Poloralphloren
This question got lost amid other issues that came up in a previous thread... Just re-stating my question once again: Is there a significant difference between "fast" and "advanced" master tempo?
I get much better performance using "fast", but how much is the sound quality compromised? Would it be noticeable in the mix? To me the "fast" master tempo sounds less rich, somehow flatter, but maybe it's just me overanalyzing it... However, using "advanced" master tempo I get subtle, but noticeable, clicks/skips when I'm manipulating the cued track... Anyone else have an opinion?
I get much better performance using "fast", but how much is the sound quality compromised? Would it be noticeable in the mix? To me the "fast" master tempo sounds less rich, somehow flatter, but maybe it's just me overanalyzing it... However, using "advanced" master tempo I get subtle, but noticeable, clicks/skips when I'm manipulating the cued track... Anyone else have an opinion?
Posted Wed 08 Nov 06 @ 4:28 pm
listen2
i think you sort of answered your own question, fast uses less CPU
look at page 19 in the manual.
look at page 19 in the manual.
Posted Wed 08 Nov 06 @ 4:53 pm
Poloralphloren
I guess what I'm really asking is for other peoples' opinions:
Is "fast" master tempo suitable for a professional-sounding mix? It's definitely not as nice sounding as the "advanced" master tempo, but perhaps it's too subtle for anyone to really notice... I notice it when I'm paying attention and evaluating it, but does it affect the overall listening experience? Any opinions?
Is "fast" master tempo suitable for a professional-sounding mix? It's definitely not as nice sounding as the "advanced" master tempo, but perhaps it's too subtle for anyone to really notice... I notice it when I'm paying attention and evaluating it, but does it affect the overall listening experience? Any opinions?
Posted Wed 08 Nov 06 @ 5:05 pm
erxon
Poloralphloren wrote :
Is "fast" master tempo suitable for a professional-sounding mix?
No.
Poloralphloren wrote :
It's definitely not as nice sounding as the "advanced" master tempo, but perhaps it's too subtle for anyone to really notice... I notice it when I'm paying attention and evaluating it, but does it affect the overall listening experience? Any opinions?
Fast master tempo algorithm can in my opinion be only used on the vocals (or anything less rhythmic) that you throw over the non time-stretched beat, because tempo flaws are less noticeable. Definitely not for basic DJing.
Poloralphloren wrote :
This question got lost amid other issues that came up in a previous thread... Just re-stating my question once again: Is there a significant difference between "fast" and "advanced" master tempo?
I get much better performance using "fast", but how much is the sound quality compromised? Would it be noticeable in the mix? To me the "fast" master tempo sounds less rich, somehow flatter, but maybe it's just me overanalyzing it... However, using "advanced" master tempo I get subtle, but noticeable, clicks/skips when I'm manipulating the cued track... Anyone else have an opinion?
I get much better performance using "fast", but how much is the sound quality compromised? Would it be noticeable in the mix? To me the "fast" master tempo sounds less rich, somehow flatter, but maybe it's just me overanalyzing it... However, using "advanced" master tempo I get subtle, but noticeable, clicks/skips when I'm manipulating the cued track... Anyone else have an opinion?
Advanced master tempo has a great sound when calibrated properly, but it requires better CPU & higher latency if you don't want the byproduct of clicks & pops. So as in many "simple/advanced" comparisons, advanced is definitely better sounding but also more demanding on resources.
Does that answer your question(s)? :)
e
Posted Wed 08 Nov 06 @ 5:24 pm
Poloralphloren
Yes it does, thanks! That was my opinion too, but wanted to see if other people agreed or not... I'll stick to advanced master tempo, and see what I can do to avoid overloading the CPU... Maybe playing around with the soundcard settings? I'm running on a highi-speed dual-core chip with 2 gigs of RAM -- don't think it should be having too much trouble with this, just gotta tweak it a bit I suppose...
Posted Wed 08 Nov 06 @ 7:39 pm
erxon
As said, you'll have to raise latency to get better results, this will affect the response time though which could get annoying.
Posted Wed 08 Nov 06 @ 8:29 pm
jaakko
The only reason I bought a new laptop was to get advanced master tempo to work. Do I have to say more? ;)
Posted Wed 08 Nov 06 @ 8:55 pm
Niems
I notice a big difference with Spatilization set to 1 as apposed to 0. 1 Sounds a lot better. Set on 2 just simply cripples the computer.
If you want to see your computer fall to its knees, apply the 'key changer' plugin to one deck, and start playing another song on the other. Enjoy :)
*I wonder how Traktor got theirs to work so well...
If you want to see your computer fall to its knees, apply the 'key changer' plugin to one deck, and start playing another song on the other. Enjoy :)
*I wonder how Traktor got theirs to work so well...
Posted Wed 08 Nov 06 @ 8:55 pm
Poloralphloren
Haha nice one Niems :) We should all play a game -- who can get their high-performance super-computer to fall into a crumpled heap fetal-position drowning in its own tears the fastest -- and how??!?
Posted Wed 08 Nov 06 @ 9:02 pm