtime output is checking what type of interpolation mode has been used when rendering: arguru’s sinc has the most impact upon low quality or massive filtered samples
I didn’t do any more experiments on this subject for now.
BUT: There should be some volume meter (in dB) and/or a peak/clipping indicator for the instruments and for the channels.
cough Throw out those track scopes and put a mixer there! cough 
What do you mean by most impact?
BLASPHEMY!
Well, the track scopes phenomena is a holy heritage from trackers of old, that is not to be screwed around with 
Most noticable.
about the scopes:
I still think it could be useful to have levels/clip indicators, as ppl have suggested many times before.
I also sometimes miss a basic vol/pan overview (mixer). So why not add a few basic things in the scopes?
Here you see a simple vol/pan value that you can click and drag to change.
I think this make most sense if its a ‘hidden’ gainer last in the track fx-chain.
You dont need the ‘v’ and ‘p’ letters either.
If you got lots of tracks and the scopes get narrow the numbers can be replaced by a symbol. When you click and hold the symbol a slider or something will pop up:
Other ways could be to get popup-slider by just leftclick and hold any place in the scope to get volume slider. And rightclik and hold to get pan slider.
hum… maybe I should post this in the ‘Ideas and suggestion’ forum.
The first picture is great. Just to have the info visible. The second looks a little cluttered, but more because of the actual scopes than your addition. IMHO it’s actually time the scopes were done something with. I’m just a front page blasphemer I guess.
Having them above/below each track (maybe contractable/expandable) seems like a logical step to take, except it would eat screenspace.
Throw a few small track indicators (for clipping, etc) on the first one and it’s the perfect addition.
great idea … volume slider popups! nice little help as long as there is no real mixer …
and i say it again and again: we need level-meters with peak indication!!!
PLEASE in the next version! 