vlnjacki
+1
Posted Mon 02 Jan 17 @ 6:33 pm
djragman
Adion wrote :
Why would you want to scan a file again that has already been scanned, if not because you made a mistake and want to reset it?
In my case it's the following reason:
I have some files, which were scanned with wrong settings in the ZeroDB-Entry, so Gain is too high.
In a lot of them, the grid is corrected to use the Freestyler-Plugin ;-)
So if I rescan to have the right Gain, I will lose all the Grid-Corrections.
Posted Mon 09 Jan 17 @ 10:05 am
DJ Varium
Another reason though. When version 8 came out, it was said to have an improved beat detection algorithm. I would assume when the next release comes out (whenever that is) It will again have an improved beat detection. We will ALL at that point then want to re scan all our files, but I cannot remember which ones I have manually adjusted.
Posted Mon 09 Jan 17 @ 10:20 am
Adion
The zero db setting takes effect on the next song load, it doesn't require rescanning at all.
Posted Mon 09 Jan 17 @ 11:05 am
djragman
Takes it effect, If there are entries in the Gain-Tag, too ?
Posted Mon 09 Jan 17 @ 11:47 am
groovindj
Andy7689 wrote :
We will ALL at that point then want to re scan all our files
No, please don't speak for all of us! It's entirely up to each individual if they want to rescan their files. No one has to. If they've already been scanned once, that should be good enough.
Personally I don't really bother with checking beat grids, setting lots of cue points and POI's. Mostly I just play the music. I don't use lots of CBG reliant effects or mess with the track using cues etc. so grids, cues and all that jazz is not a big deal for me.
I would imagine there are many other VDJ users like me too, as it's very popular with mobile DJs and we don't all do live mashups. :-)
Posted Mon 09 Jan 17 @ 6:30 pm
kradcliffe
Never ever used CBG. I just use cue points and my ears!
Posted Mon 09 Jan 17 @ 6:33 pm
Adion
djragman wrote :
Takes it effect, If there are entries in the Gain-Tag, too ?
Gain in the tag editor shows the computed level of the track, zeroDb is indeed applied after that.
If you use autoGain setting remember or auto+remember, then gain doesn't change based on zeroDb value if there is a remembered gain.
Posted Mon 09 Jan 17 @ 9:39 pm
DJ Varium
groovindj wrote :
No, please don't speak for all of us! It's entirely up to each individual if they want to rescan their files. No one has to. If they've already been scanned once, that should be good enough.
Ok...miss the point, home in on something to disagree with for the sake of being cantankerous. For the sake of the pedantic i will rephrase....Lots of people will then want to re scan their files. Maybe it would be more conducive to respond to the point rather than the semantic.
Posted Mon 09 Jan 17 @ 11:37 pm
groovindj
I'm only responding to what you wrote. :-) If you meant something else then that's not my fault, is it?
You even emphasised the "all" part!
You even emphasised the "all" part!
Posted Wed 11 Jan 17 @ 5:39 pm
Djratedxxx919
You guys still going on about something you will never get....Truth is the software couldnt hurt anything locking scans, it could also use consistency checks, so you dont get load errors you didnt know about. But truth also being it just aint gonna happen.
Posted Wed 11 Jan 17 @ 5:44 pm
groovindj
Djratedxxx919 wrote :
it just aint gonna happen.
Well actually it might - if you can give Adion a valid reason or two for rescanning, as he asked.
So far it seems no one has managed to do so.
Posted Wed 11 Jan 17 @ 6:36 pm
Djratedxxx919
Locking Scans is just a fail safe from us the user messing things up.
Consistency checks is to catch unreadable files, the remove missing files doesnt really work.I can run that 50 times and doesnt find them. I got caught by CryptoLocker and ran the missing files function, but still had to manually search for the files it corrupted.
Consistency checks is to catch unreadable files, the remove missing files doesnt really work.I can run that 50 times and doesnt find them. I got caught by CryptoLocker and ran the missing files function, but still had to manually search for the files it corrupted.
Posted Wed 11 Jan 17 @ 8:15 pm
DJ Varium
groovindj wrote :
then that's not my fault, is it?
Of course not, nobody can be blamed for autistic proclivities that render one to take things literally. I assume that you jumped in to the conversation because you had a meaningful response to the actual point being made, and merely digressed at the sight of such gross generalisation on my part. For which I am truly repentant. If you would like to now share your wisdom once it comes back to you I would be most obliged. :)
Posted Wed 11 Jan 17 @ 11:13 pm
groovindj
Andy7689 wrote :
render one to take things literally
Of course I took it literally. It's what you wrote!
If you write "dog" I'm not going to look at that and think maybe you meant cat.
LOL
Posted Thu 12 Jan 17 @ 6:20 pm