Pure nonsense. You also still believe in Santa Claus?
The native compressors do an undefinded kind of compression, the maximizer cuts like a scythe and adds crackles and clipping noise, multiband-compressors and/or limiters are completely missing and faking them yourself doesn’t have any use because of the anyway useless behavior of the standard compressors and limiter. A unit for soft-clipping is missing, so is saturation and fuzz gear generally. The native reverbs are plain mud and metal factories, missing any kind of modulation anyway and have to be EQed separately to sound halfway acceptable, M/S processing is (despite a bit of it in the exciter) completely missing, some decent amps are missing. IR wouldn’t work for everything because of the memory limit.
Well, that is only the mixing and processing side. I’ve already described the problems with instruments before in the thread and elsewhere. Missing modulations, redundancy, memory usage, bla bla… I’m really getting tired of it.
With yours it’s already 2 weird statements in this thread then.
It’s easy to walk somewhere in and say “you’re wrong”, turn around and walk out. I have a whole lot of practical arguments. I’ve repeated a part of them, specially for you. What are yours? That Santa Claus could do it?
With an old sock soaked with paint you’re not able to paint like Da Vinici and with native Renoise you’re not able to produce commercial EDM sound in the size of a demo-file. Not you, not me, not Andy Wallace and not Gandalf the White. I say again: you’re very welcome to prove me a liar. Dealing with mixing and production specially in Renoise since years, I know best what I’m talking about. Do you know what you’re talking about, too? I don’t think so.
yay, less music-making and more wank theorizing! i’ll be back in about 6 months to make sure everyone is still arguing about the same shit. good luck ya’ll.
Well again, do you think Andy Wallace used mb compression mixing Nevermind? Does every successful producer out there use tube saturation? (It isn’t tube I know but Renoise distortion’s saturation mode sounds pretty damn good to me) Phase distortion is a tiny detail in the big (mixing) picture. And has anybody even heard the term M/S 5 years ago? Wasn’t there great sounding stereo mixdowns back then?
One can keep listing this stuff but i think it only proves Renoise lacking some trendy anal-processing tools, not sounding bad. On the contrary I for instance, think Renoise sounds fantastic compared to the current “EDM” sound (hate that term) you can easily get outta FL. And since when FL has the reputation of sounding good? I thought it was the opposite
I’ll still agree mixing in Renoise isn’t optimal but it excels in other areas (which also depends on whom you are asking). I could use those tools if they were bundled but not having them doesn’t make Renoise sounding bad right? I think the saying “It’s not the car, it’s driver” sums it up.
Btw not trying to have an arguement with you or anything, just wanted to give my 2 cents about the subject ^^
You perhaps have a point where not all native effects are working as optimal or correctly as they should or is generally expected to work, but a “well produced Renoise track” can be made out of all sorts of bones than just native or perhaps no native effects at all.
The thing that must be right in every application is at least the sample aliasing when pitches are shifted. If you don’t use any effects, turn off the dither on the master track in Renoise and pump the default headroom from -6db to 0db, you have a raw mix that should sound as-is in every other music application that does not apply (hidden) pre- or post effects.
If you trust that, the “Save each track to a separate file” will be your safe way to deliver stems to mixing engineers that you rather trust in doing the job that is simply not confined in one rule to get the perfect mix.
If there is anything not correct in the raw mix, then this is a real bug in the program that has to be dealt with.
Mixing engineers come in different grades and levels.
Even mixes done in the better tools can suck. It all depends on who was twisting the knobs there. Also with the loudness wars you have to carefully watch out what you decide to use as a reference track (Enough examples on youtube that prove the point).
One can fuck up a mix using any kind of effect and this doesn’t matter whether you do this in Renoise or in any other music program or use external plugins for it rather than the native solutions.
Don’t think we can convince each other here. You think commercial “EDM” music sounds great and that it can’t be done in Renoise (because it lacks m/s processing and stuff). And you clearly believe the car is (if not more) as important as the driver. Da Vinci not being Da Vinci without using quality painting equipment and all. And you appear to believe it’s impossible to make a great sounding track without using MB compression or soft clipping. So it seems to me that argueing further would be pointless. Not to mention Santa Claus references.
Well, can you do that nativly in any DAW, using nothing but the DAW? Music on the charts have been mixed by higly skilled producers in proffesional studios and mastered with expensive mastering equipment. It’s not just a DAW on some cheap monitors.
So, if someone enters a formula one race with a ford fiesta and does not win the race, then you would still say that this is mainly due to a bad driver? Or would you agree that this rather extreme example shows that there are limits to your argumentation?
But yeah, I agree, the discussion doesn’t make much sense anymore at this point
Well except your arguments are mostly personal opinions? Reverbs being muddy or compression not being up to your standarts. Your previous argument is also a non-argument. Why not post up what you think is a great record and what you think is a well produced Renoise track but still being inferior?
I mean ASC uses Renoise. I think Fladd posted some great sounding music (b-complex etc.) using Renoise. I don’t have much listening experience in the stuff Fladd posted before but I can vouch for ASC sounding perfect. I mean:
Sure enough, he uses outboard gear a lot but do you really believe an artist’s sound is about mb compression or different saturation flavours?
Well you gotta stop being figurative at some point I suppose
Ok bit arts , I respect you and all and most of the time you have some good ideas and arguments, indeed most of renoise effects sound weak .
But I think you’re getting a bit anal about renoise .
People that love the renoise ditortion effect ( inputsignal /absolute value of input signal -1) = that’s the resnoise saturation algo …cheap as chips and free for download on music dsp
Most havent heard what a hardware tube saturator does …they just get excited by the fact that their signal is soft/hard saturated WOOOWwweeee …
Bottom line is …;renoise developers are no dsp ninjas … …they just build a great program + mediocre effects …
That’s why there are some good quality vsts’s to help us with that .
And oh yeahh …the multitapdelay is not that bad sounding …
The rest of the effects are indeed mediocre …
And to be honoust ,I think most of the demo files do sound Good
That’s of course true. And it’s probably not really possible to give a track that last touch, that a hardware console gives to it. Othwise everyone would do it, instead of paying expensive studios. But it’s not even that last touch. Renoise is just far away from achieving the sound that other DAWs can achieve. Take Sonar, Cubase, Fl Studio, Ableton Live, Reaper… no matter. Often enough this is also the sound that goes straight from the DAW to beatport or whereever, when no console is involved. They’re soundwise all far beyond what you can achieve in native Renoise with mixing. Yes, most of them cost a multiple of what Renoise costs. But that’s not the point. The huge difference in sound would Renoise imo make look awkward, like “trying hard and giving my best. sorry, won’t become any better.”. And that actually isn’t the sense of demos.
Take dblue’s “Syntechtic Sugar” demo from 2.8 for example. To me the most “popular” sounding one atm. Despite some things I’d have done different in the mix and some that I think are done wrong, it’s obvious he tried to sound modern, loud and proud. Overall I think he did a good job with the mix. But it still sounds very thin in huge parts, in parts very metallic and harsh. You probably could sound a bit better here and there with some more decent EQing. Probably. I haven’t tried. But I have tried some simple saturation and a multiband-compressor on the master. And the difference after some adjustments here and there is just massive, making it sound like a complete different caliber. Sound you can’t achieve with plain native Renoise atm, because of missing or bad essentials. In Renoise you just can say to yourself “Well, it’s not there. Screw it and stay thin.”. In every other DAW you’d now just drop in that saturation, the MBC and you’re one step closer to the big sound. Just one very simple example on one single track, but soundwise already a huge difference. Part of the difference between awkward and pro.
couldn’t disagree more. here’s a track of mine. i sketch my tracks outside of the computer (this one was with the op-1). i then imported the sketches into renoise for further composing/arranging/final mix with native renoise fx. then normalized in audacity. then straight to soundcloud. this may or may not be everyone’s cup of tea style/compositionally, but i think it stands up fairly well in the mix department. but honestly, the way that someone decides to mix their track is full of creative decisions as well…so ultimately, to each his own. aaaaand mp3’s suck:
Yeah, maybe I’m getting a bit of a heat. Still doesn’t change the facts.
If people are satisfied with what they have in Renoise, that’s fine and I’m for sure not going to tell them to become unsatisfied.
Yeah, that’s probably true. But they better become those ninjas, because what imo makes at least 25% and more of a DAW are its DSPs. That’s why it’s called DAW and not just sequencer.
Agreed on everything. But VSTs don’t help for a native demo.
Nope, I was refering to someone else painting like Da Vinci with it. There have been a lot of attempts to turn around the words in my mouth in this thread. You’re the only one getting a twinkle for it.
@rest
Sorry, peeps. Can’t answer all replies, because it’s just becoming too much. Just surprise me with a pro-track.
Well I’m not sure what you are asking for. I posted a pro track that’s done in Renoise which sounds fantastic. And it would be funny to say the least, claiming ASC wouldn’t be able to produce a (perhaps slightly less) great track using native stuff only.
So you want only native FX? Fair enough. But you should also post up some of those “commercial EDM” tracks using only native FX in other DAW’s, right? Like some #1 tune on beatport or whatever which uses nothing but Logic native effects and that would be the end of all arguments? Or were people supposed to be convinced by your imaginary modifications to the dblue demo track?
Or perhaps you were just talking about the demo songs that come bundled with FL? In that case I’m gonna have to disagree again cause to me they sound like everything wrong nowadays with electronic music.
Anyway, I’ve never bought a piece of gear because of a demo, or because artist x is using it. So even if renoise came with tons of bad ass demos by superstar producers, that doesn’t mean user x is going to magically start making comparable tracks. So if that means that renoise will never be the latest hipster trend, thank fuck for that.
After all it’s a $75 tracker. A fucking steal for what it does if you ask me. And if other’s can’t see the value in it, then don’t use it, and stop complaining about it. (stop complaining about it-- haha it’s the internet)
Still doesn’t change the facts.