Copy all slice points from one sample to another… basic feature but this is really lacking.
Example : I have a break and slice it, apply lots of effects on it and then I resample the break to save cpu, and now i lost my slice points and cannot get them back.
2 Likes
For the time being, I’m just happy 3.4 is here.
1 Like
A shortcut for hdpi scaling:)
What I also would love to see is the possibility to draw an automation curve across the pattern boundaries:
Currently you can’t start with a curve in one pattern and end in the next pattern. You will have to fiddle around with the start and end point of the automation. This is even more annoying due the factual two points for the same position. This could be easily done automatically and then way more precisely.
Maybe the last and the first position could also treated as the same point, instead two points. I think this would also be more logical. Tools which then still access the not exisitng last point could be auto-mapped maybe to the first point of the next pattern (e.g. dblues pattern resizer). Maybe this could break pattern logic though (if you use repeating patterns). Or the tools simply need a minor fix then, I could do that hehe
EDIT: Ok, you can do a line across already. Sorry, always forgetting to switch to line mode. But this for a curve would be most comfortable. Though I understand that this would require working around the pattern logic… Could work with a linear representation of the song (only if no patterns are repeated 
)
Also setting one point into first pattern and another one into second could already do that auto-line boundaries thing, at least if the pattern is not repeated, just as in line mode, IMO.
Ok this post starts to get out of control, but at least for me, there could be a “strict linear pattern mode” in the song settings, in which repetition of pattern and aliases of tracks are not allowed anymore. THEN in this mode, a whole new world of comfort could be opened. Like drawing curves across boundaries, setting proper positioned note-offs while recording etc etc etc. Also there are phrases to repeat stuff, right?
4 Likes
Yes, would be nice.
my wish? Make me spend some money.
|Version registered:|2.7|
|Valid until:|3.7|
2.7 is March 12th, 2011 . that’s 11 years ago.
one release = USD 75.00 that’s about USD 7 a year. ridiculous.
I’m ready too spend money on my favourite daw now.
8 Likes
I think this thread can be merged into the other thread. Totally forgot about the other, sorry.
i totally stand by this 
1 Like
Ya, me too. Would love to see an accelerated development cycle. I bought renoise in 2014 I think? Good through 4.0… make me spend some money devs!
I mean, what an amazing value, but I’d happily shell out for a new version license. Didn’t think I’d still be cruising on this one for going on a decade
2 Likes
Something else I’ve had a hankering for recently would be some sort of polyrhythmic addition where one track could have four notes and another could have five- and not with phrases, delay adjustment, or any other work-around. A simple ability to change the LPB per track, so one could just ‘see’ it, right there on the screen.
Would also like the capability to grab a pattern and slide those up or down (on the left side of the screen), kinda like how other DAWs allow patterns to be moved left or right to overlap.
Yep, and I’d love to spend the money to make this happen!
2 Likes
You can use ZPxx parameter effect. This doesn’t work for you?
This would probably be destructive. That is, the placement of notes is not the same as the placement of audio waves that can be mixed.
When moving notes up or down, you either destroy the adjacent notes or you should move them from note column (the latter is a mess). If the adjacent patterns were empty it would not be a problem.
1 Like
Raul,
Yes, that does work for me, but it works for every track in the pattern. I’m looking for the capability of taking separate tracks within a pattern and adjusting it that way. From what the manual tells me, this is only a pattern-wide effect. Here’s a visual of what I’m looking for. Unless I’ve misunderstood the manual, I’d like it to look like this:
As for the pattern sliding, SunVox allows for it, and there is no destruction of the pattern, song, or track data. Each track is individual within the entire mix.
Unfortunately, I do not enjoy using SunVox. Otherwise, I would 
2 Likes
Oh, okay. It is about separating the “pattern-tracks” (individual slots in the matrix), so that each one can have a certain number of lines. Interesting!
I guess the limit of 1000 patterns would have to be increased somehow. Or, allow tracks without slots in the array after the limit is exceeded.
It seems technically possible, even keeping compatibility with old songs.
I guess the values of LPB, BPM and TPL should be kept as global.
2 Likes
Hence why a standard arranger with freeform “blocks/clips” (e g midi clips, audio clips) would be nice. But then the software suddenly goes into another paradigm. I would have much preferred this route to the current old school blocky nature of trackers (it’s a stretch calling the current pattern matrix an arranger view). A global timeline with clips.
Well… that’s probably another software.
2 Likes
Could be another optional layer above the current concept, which wouldn’t break anything. Useable in an arrangement like in Sunvox:
So we could create intro / verse etc with the old concept and then put them into a clip arranger, where i can also layer them. Its something similar like Reason Blocks, but in Reason Blocks it was not possible to layer.
Or just use the old concept for drums clip, melody clip etc. and use them like in the FL playlist editor.
At the it would be like a “song”-phrase, similar like an instrument phrase.
2 Likes
I dont think that this is the right basic for audio track synchronisation. Better give us 2 Markers like a slicing marker that can move forward/backward in the Audioinformationstream. Some that move audio track content and some that shrink/expand audio content. This could be implemented horizontal or vertical and would be easy to use to quantizing the audio lyriks on pattern notes. Changing the LPB and with that changing the tempo of the entire pattern to sync with audiotrack is not a good ideo for me. But maybe i missunderstood you, my english is not the best.
happy tracking
Indeed, I was referring to being able to access this feature that comment @Neuro_No_Neuro without modifying these tempo values. Currently, these values are general for all tracks. There is no BPM or LPB per track.
@joule’s “place selected notes evenly” tool is a great stand in for assignable LPB per track. Very easy to do polymeter/polyrhythm and n-tuplets per track with it
@Neuro_No_Neuro, have you tried using this tool? I could imagine it opening up some nice rhythms for you…
1 Like
Not yet! 
I would even remove pattern repeat and maybe even aliases… To simplify and reshapen what’s left then, following more a common, standard daw linear concept as seen in the other daws.
For anything polyrhythmic, phrases can be used and extended. Also midi recording in phrases would be great, or some easy handling to mark a note range and make it a phrase. And phrases could be marked in the normal pattern editor, showing its notes slightly washed out or so. Then the phrase editor currently feels cripped and IMO should feel like the normal editor instead. Maybe it could be even possible to not use the phrase editor at all to make a phrase. Please think about it. These are the real workflow improvements.
Instead adding once again another layer of complexity, IMO better improve what’s there and even cut away which is redundant. E.g. pattern repeat is awkward, it was originally introduced in soundtracker to save some bytes of ram. It also causes a lot of problems in the API, at pattern boundaries and so on.
Also think that development would benefit from reducing complexity. I can imagine how development in such a complex project works (knowing this from webdev): You adjust one setscrew, and immediately it has a ton of consequences you even did not imagine, if your technical structure wasn’t well separated from beginnnig. And since Renoise was kind of “wildly grown”, even based on Arguru’s thing at first, this might cause an immense slowdown in development. I guess that there are some kind of unit- and integration tests, but even then, writing a ton of of tests also takes a lot of time. And tests need to be fixed, too, if the base structure changes. So the bigger the whole project is, the slower a little single change will be to implement.
My respect here for Taktik again for his incredible work. C++ is the royal league, and a single minor bug already can cause a crash. Would love to have the passion like him and his team.
Happy Easter!
3 Likes