Even if some half-assed implementation would be possible, it’s a pretty bad idea to implement it before an improved arranger… (which in turn, in all likelihood, would make people stop requesting the master waveform timeline). The basic need could be covered in a more conventional and better way.
ARE YOU STILL WORKING ON THE SOFTWARE RENOISE ?
It’s already been stated, in this thread I think, that they have the intention to. The project hasn’t just been abandoned, the team have been quite clear for the reason that there hasn’t been an update in a while.
What is ‘the complexer system’
Your mail probably got marked or caught as spam due to your username…
…normally me was pretty satisfied with the new updates so far & this since version 2.1 
At first I thought that 3.x was shooting a lil bit ova da top, in due to all them new features & changes, yet even got used to that, now. 
Things will work out juz fine…trust Me! 
It’s already been stated, in this thread I think, that they have the intention to. The project hasn’t just been abandoned, the team have been quite clear for the reason that there hasn’t been an update in a while.
What is ‘the complexer system’
Your mail probably got marked or caught as spam due to your username…
Yes it was caught by the spambot.
Well yes i sell my own software.
To me Renoise is just about the first thing i use to create tracks and hunt for samples.
It is far more easy to do so then other DAWs like cubase etc.
I do not expect updates like that, but if there is no work on it, it might fail and needs repairs…
A waveform could be pre-generated in the background, e.g. if you stopped playing. It wouldn’t be 100% exact, but surely would help a lot. But then other details like note blocks instead note-offs should arrive, too, IMO.
What I’m wondering is whether the wave in the background requires a lot of CPU processing or is something light.In this way it would only have to update the wave every time that the parameters or notes are introduced inside the pattern editor/phrase editor (which is something that I do not like).It seems a very complicated subject. But I would not rule out that in the future, this would be perfectly possible, given the high power of the existing hardware.The question is to know what impact all this has on the overall performance.
For me, it would be great if this were possible. Each time you enter or remove anything from the song, you would see the impact directly on that general audio wave. At some point, this will be implemented in other audio programs, even if it involves some delay. But do not forget that this can be very complex to implement. Imagine very long songs. Any effect, equalization, filter, influencing the whole song would change the whole general wave. It would be a little beast. Therefore, it is necessary to know what real impact would have on the performance of having to redraw a wave or parts of it constantly.It must be very well thought out so that it does not require a lot of CPU processing.
The other path would already be a wave generated through an update button. There could also be a pattern range selector. Show me the patterns from 10 to 30. You do not have to show the whole wave.All this would be useful in post-production processes.Ok, you have your song practically finished, then check that everything is in place.
For volume correction of certain areas compared to the rest of the song would be very useful.
…
One way to do all this by steps is to render the song, then put that song in a sample to see what you’ve done.How many minutes fit in a sample?But this process is useless. The interesting thing is to be able to do all that before rendering the song.
Otherwise, you have no choice but to use an additional program, and do the process in steps:
- Your song is in the postproduction process, and you need a general look of the song.
- Save the entire song rendered in wav format.
- Run another program that allows you to visually analyze a complete audio wave to the millimeter.
- Determine the areas to correct. You will easily find the exaggerated peaks and the poor valleys. There is nothing better than a general wave to determine if your song has the volume structure you want.
- Go back to Renoise, locate through the time clock the conflicting zone or zones to be corrected.
- Readjust the overall volume of the song again.
- Render the song again.
- Reload it in the wave analyzer program.
- Check again that everything is in place.
- Repeat the process as many times as necessary until you find the volume structure you want for your song.
If Renoise had something that would accelerate this whole process, it would be magnificent. With the spectrum analyzer or the equalizer you can guide yourself in each point, but it does not allow you that global vision of the whole song. I’m thinking at all times about the post-production process, the mastering.That’s why a “wave update button” would not be crazy. Only use the general wave when necessary, even if that requires a short waiting time for the load.
This would also help the compositor to create albums that would not be out of harmony with each other due to volume issues. This is a fairly generalizing problem in Renoise.
EDIT :I have created another thread in case someone wants to discuss or contribute ideas on this matter. I get the feeling that we are derailing the main theme of this thread, which is rather a direct question to the Renoise Team…
hehe…
…he said #cat picture
canvas +1
not again
w00tttt!! Check Renoise Backstage!
^^ ^^ ^_^For some reason, I distrusted from the first moment of this link. According to “the virtual calendar”, the gentlemen in charge of taking Renoise forwardthey are immersed in Sononym, which should be published now.Probably, until the end of summer there will be no news here, since they will take vacations.So, maybe in early 2019 there will be some news.As you can see, Renoise has no priority at all.
Anyway, we can continue dancing together!
I think this whole topic is often a bit derailed by the silent assumption that the devs would feel some moral obligation towards developing Renoise. I don’t think that’s the case at all. It’s difficult to speculate, but I think these are the relevant factors.
- “Spiritual motivation” (referring to comments about devs wanting to do something else)
- Financial motivation:
- How well will Sononym do?
- Is Renoise currently selling well, already?
- Would hours spent on Renoise development be justified in terms of revenue?
The last point is interesting but also difficult to speculate on. Renoise is already “unique” enough regarding attracting new users. A new version with HiDPI or sidechaining et c won’t change that factor too much , realisticly speaking. I would assume that the large part of new version revenues (short/mid-term) would come from existing customers updating their license. If that’s the case, the interesting factors would be 1) how many loyal users are there currently, 2) When did they register and what will be the next version number.
That being said, I can only say that I’m hoping that the next version will be 4.0, if it’s true that it will feature a HiDPI interface. That’s totally justified imho. Renoise is already cheap, compared to other DAWs. Raising the next version number to 3.5 would be crazy generous imo 
I already changed my mind, I don’t expect anything new anymore… But it would be nice if Renoise could work at least as it was supposed to do, so providing OS update patches.
I really wonder that the Renoise team really does so few advertising at all, seems to me the same already with sononym. I read about it 2 times, and there weren’t so many details. There is no starting offer, no kvr thread, no kvr forum support area. I am no marketing expert, but there are a lot of ideas, to have a good start with a new software…
I already changed my mind, I don’t expect anything new anymore… But it would be nice if Renoise could work at least as it was supposed to do, so providing OS update patches.
I really wonder that the Renoise team really does so few advertising at all, seems to me the same already with sononym. I read about it 2 times, and there weren’t so many details. There is no starting offer, no kvr thread, no kvr forum support area. I am no marketing expert, but there are a lot of ideas, to have a good start with a new software…
Well, sononym is still in diapers if we talk about marketing.I mean, the product has not even been launched yet. Just an announcement of what it will be. But with that you can not prove anything. Not even there is a demo. When this exists, which could be this week, you can already do product marketing. Now it’s still early.
If we are strict, Sononym still does not exist!In any case, it is necessary to invest time in marketing as well, and for that you need staff in charge. Marketing does not work alone.Expecting that the opening of a website is enough is an error. It means announcing it on important sites and “provoking” people. Hey, here is this product. At least try it!
There is so much content on the internet that it is very easy to ignore certain products, no matter how good they are.But in all this there is an advantage. This is Internet. It is very easy to spread a news, make marketing “almost automatic” or at least practically free.Make your product appear on the most respected or relevant music production websites and forums, worldwide.A product can succeed depending on how you sell it.
And of course, make a link that is very easy for people to buy it try the demo and all that,and most importantly, do not quit, keep insisting.The novelty has its pull. But then the product will need to continue selling, and it will no longer have that “novelty” label.
…
That being said, I can only say that I’m hoping that the next version will be 4.0, if it’s true that it will feature a HiDPI interface. That’s totally justified imho. Renoise is already cheap, compared to other DAWs. Raising the next version number to 3.5 would be crazy generous imo
I guess everyone is now waiting for a new version 3.2, and it will be an important version. Then come the 3.2.1 or 3.3, 3.4 … to the 4.0. Jumping directly to version 4.0 is like laughing at the customers in your face.
Another issue is the number itself. I think the number is also important because it implies certain things. Because the rest of the programs use the numbers in a faster way. That Renoise has version 3.0 and two years go by for version 3.1 and another two years for version 3.2 is a bit strange. The reasonable thing is to use the x.1 x.2 … x.9 for versions of bug fixes and minor things, and versions 3.x 4.x 5.x for important and weighty updates. So from version 3 to version 5 it can take 2 or 3 years, at the most. Even the number is important in marketing.
If now in 2019 the version 3.2 of Renoise appears as important update, people who do not know Renoise thoroughly and its philosophy of updates, will think it is a shabby or poorly worked version, due to a simple number (3.1.1 to 3.2).It is a strange situation, which implies that in any news it is widely specified that it is an important update, which does not pay much attention to the number.
In any case, it does not stop being a number, but it is that people are also guided by certain customs, also with numbers.There is a recent example. FL Studio jumped to version 20 directly for its 20th anniversary. It is something symbolic that you wanted to point out with a simple number. The numbers also matter.It is necessary to always keep it in mind.
In addition, and also this is a strange situation, when the number is higher, it seems like more important. Now FL Studio has the version 20. Who does not know it will think it is an important software, with 20 important versions already behind their backs. Something similar happens with Ableton 10. It has reached number 10. It is an important value for certain values. Even the fact of reaching a certain number causes its developers to put their batteries.
Yes, all this roll for a simple number. :lol:
I’m not going to discuss this in length since your arguments are already too irrational or irrelevant. So is belief in numerology.
I just want to mention that 0.3 and even 0.4 leaps have been made before. 3.2 is not very likely imo. I think 3.5 is most likely, but maintain that 4.0 could be easily justified for a number of reasons.
The last time I mentioned #marketing to Taktik, he ‘virtually’ hang up the phone.
A new renoise - version around x-mess would be a legit #guess though.
I’m not going to discuss this in length since your arguments are already too irrational or irrelevant. So is belief in numerology.
…
Do not get confused!I have never spoken of “numerology” or any kind of belief. I am referring at all times to the impression that a "unbeliever client"can receive from a particular version number at a specific moment, and to the conscious choice of a company or programmer about the version that interests to have a program for an update.They are two totally different topics.
…
I just want to mention that 0.3 and even 0.4 leaps have been made before. 3.2 is not very likely imo. I think 3.5 is most likely, but maintain that 4.0 could be easily justified for a number of reasons.
It seems to me a very exaggerated andunjustified leap from version 3.1 to version 4.0. This makes no sense (in Renoise). As I said before, it is like laughing in your face.The immediate reaction would be from the customers, who would ask disgusted what the reason is; the customers who have a license about to expire would not care, but recent customers would not see it reasonable… It would be a very unpleasant gesture, knowing that among the previous versions there have always been about 10 updates.Since version 3 there have only been a couple of updates.Version 3.5 would be another story, there would still be a lot of scope to reach version 4.0.But hey, it seems that you are consciously choosing a number ;).
If you want we could discuss what would happen if within a few months (2019) Renoise 4.0 appears (without any intermediate version). Another issue would be if version 4.0 appears in 2020-21, without any further intermediate updates. It’s better that this new update is a super update. Many people would feel “cheated” (or rather very upset) after 4 years without updates and then they saw that the new update has hardly any juicy news.
Where is my crystal ball…
Where is my crystal ball…
Good question.I wish we all had a magic crystal ball.At least, we know that Sononym will be released by the middle of this month, and that taktik wants to get his hands dirty again with the Renoise code once again. At least it is good news more or less official. That’s something…
The Main Question is; will the instant #update cry babies ‘finally’ be satisfied with Renoise 3.2.2?