I would not call this thread a request. these are just some fantasies or hopes, perhaps wishes. I realized a long time ago that development is going its own way, and how the developers themselves will decide. before it annoyed me that some kind of trivial thing in my opinion could not be implemented for years. Now I think more about how I can use what I have. This seems to me much more productive and at the present time, thanks to the already available instruments, I have found an interesting sound for myself. which I successfully implement specifically in renoise. I am very grateful that there is such a tool for so many years, because thanks to this I can realize my ideas.
7 Likes
Good morning,
I wouldnât agree here, since your comment seems to be out of context. The development does listen to the requests, but is very slow and takes time, also it focuses more on the essential or easy-to-implement features, the features you cannot workaround. VST3 and sidechain were long requested features. You are right, probably there wonât come neither your requested multiband-sidechain nor my requested prelook in the sidechain-send (which actually is a bit sad, since it woud give Renoise another unique feature again, a selling point 
), but I am quite positive that a parallel container thing will come on day, since it seems to be the most often requested feature here and also can be considered as âessentialâ these days. So requesting might be 90% of the time useless, but also might give new ideas and input to the devs. And also an overview about mood of the customers and fans, in the end.
Also if they one day would restructure development/sales, a lot more features could be implemented. They just would read this thread, program it 1:1 and get rich quick.
Nobody also wrote that you canât already do good music with Renoise now. Requesting a feature doesnât mean that you are devaluing the developerâs work. If I compare Renoise with other DAWs, Renoise actually feels much more comfortable to me in so many areas, like shortcuts, scripting, keyboard driven work. On the other hand, the other DAWs have ton of more modern features which Renoise simply lacks of. Or more recent base concepts like Bitwig.
This! Couldât write this any better.
1 Like
If I had a magic lamp and three wishes I would wish for
- (for vocals and recorded analog instruments)
- (for placing risers and such where the placement of the end of the sample is relevant)
- World Peace
In that order.
3 Likes
i would like to take â3 wishesâ approach as well
as the first
2nd: The whole Renoise community to show @taktik some love instead of bashing all the time on various topics
3rd: world peace
Renoise is very capable as a mixture of tracker/daw⌠I think we need more time focusing on the music, not the tools
1 Like
This exists! Oops, I mean, this had existed. It was called Mutant Breaks. It was a yearly unorganized contest, between Renoisers, with an open-minded spirit. It was cool. And during that event, people were sharing amazing stuff on SoundCloud, Twitter, Facebook, Twitch, Tumblr, MySpace, HearThis and of course in this forum. To me, MBC was kind of a tribute to Renoise, it gave it a small lighting beyond the forum limits.
1 Like
Hey, this is a thread for âhopingâ. Hoping is allowed. 
And hoping is not bashing.
Yes, Renoise is very capable and I love it to bits. But its not ideal for every genre, just like reaper is horrible for sampling. On the other hand moving to a different DAW is no solution for me, since I hate having to use the mouse all the time, itâs a vibe killer. So thereâs no way around living in this âstate of hopeâ and using workarounds in the meantime.
This thread provides a space where one can express their hope, cry their wishes into the void and then get back to making music, feeling relieved that they put their desires into words. Taking it as bashing taktik is not doing it justice.
5 Likes
worth of notice - there are many similar topics, which represent the same thing (asking for XY, feature) - hence my reply
actually - itâs very powerful if you use the grid instead of âdesigned samplerâ and midi - like you would in Renoise. Per-region FX, pitch, stretch, and everything possible 
Also, itâs like saying, the bike cannot fly⌠there are different methods & tools to achieve whatever you want. You do not require a bike manufacturer to make a bike that can fly⌠or you simply do⌠what do i know
What are the actual limitations? please give some examples (X genre making is limited due to Y ) Thanks
probably the linguistic nuances of speech are here. I did not mean any extremes, and even more so claims. I repeat, on the whole, everything ok. and if something new is cool, it wonât be good either.
Reaper is good but the defaults are really annoying. No auto grid resolution when you zoom in for example.
The other issue is the clips which are mysteriously always not exactly 1 bar long which induces midi ghost notes when looping. I had to zoom in maximum to fix this issues all the time.
Gave up on this⌠The funny thing is that I had these issues in 2014 when i last tried reaper, still isnât fixed.
2 Likes
i agree that it comes down to a lot of âcustomizationâ. But - there are plenty of ways to achieve that (sampling). I just did counter-argument in favor of Reaper that it is quite possible to do complex sampling, but the way how you achieve it - by nature - is not the same as you would approach it in the RenoiseâŚ
sure, I see what you mean! Iâm now doing a project on bitwig, I use only the timeline and samples (not using midi). You can do so much, for example with breaks:
- reverse clips
- slice as you want, see the waveform
- move the break inside clips with âaltâ
- fix decay with fades
- apply effect, bounce, integrate new sample to timeline (ok on reaper with per-clip effect this was even better)
I think this process is the one I prefer right now for breaks. Itâs not over-engineered, simple. in this way i can try a lot of breaks in a short period of time, leading to better results.
The renoise workflow is also like this: not over engineered, simple with slices and writing the notes. Simplicity is key.
1 Like
also, aligning two ârandomâ kick drums (or whatever, really) on timeline is way more faster⌠you can visualise - and use mouse to stretch it accordingly. Sometimes i go with Renoise due to forcing myself to rather use ears, and get the âphaseâ sounding ârightâ to my taste, and not to make it âmathematically correctâ. That really depends on personal preferenceâŚ
1 Like
â˘automation data and effect command quantization options for live performance & recording
Iâd like to see MIDI Import into the Phrase editor. Like, exactly how it works now, but instead of creating a new track, let me drag the MIDI into an empty Phrase and it all populates there instead. Would make it easy to copy and paste from and wouldnât keep pooping out new tracks and such as it does now. Eventually, Iâd like to see some improvement in the importing of MIDI, though honestly it isnât unworkable as is. Just kind of crude.
4 Likes
what i hope for is native multi channel recording
1 Like
a little rant
Nothing to read here.
amen.
I am hoping for a little overhaul / slight improvement by @taktik of the sidechain in Renoise:
-
Sidechain input also for the signal follower. And sidechain input for a doofer. For example, if you build some dynamical effect and put it into a doofer for portability, you cannot use sidechain anymore. Also for the signal follower, you now canât simply put the signal follower on another source track anymore, without loosing portability (my new fav word). Some good solution for doofer and signal follower. Most simple was that the doofer passes-thru the sidechain to the children devices.
-
Sidechain input for the ringmod device, so there is space for new creative explorations
-
A simple sidechain receiver device, so that VST is not required anymore (good for song sharing, portability). This one could also provide a most simple ringmod mode.
Thanks for consideration
EDIT: Aww, I highly need sidechain for the signal follower and doofer. Then I could use a separate track as intermediate sidechain where I add a constant noise using a fx, so I can establish an actual range limit for the upwards compression⌠Blah blah
Being able to pass ALL controller data through from the Midi tab input to the assigned track/instrument.
The current set up I have requires an input and channel set in the midi tab for an instrument (plugin in this case) assigned to a specific track, and the input also sends CC data too (itâs a hardware sequencer), but there is no way to map the cc data to a plugin instrument parameter that I can see, using the Instr Automation device. The only way is to set the same input device in the MIDI preferences and map the CC number to a parameter on the device. Seems a bit convoluted and has unwanted side effects, like entering midi data on other tracks than the assigned track highlighted above.