The latest release was an important maintainance release for sure. Yet there is some stuff missing that you can’t really compensate with a plugin, e.g. parallel container for fx and instruments 
Also some small stuff, like increasing midi inputs to 6, doofer inputs to 16, a native sidechain input device etc. Improving scripting. Oh, clap support 
MPE support 
Polyphonic modulation, you name it.
4 Likes
Simple but necessary thing. Allow to PASTE multiple times in Sampler . Like in any other programs.
What do you mean? Whole samples or parts of samples in the editor? For the latter, spamming Ctrl + V works and for the former Ctrl + D duplicates samples in the sample list as many times as you want
- select and copy ctrl+c part of sample.
- press ctrl+v on any other part of sample. Have a copy of selected part.
- press ctrl+v again - nothing happen.
for example, I can do it in SoundForge.
Press the right arrow to move the selection cursor in the sample editor, then Ctrl V should paste again. At least that’s how it works for me. I often paste multiple times in the sample editor, adding cycles, etc
1 Like
Ok. Thanks. Look like this feature not available for now. I’ll keep do it , like you do. But it’s very awkward.
Ability to “Note off” before second line. This is something I miss daily.
Maybe a New note off command for whole track so you could enter it to a paraller column.
1 Like
Do you mean a continuous paste via a keyboard command?
For example, after copying the selection and marking a position, pressing [ALT CTRL V] four times pastes the piece of the copied selection four consecutive times. The result would be 4 pieces glued in a row starting from the previously marked point. If the marked point is the end of the sample, it would grow in duration. Is that?
1 Like
Does Cxx not do the trick? Also, I’m curious what LPB and BPM values you’re using that would necessitate an off message before the next line.
You can always use phrases to create very short note events by scaling up the LPB in the selected phrase and calling that phrase when you need it with Zxx
2 Likes
Theme files could include fields like Artist_Name, Theme_Description, HTTP_Link and UUID.
In the Theme tab in Settings one could access the theme info, similar to Song Comments, through a Right Click on the theme or a button under Delete button.
2 Likes
A simple native Pitch Shifter and/or Octave efx plugin - something similar to the ones in Zoom Multistomps. It does not have to sound perfect transparent, I quite like the effect of the real time pitcshift artefacts.
Controls for Semitone, Cents, Wet/Dry, Tone.
With assignable parameters, that map correctly to Key Followers output.
5 Likes
Native wavetable instead of FM. A chorus with ‘noise’. These two things that I have in Ableton would take care of any FM requests and also provide beautiful pads with wonderful stereo chorus effects that are ‘noisy’. Yep, I know I can just add a noise waveform to the sampler and maybe just add a stereo effect, but it would be nice to have an ‘all-in-one’. The Wavetable synth in Ableton is where it’s at. Too damn good!
3 Likes
Did you see my recent wavetable vid? It’s a workaround, to be sure, but easy to get some nice results with it.
I’m all for a native, robust wavetable implementation in a future release.
I still would love to see native fm. Would be dope to be able to FM samples with other samples
3 Likes
oh yeah!!!
I mean…MPE support!!! 
There is one feature I would like to formally request for the Pattern Editor and Instrument Box:
- Ability to link any track to a specific instrument. By doing this, “in the track the instrument index subcolumn would disappear”, gaining a lot of space horizontally for more tracks and getting an even cleaner view of the notes. The two-digit pinned instrument index should appear above the track. The instrument index on the track may appear to the right of the color bar if linked (empty or “- -” if not).
Technically, it is common to “link” an track to a specific instrument. Why not have it in practice?
In the image above (it’s just a fictitious sketch), instrument 02 is linked to track 01, and instrument 03 is linked to track 03. In these two tracks, the instrument index next to the notes does not appear, saving horizontal space and avoiding repetitive information . Additionally, “Track” could be replaced with “Tr” in all tracks, if necessary.
It’s just an idea of what it could be like. I think this feature should be included in the pattern editor, as well as more mouse wheel capability. For example, being able to open or close note columns with the wheel, on the [+] buttons (upper left corner)…
Actually the instrument index for each note would “still exist”, it would just be “hidden” by not showing the instrument index subcolumn in the track. In fact, a lot of space is saved in a track by using multiple note columns. If we study most XRNS song compositions, a lot of them link tracks to specific instruments on a regular basis. It’s very common.
7 Likes
This would have some advantages and some disadvantages. Compatibility with old Mods stuff would broken because many uses more the only 1 Instrument per Track. (Instrumentmixing because olf Trackcount limitation)
Maybe there would be disadvantages for heavy sample users. I dont know her Workflows, im using much VST.
on the other Side…
It would give more efficient use of horizontal screenspace, which is ergonomic. And ergonomic is nice.
Difficult to decide.
Maybe it would be best to make a good compromise?
My suggestion would be a Button under the Patternarea to outblend the Instrument IndexColumn in Trackview, similar to the other buttons of this type to outblend PatterFx and so on. We could make show the Instrumentindex as “02” like in your example when all Notes in all Trackcolumns are same instruments, and “02+” for instance. if there are more then 1 instrument in track. Then we could get maybe a Hint to with exact
instrument index, samplename or VST name when you hover over a single trackcoloumn. In every condition for this, i would recommend some design studis for this changed design/use-case scenario to practically outtesting if the Pattern/Track workflow in all will be better or worser.
I dont know if there are many users which use all 12 Columns per track with instrument mixing. The difficult is that you can mix different instruments together in one trackcolumn ( what you should not do anymore in nowadays times) or they use maybe trackmixing with different instruments in different Columns of a Track. (1 instrument per trackcolumn)
A good idea would be a user survey to this thematics i think.
happy tracking
Edit: The “Track 01” and so on, i everytime rename to my Instrument category. For instance in “Snare” and so on.
This would be an XRNS feature. If you use another type of format or data from other song formats there simply would not be tracks linked to the instrument. There wouldn’t be any problem. Furthermore, the data is still there, but hidden. This is the same as what happens with the volume subcolumn, for example. You can hide it but the data is still there. Or with the unused lines at the end of the pattern (all patterns have 512 lines, but it is common to have many hidden lines). These hidden lines can contain data, even though they are hidden. So there wouldn’t be any compatibility problem, since the “data container” is still intact. I would only change the triggering of the notes (instead of using the instrument’s index next to each note, it would use the linked top index of the track)…
There would be no problem either, because the user still has the possibility of using “unlinked tracks”. It’s just that linking a track to an instrument is an option. If you don’t want to, don’t link it. There are no compatibility or workflow issues here. It’s really a graphical and linking feature.
If you decide to unlink the track when you already have many notes composed, the instrument index will automatically appear next to each note.
On the other hand, there are no problems with the track names. Renoise automatically assigns a fixed name “Track XY”, which could be compressed to “Tr XY” if necessary, for automatic names only.
1 Like
Would be helpful if the Multiband Send device, could also be able to send to a group it is within.
1 Like
Ok in this way it sounds sensfully for me. Except the fixed Trackname. I want to assign my own trackname to a linked track anyway. So better for me would be showing a linked track over a single symbol ( for instance a chain icon) and leave the Trackname overrideable by user. This would be an acceptable Solution for me. and if you unlink the Track over a click on the chainsymbol, it dissapears and the instrumentindex columns are showed back in the Trackcolumns. I would support this suggestion.
happy tracking
When I comment on track naming, I’m referring to when Renoise automatically names tracks with “Track XY” (then compresses it to “Tr XY”). Of course, the user can change the name as he prefers and use whatever he wants. I have never talked about a “fixed name” but rather the automatic name adaptable to the width of the track.