groovindj
Posted Sun 14 Apr 24 @ 3:24 pm
Matty1000
groovindj wrote :
ok the issue I have at the moment is that the 0db on my pioneer Rev 5 is roughly at the middle point where the -18db is on the software (this would be -18db accordong to your diagram right?). my understanding is that i should be keeping around the 0db mark on the mixer, but because there are no markings on the VU in virtual dj its hard to know where you are. even if they are just colors or lines, it would be helpful, because it is often hard to see the markings on the hardware mixers in the dark
Posted Sun 14 Apr 24 @ 4:20 pm
groovindj
As long as you have autogain turned on in VDJ (the recommended setting) then you really don't need to worry 99.9% of the time.
Often, DJ equipment that handles both analogue inputs and digital signals via USB will have the meter markings show the analogue scale. When used with DJ software, you might assume something's wrong when the LEDs are going above "zero" but actually 0dB is at the top.
If you want to confirm, play an analogue signal on one channel of your unit and have VDJ play the same track on the other, and see where the meters sit.
Often, DJ equipment that handles both analogue inputs and digital signals via USB will have the meter markings show the analogue scale. When used with DJ software, you might assume something's wrong when the LEDs are going above "zero" but actually 0dB is at the top.
If you want to confirm, play an analogue signal on one channel of your unit and have VDJ play the same track on the other, and see where the meters sit.
Posted Sun 14 Apr 24 @ 4:34 pm
Matty1000
groovindj wrote :
As long as you have autogain turned on in VDJ (the recommended setting) then you really don't need to worry 99.9% of the time.
Often, DJ equipment that handles both analogue inputs and digital signals via USB will have the meter markings show the analogue scale. When used with DJ software, you might assume something's wrong when the LEDs are going above "zero" but actually 0dB is at the top.
If you want to confirm, play an analogue signal on one channel of your unit and have VDJ play the same track on the other, and see where the meters sit.
Often, DJ equipment that handles both analogue inputs and digital signals via USB will have the meter markings show the analogue scale. When used with DJ software, you might assume something's wrong when the LEDs are going above "zero" but actually 0dB is at the top.
If you want to confirm, play an analogue signal on one channel of your unit and have VDJ play the same track on the other, and see where the meters sit.
ok that makes sense, except , the Rev5 doesnt take any analogue inputs into the channels so this would mean the db markings make no sense
Posted Sun 14 Apr 24 @ 4:56 pm
groovindj
Er.......well it's probably just done so the meters tie in with other equipment which does have mixed analogue/digital signals.
I'm sure some customers would be confused if they were confronted with certain kit that had 0dB at the top, and other kit with 0dB lower down.
They go with what people are more familiar with, I guess. It's fairly arbitrary anyway as it only says dB.
I'm sure some customers would be confused if they were confronted with certain kit that had 0dB at the top, and other kit with 0dB lower down.
They go with what people are more familiar with, I guess. It's fairly arbitrary anyway as it only says dB.
Posted Sun 14 Apr 24 @ 6:50 pm
Matty1000
groovindj wrote :
As long as you have autogain turned on in VDJ (the recommended setting) then you really don't need to worry 99.9% of the time.
Often, DJ equipment that handles both analogue inputs and digital signals via USB will have the meter markings show the analogue scale. When used with DJ software, you might assume something's wrong when the LEDs are going above "zero" but actually 0dB is at the top.
If you want to confirm, play an analogue signal on one channel of your unit and have VDJ play the same track on the other, and see where the meters sit.
Often, DJ equipment that handles both analogue inputs and digital signals via USB will have the meter markings show the analogue scale. When used with DJ software, you might assume something's wrong when the LEDs are going above "zero" but actually 0dB is at the top.
If you want to confirm, play an analogue signal on one channel of your unit and have VDJ play the same track on the other, and see where the meters sit.
I play a lot of live music that changes volume a lot mid song , i feel i have more control with manual gain, but it could be an old habit.... ill see how it goes with it for a couple of gigs
Posted Tue 16 Apr 24 @ 10:42 pm
locoDog
songpos colors are kind of cool, I never really knew about them,
I like that kind of information to be uniform so always opted for neutral.
Monochrome and with common colours is more descriptive but scratch wave isn't as good.
Could they be separated?
current setting coloredWaveForms [just being scratch]
new setting coloredSongpos
Posted Sat 27 Apr 24 @ 11:26 am
locoDog
<scratchwave> rework with these params like songpos?
<scratchwave half="true" colorBass="#D23D2D" colorMed="#6620FF" colorHigh="#31FF3D"
oh and loops & markers to have their own entries so they can all have different dy for their gfx and text
<scratchwave half="true" colorBass="#D23D2D" colorMed="#6620FF" colorHigh="#31FF3D"
oh and loops & markers to have their own entries so they can all have different dy for their gfx and text
Posted Sat 27 Apr 24 @ 11:34 am
gvaste
totally agree
Posted Mon 21 Oct 24 @ 1:51 pm
locoDog
I faked my way to a bit of text outlining, but the kerning [char spacing, new word for me] is messed up.
Maybe a kerning="±f" param, it would allow outline, shadow, some other fun ideas.
Real outline would be cool too.
Posted Mon 21 Oct 24 @ 2:54 pm
Wlodek Piskorz
Hello, noble group. I turn to you for help. I am passionately looking for a skin for Numark N4 without success. I know that you can download it, but I keep getting a download error. Do you have somewhere I could send it?
Posted Wed 18 Dec 24 @ 5:23 am
GuiYeYDJ
Hi, I'm not sure I'm writing in the right place, I apologize in advance if I do.
I have an open war (which I will never win) with duplicates and the choice of the best track.
I'm bored of seeing files that I have with flac extension and when I check them with SPEK I see that they barely exceed 15khz and hopefully reach 20khz.
Well, to check them in spek is somewhat cumbersome since I have to drag and drop the file into a previously opened spek window.
It gets even heavier when I want to compare several...
At the moment my process is: I copy the files I want to check to a folder on the desktop.
I open several Spek windows and move the copied files there on the desktop...
Once I decide which one I like the most, I go back to the virtual browser and select all but the one that is going to stay and delete them.
It seems to me that there is no virtual tool that allows you to see the quality of the files at a glance as it is done with spek,
so my wish would be to have something like spek associated with the browser to be able to see what quality my files really reach at a glance... Like I do with Spek.
Perhaps I don't know of any virtual option or tool that allows me to do what I ask, and if so, I would appreciate much information about it.
Many thanks
I have an open war (which I will never win) with duplicates and the choice of the best track.
I'm bored of seeing files that I have with flac extension and when I check them with SPEK I see that they barely exceed 15khz and hopefully reach 20khz.
Well, to check them in spek is somewhat cumbersome since I have to drag and drop the file into a previously opened spek window.
It gets even heavier when I want to compare several...
At the moment my process is: I copy the files I want to check to a folder on the desktop.
I open several Spek windows and move the copied files there on the desktop...
Once I decide which one I like the most, I go back to the virtual browser and select all but the one that is going to stay and delete them.
It seems to me that there is no virtual tool that allows you to see the quality of the files at a glance as it is done with spek,
so my wish would be to have something like spek associated with the browser to be able to see what quality my files really reach at a glance... Like I do with Spek.
Perhaps I don't know of any virtual option or tool that allows me to do what I ask, and if so, I would appreciate much information about it.
Many thanks
Posted Fri 14 Feb 25 @ 10:57 am
groovindj
IMO the "quality" of files should not be judged based on the amount of high frequency content.
Whether a track contains audio at those frequencies depends on the instruments and equipment used, the recording process etc.
The playback equipment also has to be capable and accurate, which is not usually the case with PA equipment designed for volume.
Also, audibility of high frequencies deteriorates with age, so if you or your audience are adults then you/they can't hear that high anyway.
Whether a track contains audio at those frequencies depends on the instruments and equipment used, the recording process etc.
The playback equipment also has to be capable and accurate, which is not usually the case with PA equipment designed for volume.
Also, audibility of high frequencies deteriorates with age, so if you or your audience are adults then you/they can't hear that high anyway.
Posted Fri 14 Feb 25 @ 11:50 am
GuiYeYDJ
JAJAJJA, yes i´m 46 years old, so can say it was a down hit...
i´m based on how works mp3 or ogg compressing. they cut high frecquencies and all others what the human ear can`t reach.
can you illustrate me and give me other way to select the best quality track as fast i can?
of course ever can ear it one by one but is a terrible slow way.
thanks
add:
for my limited ear i feel better sound when high frecuencies can be feel and get some bright to sound, this bright is loosed whenn high are loosed.
i´m based on how works mp3 or ogg compressing. they cut high frecquencies and all others what the human ear can`t reach.
can you illustrate me and give me other way to select the best quality track as fast i can?
of course ever can ear it one by one but is a terrible slow way.
thanks
add:
for my limited ear i feel better sound when high frecuencies can be feel and get some bright to sound, this bright is loosed whenn high are loosed.
Posted Fri 14 Feb 25 @ 11:56 am
groovindj
MP3 compression works by removing sounds that are hidden by others, so for example a quiet sound that's masked by a loud one. It's not necessarily removing high frequencies.
Posted Fri 14 Feb 25 @ 12:08 pm
Adion
Most lossy compression does by default use a low-pass filter, and the frequency at which it works (with default settings) is so that for lower bitrates the filter frequency is also lower.
So based on frequency content, you can make a good guess that the source was a 128kbps or a 192kbps mp3.
It's indeed not likely to be possible to see the difference between mp3, aac or lossless sources at higher bitrates though.
As for VirtualDJ, since it requires decoding and analyzing the song, it would need to happen during bpm analysis, and then stored in the db, but it is a bit of a specific use case with limited broad use I think.
I also seem to remember there used to be other tools that did exactly this. (Can't remember the name though)
So based on frequency content, you can make a good guess that the source was a 128kbps or a 192kbps mp3.
It's indeed not likely to be possible to see the difference between mp3, aac or lossless sources at higher bitrates though.
As for VirtualDJ, since it requires decoding and analyzing the song, it would need to happen during bpm analysis, and then stored in the db, but it is a bit of a specific use case with limited broad use I think.
I also seem to remember there used to be other tools that did exactly this. (Can't remember the name though)
Posted Fri 14 Feb 25 @ 12:25 pm
GuiYeYDJ
groovindj wrote :
MP3 compression works by removing sounds that are hidden by others, so for example a quiet sound that's masked by a loud one. It's not necessarily removing high frequencies.
Thank you once again for your comments, but if you would do me the favor of answering my doubts instead of correcting me, I would appreciate it almost as much as I admire you for the vast knowledge you expose.
I'm sorry to tell you that I'm sorry to waste time when I talk to you, I don't doubt your knowledge, but you don't give me the slightest indication to solve what I'm asking. With all my respect, and humility I would ask you that if you can help me you do it, and if you can't.....
Posted Fri 14 Feb 25 @ 12:27 pm
GuiYeYDJ
Adion wrote :
Most lossy compression does by default use a low-pass filter, and the frequency at which it works (with default settings) is so that for lower bitrates the filter frequency is also lower.
So based on frequency content, you can make a good guess that the source was a 128kbps or a 192kbps mp3.
It's indeed not likely to be possible to see the difference between mp3, aac or lossless sources at higher bitrates though.
As for VirtualDJ, since it requires decoding and analyzing the song, it would need to happen during bpm analysis, and then stored in the db, but it is a bit of a specific use case with limited broad use I think.
I also seem to remember there used to be other tools that did exactly this. (Can't remember the name though)
So based on frequency content, you can make a good guess that the source was a 128kbps or a 192kbps mp3.
It's indeed not likely to be possible to see the difference between mp3, aac or lossless sources at higher bitrates though.
As for VirtualDJ, since it requires decoding and analyzing the song, it would need to happen during bpm analysis, and then stored in the db, but it is a bit of a specific use case with limited broad use I think.
I also seem to remember there used to be other tools that did exactly this. (Can't remember the name though)
lot of thanks, sure other use who read this remember the tools yoou are talking about.
Maybe can talk about the way we are seleccting tracks.
can expose here how you do the selecction and exclude tracks when have it duplicated?? hope people found this proppose interestinng and participe..
thanks to all
Posted Fri 14 Feb 25 @ 12:35 pm
PhantomDeejay
Personally I use a "file catalog" system that pretty much prevents duplicates for the most part.
Don't get me wrong, I do have some, but not that many.
So, for me my main folder/filename structure is like this:
Drive/Music/2025-2029/Artist - Title (Remix).ext
If I download a few older songs today and try to put them on the '2000-2004' folder (as an example) then 2 things can happen.
Either the song exists allready (and therefore I can check if the newer version I have is better quality or not) or it doesn't so the new file gets in place anyway.
I choose this system because the year of a track release is pretty much a constant that can be determined very easily. It's not like "genre" where tracks can fall into two or three or even more genres and subgenres.
I use the tags of the files to set "genres" correctly, and then I rely on the tags to set up filter folders that give me the equivalent of what other dj's get when they use the "Genre" folder split format.
Finally I pay great attention to the source of my downloads. I know pretty much that the pools I use provide "real" high quality content, and I rarely (if ever) have come across a "fake" bitrate file.
Just some food for thought..
Don't get me wrong, I do have some, but not that many.
So, for me my main folder/filename structure is like this:
Drive/Music/2025-2029/Artist - Title (Remix).ext
If I download a few older songs today and try to put them on the '2000-2004' folder (as an example) then 2 things can happen.
Either the song exists allready (and therefore I can check if the newer version I have is better quality or not) or it doesn't so the new file gets in place anyway.
I choose this system because the year of a track release is pretty much a constant that can be determined very easily. It's not like "genre" where tracks can fall into two or three or even more genres and subgenres.
I use the tags of the files to set "genres" correctly, and then I rely on the tags to set up filter folders that give me the equivalent of what other dj's get when they use the "Genre" folder split format.
Finally I pay great attention to the source of my downloads. I know pretty much that the pools I use provide "real" high quality content, and I rarely (if ever) have come across a "fake" bitrate file.
Just some food for thought..
Posted Fri 14 Feb 25 @ 1:00 pm
groovindj
I can only give you my opinion and my method, but you may not like it!
I've already suggested not to rely totally on whether certain frequencies are present, because even in a good quality recording, they may not be there. I also would not depend on using software to make a decision for me. My ears and my brain are my tools.
If a track sounds bad, I will replace it - not just because it's 128k bit rate or because it doesn't have content above 15kHz, but more likely because the balance between frequencies is incorrect, or I don't hear things clearly enough.
I've already suggested not to rely totally on whether certain frequencies are present, because even in a good quality recording, they may not be there. I also would not depend on using software to make a decision for me. My ears and my brain are my tools.
If a track sounds bad, I will replace it - not just because it's 128k bit rate or because it doesn't have content above 15kHz, but more likely because the balance between frequencies is incorrect, or I don't hear things clearly enough.
Posted Fri 14 Feb 25 @ 1:01 pm
