Add to Chrome
Add to Edge
Add to Firefox
Add to Opera
Add to Brave
Add to SafariWhen comparing ReNoise 3.0 vs Sequel 3, the Slant community recommends ReNoise 3.0 for most people. In the question“What are the best DAWs? ” ReNoise 3.0 is ranked 20th while Sequel 3 is ranked 24th. The most important reason people chose ReNoise 3.0 is:
Shortcuts and other methods are used in order to minimize the amount of work that users must do with a mouse. This can greatly increase the efficiency of a workflow.
Specs
Question Ranking
Pros
Pro Requires minimum mouse input
Shortcuts and other methods are used in order to minimize the amount of work that users must do with a mouse. This can greatly increase the efficiency of a workflow.
Pro Very stable
DAWs are notorious for crashing, especially at the peak of a workflow. ReNoise 3 is known for its outstanding stability.
Pro Optimized for dual monitors
Users who have more than one monitor can view the sampler, plugins, and MIDI controls in the instrument editor, which can be moved to a second monitor.
Pro Uses a module tracker instead of piano roll
Module trackers are preferred by some users because they help increase productivity.
Pro Sophisticated effect modulation
ReNoise 3 offers a ridiculous amount of flexibility when it comes to automation. Instead automating by sliding points around, users can choose from an array of preloaded automation patterns in order to produce more interesting sounding patterns.
Pro Highly customizeable effect chains
Effects can be applied to samples in Instrument Editor in addition to being sent through track input. This is highly useful when dealing with multi-sample instruments, as each sample can have one or more effect chains.
Pro Limitless sampler
The sampler is deeply embedded in the way the whole DAW works, and it allows the user to build complex synth sounds with ease.
Pro Unique grid based tracker
ReNoise 3 replaces the typical piano roll with a tracker, which is claimed to be "the most powerful tracker in existence". The difference between piano roll and tracker is that piano roll moves horizontally, while trackers move vertically. Users may find this confusing at first, but trackers make it simple to customize every individual note.
Pro Fast yet intricate workflow
Building basic patterns (e.g. drums) from scratch is extremely fast and easy, and built-in effects commands allow for fine grain control that is difficult, time consuming or outright impossible in conventional DAWs.
Pro Vst support
Pro Program custom tools
Users can make their own instruments and effects using Lua .
Pro Advanced pattern command
The Pattern Command called "MaYbe" guesses which note will be next in a progression based on the user's habits.
Pro Designed to be easy to learn
Sequel 3 was made by the folks behind Cubase, and it is meant to be lighter and easier to learn. This program's focus on loops and computer generated drum patterns makes the process easier for people with no music knowledge.
Pro Dedicated beat page
There is a page exclusively meant for generating drum patterns.
Cons
Con Cannot record multiple tracks simultaneously
Live musicians are limited by only being able to record on one tracks at a time.
Con Interface can be confusing to people who's not familiar with trackers
Trackers are different from sequencing (arrangement) view (most DAWs) and session view (Ableton, Bitwig).
Con Closed source
Con No PulseAudio support
Without JACK or ALSA set up as your Linux sound system, audio will play from Renoise or from other applications, but not both at the same time.
Con No GNU/Linux
Does not run on GNU/Linux
Con 32-bit only
While Sequel 3 supports VST3, it oddly (imo) doesn't have a 64-bit installer, meaning you can't load any 64-bit VST3s either. Not sure how it was even possible for that to have ever happened.
Con Outdated
Con Complicated to download
