When you want to have a discussion about mixing, it’d be a good idea to know what you’re talking about. Sorry, but you completely do not leave this impression. Talk to the hand. 
/>
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.
this is a bit off topic but i hope they actually kind of give up on trying to build more dsps. make the basic ones okish but better to focus on the core… there are great ecosystems and great competition regading dsps out there and building that kind of product is not what the team does best (as i understand it)
maybe partner with some firm which has a range of plugs and integrate them or just admit that it is a byops type of daw?
building a whole range of great dsps is a daunting task.
I almost fell for it 
Very cool idea!!
Renoise is a Tracker, which is just a sequencer 
Yes, but this someone else would have to be able to paint like da Vinci in the first place, or else your words wouldn’t make sense, and with those skills i bet this someone else could do some amazing things with this sock. 
I kind of agree with that. Effects can be done with plugins quite handily. Native renoise effects are far more convenient to use with the meta devices, so it really would be cool if the effects were better, but imo I would rather see other things implemented that are considered pretty standard, like audio tracks, midi routing, side chain capability. For my own personal use, and I know I’m in the extreme minority here because I’m the only idiot stupid enough to want to make metal in renoise, the day audio tracks appear in renoise will be the happiest day of my life.
First sentence of the Renoise Product description on the main page:
bit_arts, until you reference a demo track of another DAW that represents your subjective opinion of a “pro” track, you’re sort of talking out of your ass. because we can’t possibly make an informed(yet subjective)counter argument until you do so. chasing my tail in circles isn’t really a hobby of mine.
totally agree with this. the devs should drop the DAW reference. it’s a tracker/sequencer with some DAW capabilities. but for me, it has everything I need (actually it’s bloated in many cases) to make tunes (so it is a DAW for me). and for $75?? yes please.
This is also a reason why I bought it 2+ years ago. It’s so sparse that you gotta improvise. (also, all OS compatibility, songs have the samples in them, and the great license scheme)
There’s no direct relationship between tracking and sounding pro. Tracking means building music within a pattern editor. Sounding pro means using quality samples, quality hardware, studio-oriented speakers with a flat response, in a mastered environement free from sound artifacts, plus mixing & mastering knowledge about the way to use tools and fx to improve the listening experience.
You can build a cool composition within a pattern, without any knowledge about mixing and mastering, without any kind of appropriated hardware. And that’s probably what lots of users like to do because tracking music can be satisfying enough for a lot of people especially when the music is good from the start. After that you can have no ideas, no talent at all, no musicality, create a boring and predictable music, and use some DSPs, highly expensive hardware, consoles, and mixing techniques to improve the listening experience of a well packaged musical crap. Everything is possible.
Renoise -no doubt about it - is considered by people lika a DAW, and it follows the definition of a DAW quite well. It’s a software dealing with digital audio, automation concepts, tracks mixing, that has scopes and by track signal analysis, that stores audio data in disks and memory. Renoise is listed by musicradar as one of the most best DAWSof the world with Pro Tools, Sonar, Cubase, and FL Studio. But even with that kind of promotion, and recognition, it’s clearly focused on PEOPLE THAT LOVE TRACKERS AT FIRST and that don’t want to quit their tracker interface.
I don’t expect any “better” (mainstream big studio) sound from Renoise itself. Especially if I continue to work with lofi samples, with crappy budget speakers, within my room - that is NOT a good environment for listening music and recording music properly -. I defy any professionnal to make a pro sound of my music just with Pro Tools, and my messy room, my broken speakers, my headphones, or my laptop buzzer (well that’s the only name I’ve found for the speakers in it) : whatever the software, nobody - even a pro - will be able to make it at all with such a hardware.
So you can’t and will never be able to advertise Renoise as a “Pro” sound producer, you’ll have better chances to advertise it well if you show it like what it is : it is a mothafucking tracker.
I believe there are people with good hardware around as well, so…
“I know a million and one button monkeys that can mix a tune for you but only a handful of people who can write a great tune.”
- Ill.Gates
Did you guys know that Burial, one of the most respected artists in the Garage/Dubstep scene put together his first release in Soundforge by basically scissors-and-pasting all his tracks together? I’m hearing a lot of talk about the physical capabilities of Renoise being shit, but that doesn’t make up for the lack of actual good music writing coming out of the userbase. (I say this very cynically and loosely, I really enjoyed 22-tape’s posted music) Honestly, out of the Renoise demo songs I’d say that some of them are damn good music compared to the lackluster tracks of Reason or FL, like HUNZ’s Soon or Vivace’s cheese track or whatever.
I also can’t remember the last time a demo track for a DAW rivaled that of a charted tune using only native elements.
But yeah, I want to hear something new.
exactly.
aaaand exactly.
I just don’t see how great demo tracks are going to help Renoise sell licenses. It’s a tracker. You either like it or you don’t. I don’t think hearing a great Renoise demo will change the way people are inspired/or not by the tracker paradigm.
thanks for peeping my tracks, btw. glad you could dig them.
Another fact that should be taken under consideration, is that people do have very different taste in music. My impression is that people that are attracted to Renoise are not the typical top chart fanbase.
With my lack of audio enginering knowledge i can’t say what is correct in this discussion, but i can’t see why it shouldn’t be possible to produce just about anything with the right samples? If the samples are already processed so that you wouldn’t need to use any DSPs at all?
I can accept that some specific sounds are not possible to achieve by chipping (or other popular tracker techniques) and the use of only native DSPs, but i’m not really in on the whole concept of “professional sounding” music.
There are lofi bands that live off their music. So if music is your profession and lofi is your style, then can you technically say it does not sound professional?
I think you’re wrong, i elieve there are lots of stupid people with a lot of money that buys everything associated with big names and popular music just because they want be able to make music like that too.
I’m not shure it would be the right thing to attract people like that though. It would probably flood the help section. 
I guess that is just it. As I said before, my impression is also that most Renoise people do very, well, let’s say, alternative electronic music. Ambient, IDM, Breakcore (or whatever that sample slicing genre is called), etc. I wouldn’t consider the music I like to be chart music, but it is definitely different (think RJD2, Prodigy, Norman Cook, etc.). I sometimes just wish that Renoise would attract people with a broader musical style (hence, the idea to showcase different styles, to not induce this bias right from the start), so that I can have more exchange on the actual music I enjoy. Right now, I feel a bit like an alien in this forum when I listen to tracks.
Tracking music is anyway an “alternative way” to conceive music and to compose it. Alternative methods should lead people to produce alternative sounds or at least some alternative electronic music. It’s obvious that a soundtracker like renoise, attracts and aggregates members of a true sub-culture, raised inside a “vertical paradygm”, with ABCDEF instead of DO-RE-MI-FA, hexa display, qwerty shortcuts, the demosceners roots and connexions to game soundtrack music including chipmusic. We can’t deny that any tracker boy has a kind of “state of mind” in himself and it probably determines the genres musicians will explore with that kind of tool. It’s obvious that you will find on trackers more people that are against bad and expensive mainstream music. The sub-culture I’m talking about, has quite subversive views about the way “big money” determines what the people will eat or not musically speaking. (We understand that everything that you can “globally” listen on national radios, is most of the time promoted through an expensive brainwashing program, where true talent or innovation has nearly no importance at all compared with instant profit). You’ve got the vision of a mainstream culture dominated and controlled by “big ones”, always the same big names, pushed by big bank accounts, that spend big cash to be played and replayed all the time, by big audiences. And those big ones define what is the “good sound” : i’m going to tell you what is the good sound they want to define : the sound that only them can produce, probably a sound requiring a so expensinve hardware and expensive production that nobody but them will provide it.
I wonder what aspirations the devs hold for the future of Renoise? The answer to that question could possibly answer the question posed by this thread.
Well, I generally see Renoise as a tool to compose music. It is different than the piano roll ones, sure, but I don’t care for that. For me it is just one way to put in my notes. I can also do this with a piano roll. So the tracker aspect as such is not what attracts me to Renoise in the first place. I, however, can see the tracker and demoscene roots, but that doesn’t mean that Renoise cannot grow out of this and gain a larger audience. I mean, this whole discussion about implementing a piano roll, for instance, shows the problem quite well: The oldschool tracker people are strictly against this idea, just to keep the tracker culture up or so. I don’t understand this reasoning. I don’t think we can deny that there are musical situations where a piano roll makes much much more sense, while in others the tracker interface is more convenient. So why not just offer both? Composing would benefit from this. So the question really boils down to: Is Renoise defined as a music composition tool, or is it a Tracker, implying that it is not allowed to deviate from whatever defines a Tracker? I personally see it as a composition tool and extending the Tracker interface with alternative methods would BENEFIT Renoise, NOT HARM it.
I also don’t care for the music business that much. I just listen to stuff I like, and whether I find that on the Radio or in some underground forum doesn’t make the slightest difference for me.