discjockeydoc
Let me begin by saying that I love VDJ and wouldn't care to use anything else (I've tried the others). I am impressed by the functionality and features of this carefully thought out piece of software (even though I'm still waiting for ID3 support <g>). However, I can't seem to get videos to display smoothly with the internal video codec (some play, most will not - those that do are garbled), and they won't work at all using the WindowsMediaPlayer codec, for the most part. I have read the topics on this issue and still cannot resolve it.
I tried disabling hardware acceleration, but that just taxes the CPU and plays choppy video - that freezes completely into the song a minute or so - with sound drops, as well as causing the VDJ software itself not to respond to input.
I know that at least one of you is going to single out my video card. Before you do, however, consider this. All the videos in question here play perfectly well in Windows MediaPlayer, every time with my "substandard" video card. I should not need to upgrade (which is an impossibility in my lappy - I checked). The issue, then, is why they will not play in VirtualDJ just as well as they do in MediaPlayer.
My specs are:
Toshiba Tecra A4 S211
ATI Mobility Raedon X600 (64MB RAM)
1.6G intel Centrino CPU
1.5G RAM
60G HDD (4200 RPM) for system files and OS
160G IEEE 1394 external HDD (7200 RPM) for music and video files
This lappy has already been tweaked using the suggestions in the forums, but still exhibits this behavior.
I could use some guidance, and I would really like to see a fix for this soon; thanks.
I tried disabling hardware acceleration, but that just taxes the CPU and plays choppy video - that freezes completely into the song a minute or so - with sound drops, as well as causing the VDJ software itself not to respond to input.
I know that at least one of you is going to single out my video card. Before you do, however, consider this. All the videos in question here play perfectly well in Windows MediaPlayer, every time with my "substandard" video card. I should not need to upgrade (which is an impossibility in my lappy - I checked). The issue, then, is why they will not play in VirtualDJ just as well as they do in MediaPlayer.
My specs are:
Toshiba Tecra A4 S211
ATI Mobility Raedon X600 (64MB RAM)
1.6G intel Centrino CPU
1.5G RAM
60G HDD (4200 RPM) for system files and OS
160G IEEE 1394 external HDD (7200 RPM) for music and video files
This lappy has already been tweaked using the suggestions in the forums, but still exhibits this behavior.
I could use some guidance, and I would really like to see a fix for this soon; thanks.
geposted Fri 09 Mar 07 @ 11:30 am
paulettecerra
Sounds like a problem for skyfxl
geposted Fri 09 Mar 07 @ 2:34 pm
sbangs
heya there
does windows media play ok still when you send the video from it to the second monitor?
what ever you do dont dissable hardware acel or video is slow + video fx wont work
does windows media play ok still when you send the video from it to the second monitor?
what ever you do dont dissable hardware acel or video is slow + video fx wont work
geposted Fri 09 Mar 07 @ 4:11 pm
discjockeydoc
skyfxl wrote :
heya there
does windows media play ok still when you send the video from it to the second monitor?
what ever you do dont dissable hardware acel or video is slow + video fx wont work
does windows media play ok still when you send the video from it to the second monitor?
what ever you do dont dissable hardware acel or video is slow + video fx wont work
Yup. In fact, there is a video playing fullscreen in WMP on that monitor as I write this reply :)
geposted Fri 09 Mar 07 @ 5:34 pm
sbangs
ok mate let me have a think then il get back to you :)
geposted Fri 09 Mar 07 @ 9:42 pm
discjockeydoc
Thanks mate! I'll be be waiting...cheers!
geposted Fri 09 Mar 07 @ 9:51 pm
djcel
Your video card is not powerfull enough to mix video.
We advise for a good use at least 256MB of internal RAM on the video card
We advise for a good use at least 256MB of internal RAM on the video card
geposted Fri 09 Mar 07 @ 10:13 pm
discjockeydoc
djcel wrote :
Your video card is not powerfull enough to mix video.
We advise for a good use at least 256MB of internal RAM on the video card
We advise for a good use at least 256MB of internal RAM on the video card
LIKE I SAID I knew one of you would single out my video card!!! If it's good enough for Windows MediaPlayer, there's NO REASON why it shouldn't be good enough for VDJ!!
That's BULL and you know it! We need a fix, not excuses!
geposted Sat 10 Mar 07 @ 12:11 am
cstoll
discjockeydoc wrote :
That's BULL and you know it! We need a fix, not excuses!
djcel wrote :
Your video card is not powerfull enough ... use at least 256MB of internal RAM on the video card
That's BULL and you know it! We need a fix, not excuses!
Hate to say it - but it's the video card. With VDJ there is alot more involved then with the simple MediaPlayer functionality. So it's not an excuse it's a limitation of your hardware.
geposted Sat 10 Mar 07 @ 12:47 am
sbangs
its true , but im thinking about how you could improve it slightly
i found that installing windows vista helped improve my proformance greatly as it has a new video and sound api
i found that installing windows vista helped improve my proformance greatly as it has a new video and sound api
geposted Sat 10 Mar 07 @ 1:07 am
discjockeydoc
cstoll wrote :
Hate to say it - but it's the video card. With VDJ there is alot more involved then [sic] with the simple MediaPlayer functionality. So it's not an excuse it's a limitation of your hardware.
I think you need to elaborate about what, exactly, "more" means. I am not angry with you folks, mind you, I understand your position. However, the development team needs to be notified and this issue resolved, especially when the myriad number of users whom have reverted back to v3.4 are taken into account. It's just not right that I should be responsible for this problem, nor is it prudent for those of us on a budget to be forced into expensive upgrades AFTER we discover something simply does not work. The system I own is not substandard; I am merely a consumer who acted on good faith based upon the listed requirements for the software. In fact, if you look at the recommended requirements, you will find that it merely says: "1024x768 SVGA video" without any mention whatsoever of video memory requirements. To me, that indicates a practice of false advertising - a very serious offense. Furthermore, I am becoming increasingly frustrated with this glitch.
The bottom line? If the issue is addressed by the folks who have control over it, I will go merrily on my way so long as I am conviced that I understand exactly what the problem is and why the codec in VDJ is so significantly different from Windows Media. This is a Windows program, and, therefore, should comply with Windows guidelines.
geposted Sat 10 Mar 07 @ 2:58 am
bryantpb
discjockey wrote:"I think you need to elaborate about what, exactly, "more" means. I am not angry with you folks, mind you, I understand your position. However, the development team needs to be notified and this issue resolved, especially when the myriad number of users whom have reverted back to v3.4 are taken into account."
I was told i couldn't say this, but i will let you say it instead.
"myriad number of users whom have reverted back to v3.4"
I was told i couldn't say this, but i will let you say it instead.
"myriad number of users whom have reverted back to v3.4"
geposted Sat 10 Mar 07 @ 11:11 pm
3.4 will be just as demanding ... so..
geposted Sat 10 Mar 07 @ 11:47 pm
discjockeydoc
DJ Philibert wrote :
3.4 will be just as demanding ... so..
Actually, I have come across several posts that indicate alleviation of the video problems when reverting to 3.4, so...
However, I have no intention (nor can I, for that matter) of reverting. I guess I'm just frustrated. No disrepect intended, k? :) The developer team should be brought on board so we can hear from them, though.
I just want to know why VDJ's Windows Media codec is so much more intensive in terms of graphics mem than Windows' version; i.e., why vids play fine on WMP, but not in VDJ with a comparable codec. Did VDJ have to make their own because of licensing issues, perhaps? Did ol' Billy throw down the gauntlet? Another Microsoft "secret?"
geposted Sun 11 Mar 07 @ 12:04 am
andytaylor125
From what I've heard the reason that VDJ uses more video memory (and RAM in general) is because everything needs to happen so much faster than in media player.
In VDJ, you press a button to take you to a cue point, it needs to happen on the beat with no pause (half a second delay while the video rebuffers would riun your mix i'm sure you'd agree!)
Not to mention the scratching capabilities, to do that alot of information needs to be stored in your video card's RAM, where it can be accessed quickly, that's how I understood it anyway!
I'm sure somebody will correct me if that's not quite right, but I think that's about what it comes down to.
Hopefully that helps explain things a bit
:)
In VDJ, you press a button to take you to a cue point, it needs to happen on the beat with no pause (half a second delay while the video rebuffers would riun your mix i'm sure you'd agree!)
Not to mention the scratching capabilities, to do that alot of information needs to be stored in your video card's RAM, where it can be accessed quickly, that's how I understood it anyway!
I'm sure somebody will correct me if that's not quite right, but I think that's about what it comes down to.
Hopefully that helps explain things a bit
:)
geposted Sun 11 Mar 07 @ 2:32 am
discjockeydoc
That sounds reasonable. Thank you for your input :)
geposted Sun 11 Mar 07 @ 2:37 am
discobrian24
Also your windows media player is only playing on your monitor not on both your monitor and a second output. And as was said above VDJ is doing much much more than just "simply playing" your videos. Also in the system requirements it says a vidoe card with a minimum of 256mb of video memory. It should say DEDICATED and not shared. It may say this, but I haven't looked at this stuff in almost 2 years of using and lovin VDJ. I was in a similar boat when I first started and now after building a new computer I am lovin it.
geposted Mon 12 Mar 07 @ 8:19 am
djcel
Of course it's 256MB of video RAM dedicated ;-)
Turbocache (NVidia) or HyperMemory (ATI) are not a real RAM (slower)
Turbocache (NVidia) or HyperMemory (ATI) are not a real RAM (slower)
geposted Mon 12 Mar 07 @ 6:26 pm
djdarkwave
I'd like to add my 2 cents as well.
I understand the video requirements and the importance of the video card.
However I have not changed any hardware, my videos used to work great, since upgrading to the 4 series I have had problems with skipping and choppy video. If nothing changed in the hardware I can only assume there is a software issue causing my new problems.
If you can explain to my why most of my videos (seems to be mostly the AVI files) suddenly are not reliable maybe I can figure out how to fix this (other than not playing videos anymore which is what I've been reduced to)
Steve
I understand the video requirements and the importance of the video card.
However I have not changed any hardware, my videos used to work great, since upgrading to the 4 series I have had problems with skipping and choppy video. If nothing changed in the hardware I can only assume there is a software issue causing my new problems.
If you can explain to my why most of my videos (seems to be mostly the AVI files) suddenly are not reliable maybe I can figure out how to fix this (other than not playing videos anymore which is what I've been reduced to)
Steve
geposted Thu 26 Apr 07 @ 10:26 pm
bryantpb
Discobrian once said,
"Also your windows media player is only playing on your monitor not on both your monitor and a second output. And as was said above VDJ is doing much much more than just "simply playing" your videos."
Not true, Bri, I have to use WMP many a time to save my a_s, when vdj fails on video's, and it does, and WMP does play on two other monitors in fact.
Simply put ; 4.2 is killing us. It's plain to see.
Some of us on here need to stop all this denial.
I been asked not to say it out loud, but "blamk works and blank does not!"
"Also your windows media player is only playing on your monitor not on both your monitor and a second output. And as was said above VDJ is doing much much more than just "simply playing" your videos."
Not true, Bri, I have to use WMP many a time to save my a_s, when vdj fails on video's, and it does, and WMP does play on two other monitors in fact.
Simply put ; 4.2 is killing us. It's plain to see.
Some of us on here need to stop all this denial.
I been asked not to say it out loud, but "blamk works and blank does not!"
geposted Fri 27 Apr 07 @ 6:13 am
