locoDog
When a loop goes further than the track end should VDJ stop when it reaches that track end ? I don't think it should, does anyone else have any thoughts on this?
Posted Wed 09 Jul 14 @ 12:04 pm
groovindj
How can a loop go further than the track end? It shouldn't be able to - the track doesn't exist after it ends.
Posted Wed 09 Jul 14 @ 12:18 pm
A Man and His Music
The track hasn't ended, but the music has. There are plenty of tracks that are like that. You can see a straight line, meaning there is still time left on the file, just no music. You can see the loop end point, so I just shorten the loop, or don't loop.
Posted Wed 09 Jul 14 @ 12:39 pm
locoDog
Lets say a track ends (completely) precisely on beat 640, and I want to loop the last 8 beats, and then lets say I hit loop 8 at 632.1 beats, is it right VDJ just stops the track? If VDJ can (and does) 'invent' silence at the start of the track (with backloops or goto -X commands) why can't it at the end?, (and for reasons of symmetry, why doesn't it?)
Posted Wed 09 Jul 14 @ 1:02 pm
A Man and His Music
Why?????? I don't know, maybe I am just from a different era. My primary purpose, is to entertain people, playing other peoples music. Over the years, I have acquired a lot of skills, and have learned some new techniques, utilizing the latest technology. It is still my responsibility, to provide the same quality of service, that my client paid for. I am on the forum now, but my primary focus is still on the job that I am being paid to do. When it's time to mix in the next song, I am prepared to do that. Waiting until the last second, is out of the question to me. I don't care if the owner is talking to me, he has to wait, until I make a mix. So, I guess some may need this feature, but I don't get it.
Posted Wed 09 Jul 14 @ 1:45 pm
locoDog
My point is V8 invents silence if a goto -X command is used at the beginning of a track, so why not at end. (within reason.)
Application: In the mix (outro intro) the last 8 beats of the outro sounds great with the 8 coming upto the crash or 1/2 crash on the new track ( and it will several times) , if you cue that loop even a fraction of a beat late then it won't loop the track will just end, If I get it spot on it will loop 8 and you have to ride the up faders (off for 24 and on for 8)
If you could just loop 32 then you could be a fraction off and (with plenty of time to adjust the loop pos) and you would still have the 24 off 8 on,
There are other applications but that's the easiest to explain, the question is why at the beginning and not the end.
Application: In the mix (outro intro) the last 8 beats of the outro sounds great with the 8 coming upto the crash or 1/2 crash on the new track ( and it will several times) , if you cue that loop even a fraction of a beat late then it won't loop the track will just end, If I get it spot on it will loop 8 and you have to ride the up faders (off for 24 and on for 8)
If you could just loop 32 then you could be a fraction off and (with plenty of time to adjust the loop pos) and you would still have the 24 off 8 on,
There are other applications but that's the easiest to explain, the question is why at the beginning and not the end.
Posted Wed 09 Jul 14 @ 3:04 pm
A Man and His Music
I guess it would have to be answered by a developer, because I don't see why it's needed in the front either. I ask myself, how many tracks, or situations, are going to come up, where this is a necessity?
Posted Wed 09 Jul 14 @ 3:43 pm
locoDog
Well it should be both (start & end) or neither, And I think both as it may be obscure in use but it allows for greater creativity, and margin for error & correction.
Posted Wed 09 Jul 14 @ 5:18 pm
DJ Ross M
It makes perfect sense to me (AManAndHisMusic).
Sometimes you want to grab the end of a track in a loop as part of your transition to another track.
It might be a vocal outro.
We'll assume that it happens over 1 Bar and then the track immediately finishes.
In order for it to fit perfectly with your mix, you may want it to repeat every 4 Bars or 32 Beats.
If no audio exists, even silence beyond the track end, this is impossible to do.
This is a perfect example of where DJ software can create possibilities that do not exist standard hardware.
I support this feature request.
Ross
Sometimes you want to grab the end of a track in a loop as part of your transition to another track.
It might be a vocal outro.
We'll assume that it happens over 1 Bar and then the track immediately finishes.
In order for it to fit perfectly with your mix, you may want it to repeat every 4 Bars or 32 Beats.
If no audio exists, even silence beyond the track end, this is impossible to do.
This is a perfect example of where DJ software can create possibilities that do not exist standard hardware.
I support this feature request.
Ross
Posted Wed 09 Jul 14 @ 9:31 pm
PachN
Me too.
I think it is usefull. Think of the many Radio Edits, that don't have a nice outro. So you want to loop the last 16 beats or something.
Should be possible, even if you are a bit too late.
I think it is usefull. Think of the many Radio Edits, that don't have a nice outro. So you want to loop the last 16 beats or something.
Should be possible, even if you are a bit too late.
Posted Thu 10 Jul 14 @ 8:24 am
locoDog
Another example that came to mind when a looped bit of silence would be handy would be with the slicer, say a track has 1 great clean drum break and you want to mess with it, a loop of silence would be the cleanest place to do it, Now I know I could add silence to the track myself but it becomes labourious after 1 track, Doesn't VDJ just have to increase the frame count to make this happen?
Posted Fri 11 Jul 14 @ 1:21 pm