So quite simply, I mixed vinyl for near 10 years before taking a small hiatus. I started getting back into it again, and was messing around on VDJ. Searching around, I have the presets slider all the way to the right (safe mode and overclock off), w/ master temp on advanced and complexity and spatialization set to 0 (comp was 3, but it doesn't seem to make a differrence). The problem is I can't seem to get butter smooth mixes (well, for the most part). What happens is it weans off a bit here and there, or a slight ghosting or shadow is apparent.
I have included an example--the audible mix starts coming in about 49 and ends at about 1:18 when the incoming track breaks. You can hear the beats slide slightly on and off, and even the nudges doesn't help this (well, the beats will just off synch at another part).
Is that the best you can hope for w/ the automatic beat matching? Or something I can tweak? I haven't come across anything the short time I've had for searching.
EDIT
I know rapidshare sucks, but I thought I could up it here
http://rapidshare.com/files/141635175/example_mix_1.mp3.html
I have included an example--the audible mix starts coming in about 49 and ends at about 1:18 when the incoming track breaks. You can hear the beats slide slightly on and off, and even the nudges doesn't help this (well, the beats will just off synch at another part).
Is that the best you can hope for w/ the automatic beat matching? Or something I can tweak? I haven't come across anything the short time I've had for searching.
EDIT
I know rapidshare sucks, but I thought I could up it here
http://rapidshare.com/files/141635175/example_mix_1.mp3.html
geposted Sun 31 Aug 08 @ 3:37 pm
SBDJ
The automatic beat mixing is dependant upon the CBG (the beat markers) being set up correctly.
Using a controller or timecode and doing it the good old fashioned way is far better IMHO...
Using a controller or timecode and doing it the good old fashioned way is far better IMHO...
geposted Sun 31 Aug 08 @ 5:05 pm
So you heard the example then? I mean they are perfectly aligned a good portion of the time, just why don't they stay that way, you know? By timecode, you mean timecoded records? The plan was to get Serato or something, that's why my boy has and he's the one who got me back into it. I know VDJ uses them too.
Right, you can't beat old fashioned, but all I could afford was this [free] trial right now, heh. So it's just a limitation in the software then?
Right, you can't beat old fashioned, but all I could afford was this [free] trial right now, heh. So it's just a limitation in the software then?
geposted Sun 31 Aug 08 @ 5:17 pm
Tear Em 'Up
I don't mean to sound flippant or like an mean person, but the short answer is practice. You can have everything set up perfectly..and still have to make minute adjustments.....the only way to perfect that is through practice.....
geposted Sun 31 Aug 08 @ 5:41 pm
It's cool, but BELIEVE me when I tell you I don't need practice. At least manually. In other words, physically on two decks I'm smooth as hell--I was mixing before I was a teen. Since I can't really afford new vinyl or Serato right now (I just got back into it), I was messing around w/ mp3s on this app.
So it's like this--
VDJ can mix song A and song B fine together. But try song A and song C and there's issues like the mentioned down beat or snare slightly shadowed here and there-- it CORRECTS itself, but it WILL miss a beat or snare, then rinse and repeat. An untrained ear really wouldn't notice it. Manually I could correct that. But it's sorta impossible working w/ the pitch in this app right now b/c I can't monitor with headphones.
That's what I'm trying to break it down to--it's a limitation of automatic beatmatching? Fooling around I was gonna make a couple of cds and give em' but this type of thing bothers me so I wouldn't...
So it's like this--
VDJ can mix song A and song B fine together. But try song A and song C and there's issues like the mentioned down beat or snare slightly shadowed here and there-- it CORRECTS itself, but it WILL miss a beat or snare, then rinse and repeat. An untrained ear really wouldn't notice it. Manually I could correct that. But it's sorta impossible working w/ the pitch in this app right now b/c I can't monitor with headphones.
That's what I'm trying to break it down to--it's a limitation of automatic beatmatching? Fooling around I was gonna make a couple of cds and give em' but this type of thing bothers me so I wouldn't...
geposted Sun 31 Aug 08 @ 6:10 pm
Tear Em 'Up
Well, I understand what your saying but...and this is a big butt....no one is perfect.....and even using a software as advanced as this one there is still the need for our adjustments. http://www.musicv2.com/artist/tearemup go lisetn to my mixes, I started mixing in the mid 80s. Some are great, some, not so much. At some point it boils down to how well we mix, and how well we know the software. The only way to attain that knowledge? Practice.....
geposted Sun 31 Aug 08 @ 6:38 pm
SBDJ
Cygnus_Taxt wrote :
So you heard the example then? I mean they are perfectly aligned a good portion of the time, just why don't they stay that way, you know? By timecode, you mean timecoded records? The plan was to get Serato or something, that's why my boy has and he's the one who got me back into it. I know VDJ uses them too.
Right, you can't beat old fashioned, but all I could afford was this [free] trial right now, heh. So it's just a limitation in the software then?
Right, you can't beat old fashioned, but all I could afford was this [free] trial right now, heh. So it's just a limitation in the software then?
So I assume you've checked the BPM and CBG markers on song C (and possibly song A) to make sure they are exactly correct, and stay that way all the way through the portions you are trying to automix?
When you get two different tracks on vinyl, match the BPMs as best you can and let them run, will they stay in sync forever - especially if one has minor irregulaties or beat flucuations?
I'll be honest, I haven't listened to the example, I'm sat on my laptop so it would sound crap anyway ;)
The limitation with VDJ is that the beat grid will only align to a regular beat - the beat markers will be aligned in some places, but if the track isn't *absolutely* perfect, then not all the beat markers will be aligned. Same if the BPM isn't detected correctly. Some applications can work around this - Ableton Live uses a feature called warping to do this. VirtualDJ doesn't currently have that ability.
geposted Sun 31 Aug 08 @ 8:16 pm
SonsOfMethuselah
Cygnus_Taxt wrote :
It's cool, but BELIEVE me when I tell you I don't need practice. At least manually. In other words, physically on two decks I'm smooth as hell--I was mixing before I was a teen. Since I can't really afford new vinyl or Serato right now (I just got back into it), I was messing around w/ mp3s on this app.
So it's like this--
VDJ can mix song A and song B fine together. But try song A and song C and there's issues like the mentioned down beat or snare slightly shadowed here and there-- it CORRECTS itself, but it WILL miss a beat or snare, then rinse and repeat. An untrained ear really wouldn't notice it. Manually I could correct that. But it's sorta impossible working w/ the pitch in this app right now b/c I can't monitor with headphones.
That's what I'm trying to break it down to--it's a limitation of automatic beatmatching? Fooling around I was gonna make a couple of cds and give em' but this type of thing bothers me so I wouldn't...
So it's like this--
VDJ can mix song A and song B fine together. But try song A and song C and there's issues like the mentioned down beat or snare slightly shadowed here and there-- it CORRECTS itself, but it WILL miss a beat or snare, then rinse and repeat. An untrained ear really wouldn't notice it. Manually I could correct that. But it's sorta impossible working w/ the pitch in this app right now b/c I can't monitor with headphones.
That's what I'm trying to break it down to--it's a limitation of automatic beatmatching? Fooling around I was gonna make a couple of cds and give em' but this type of thing bothers me so I wouldn't...
Ok so I've had a good listen to your mix, and I think I kinda get where your coming from. As you say it's not easy to hear what's actually happening and certainly your average clubbers would not pick it up, but for recording purposes it could be annoying. So let me tell you what I've experienced.
Firstly when you are using master tempo function, especially when speeding up a track, I've noticed that a single song by itself can sometimes sound like it's missing a beat. It's not, but what you hear is something that you instinctively know is different from the last beat your heard. What I think this is down to is the algorithm that is used to compress/expand the waveform when you are in effect "real-time time stretching" the song. When you speed the song up, is essence to fit the same numbers of samples through a shorter timeframe the algorithm is actually dropping selected samples. If this so happens to contain certain fundamental timbres and frequencies of the note being heard at the time (say a bass drum beat), what you we hear is a different sound on that beat that seems out of place, like it has just missed or ghosted somehow.
This is not limited to VDJ, all applications that allow you to time-stretch audio waveforms suffer from this to a greater of lesser extent depending on the algorithm in use. In addition some algorithms are better than others at certain frequencies to are specifically used on individual instruments / vocals. Obviously when you are doing this to a whole song you don't have that luxury, so I guess the team settled on using an algorithm that generally copes across the widest range.
Secondly, if you happen to be using two songs that have a very very similar frequency/timbre to a particular beat (say two songs are recorded with an identical snare sound on a drum machine), when you have actually matched them perfectly in a mix, there is a tendancy for the sound to be "phased" as the two will clash. Whilst if both tunes have perfect in time beats normally this would cause the beat to intensify, if on one of the songs say every 4th beat is out (and I really do mean slightly out like < 1msec), it's enough to cause the out of phase beat which can sound like it's completely canceled the beat out.
Obviously the first issue is something you would never have experienced using vinyl, as changing the tempo without the (musical) pitch is just not possible. The second you probably experienced anyway as all mixing, analog or otherwise, can suffer from this.
In terms of the CBG alignment in VDJ, check how well it aligns against the waveform of the song, you may find (as I'm looking a one right now) that the waveform peaks may be perfect in line for one bar, but then on the next bar, one of them is very slightly out. This is entirely down to how the song has been recorded in the first place, and may cause you to hear "occasional" out of phase canceling in the middle of a mix, depending on your bass/mid/treble levels and the beat that is minutely out of phase.
However, listening to your mix again and again, it sounds to me like there is a very minute delay in one of the beats. Now I had this problem a while back, and if I listened hard you could hear is happening on a single song, even with the other deck not playing. What I eventually discovered was that master beat lock and having you performance slider all the way to the right are NOT best friends, unless you have a very very powerful machine and low latency sound card. Try listening to just one of the songs very carefully and see if you can hear an almost imperceptible delay in the odd beat when you have the master beat lock on, if so, drop your performance slider down one, then try it again.
Hope this helps
Denzel
geposted Mon 01 Sep 08 @ 1:41 pm
EDIT
Don't know why it's not letting me quote, but I'll outline them--
----------------------------------
So I assume you've checked the BPM and CBG markers on song C (and possibly song A) to make sure they are exactly correct, and stay that way all the way through the portions you are trying to automix?
----------------------------------
Yeah, they're fine. Searching around and reading Denzel's post I think it's a case more or less of that..
----------------------------------
Firstly when you are using master tempo function, especially when speeding up a track, I've noticed that a single song by itself can sometimes sound like it's missing a beat. It's not, but what you hear is something that you instinctively know is different from the last beat your heard. What I think this is down to is the algorithm that is used to compress/expand the waveform when you are in effect "real-time time stretching" the song. When you speed the song up, is essence to fit the same numbers of samples through a shorter timeframe the algorithm is actually dropping selected samples. If this so happens to contain certain fundamental timbres and frequencies of the note being heard at the time (say a bass drum beat), what you we hear is a different sound on that beat that seems out of place, like it has just missed or ghosted somehow.
----------------------------------
Yes! I've noticed this. Before making this post I read 'master tempo' should be set to 'advanced', however the values I am unsure of. So when you move the pitch it is more like adjusting on a real turntable rather than changing the 'key' of the song. It did seem less noticeable, and I put the (complexity) value up to 9999 but upon restart it then changes it to 2147 (???)
Anyway, I moved the slider down one notch and it seemed to clear it up a lot :) What I did before was set the slider all the way to the right, and a mod or somebody suggested to set the latency on the SC to auto when doing this. When I brought it down I left the latency alone-- 512 (11ms).
Since you have a really good ear, check out the clean up version >
http://rapidshare.com/files/141942786/example_mix_2.mp3.html
It comes in at 33 and ends at 1:02. If you go back and listen to the first, you can even hear the first song is kinda choppy, on a couple of down beats and a snare (like right at 16 there is a small double snare). I have to go back now and check out other mixes. But that simply could have been it? Guess I'll find out, let you know how I make out. Appreciate the help!
Don't know why it's not letting me quote, but I'll outline them--
----------------------------------
So I assume you've checked the BPM and CBG markers on song C (and possibly song A) to make sure they are exactly correct, and stay that way all the way through the portions you are trying to automix?
----------------------------------
Yeah, they're fine. Searching around and reading Denzel's post I think it's a case more or less of that..
----------------------------------
Firstly when you are using master tempo function, especially when speeding up a track, I've noticed that a single song by itself can sometimes sound like it's missing a beat. It's not, but what you hear is something that you instinctively know is different from the last beat your heard. What I think this is down to is the algorithm that is used to compress/expand the waveform when you are in effect "real-time time stretching" the song. When you speed the song up, is essence to fit the same numbers of samples through a shorter timeframe the algorithm is actually dropping selected samples. If this so happens to contain certain fundamental timbres and frequencies of the note being heard at the time (say a bass drum beat), what you we hear is a different sound on that beat that seems out of place, like it has just missed or ghosted somehow.
----------------------------------
Yes! I've noticed this. Before making this post I read 'master tempo' should be set to 'advanced', however the values I am unsure of. So when you move the pitch it is more like adjusting on a real turntable rather than changing the 'key' of the song. It did seem less noticeable, and I put the (complexity) value up to 9999 but upon restart it then changes it to 2147 (???)
Anyway, I moved the slider down one notch and it seemed to clear it up a lot :) What I did before was set the slider all the way to the right, and a mod or somebody suggested to set the latency on the SC to auto when doing this. When I brought it down I left the latency alone-- 512 (11ms).
Since you have a really good ear, check out the clean up version >
http://rapidshare.com/files/141942786/example_mix_2.mp3.html
It comes in at 33 and ends at 1:02. If you go back and listen to the first, you can even hear the first song is kinda choppy, on a couple of down beats and a snare (like right at 16 there is a small double snare). I have to go back now and check out other mixes. But that simply could have been it? Guess I'll find out, let you know how I make out. Appreciate the help!
geposted Mon 01 Sep 08 @ 8:40 pm
SBDJ
Master Tempo:
Advanced is better quality, but requires more CPU. It also requires that scratch is set to Enhanced as well - otherwise it will just use the Fast master tempo. I can't find anywhere where this is officially documented offhand, but from my testing it's definately been the case.
Complexity defines what quality to use for the master tempo when it is activated.
0 uses the old 3.x algorithm
1 is the new high quality
2 is super high quality
3 is hyper high quality (you'd better have a dual-core in order to use it)
Spatialization defines time-accuracy toward quality.
0 use the default
1 is very spatialized
5 is very global.
I think I use 3,1 on my gig machine from memory, but only activate it when I really think I need it.
Regards,
Scott
Advanced is better quality, but requires more CPU. It also requires that scratch is set to Enhanced as well - otherwise it will just use the Fast master tempo. I can't find anywhere where this is officially documented offhand, but from my testing it's definately been the case.
Complexity defines what quality to use for the master tempo when it is activated.
0 uses the old 3.x algorithm
1 is the new high quality
2 is super high quality
3 is hyper high quality (you'd better have a dual-core in order to use it)
Spatialization defines time-accuracy toward quality.
0 use the default
1 is very spatialized
5 is very global.
I think I use 3,1 on my gig machine from memory, but only activate it when I really think I need it.
Regards,
Scott
geposted Tue 02 Sep 08 @ 6:33 am
Andrew87
SBDJ wrote :
Master Tempo:
Advanced is better quality, but requires more CPU. It also requires that scratch is set to Enhanced as well - otherwise it will just use the Fast master tempo. I can't find anywhere where this is officially documented offhand, but from my testing it's definately been the case.
Advanced is better quality, but requires more CPU. It also requires that scratch is set to Enhanced as well - otherwise it will just use the Fast master tempo. I can't find anywhere where this is officially documented offhand, but from my testing it's definately been the case.
Are you sure on this? I've never found why but on this laptop I can only enable either advanced scratch or advanced master tempo, but I don't see why Master Tempo would be dependent on your Scratch settings? And if this is the case, then developers it's definitely time to put some tooltips in please, or some tooltips anyway, I like them :)
geposted Tue 02 Sep 08 @ 8:45 am
SBDJ
Andrew87 wrote :
Are you sure on this? I've never found why but on this laptop I can only enable either advanced scratch or advanced master tempo, but I don't see why Master Tempo would be dependent on your Scratch settings? And if this is the case, then developers it's definitely time to put some tooltips in please, or some tooltips anyway, I like them :)
SBDJ wrote :
Master Tempo:
Advanced is better quality, but requires more CPU. It also requires that scratch is set to Enhanced as well - otherwise it will just use the Fast master tempo. I can't find anywhere where this is officially documented offhand, but from my testing it's definately been the case.
Advanced is better quality, but requires more CPU. It also requires that scratch is set to Enhanced as well - otherwise it will just use the Fast master tempo. I can't find anywhere where this is officially documented offhand, but from my testing it's definately been the case.
Are you sure on this? I've never found why but on this laptop I can only enable either advanced scratch or advanced master tempo, but I don't see why Master Tempo would be dependent on your Scratch settings? And if this is the case, then developers it's definitely time to put some tooltips in please, or some tooltips anyway, I like them :)
Well with scratch on simple, nothing I change in the advanced master tempo has any effect on either quality or CPU utilisation when simply playing.
As soon as I enable enhanced scratch, the master tempo settings start to make a difference - with silly settings resulting in massive CPU utilisation when simply playing (no scratching at all).
Try it:
Load up a song, enable master tempo. Set the master tempo to advanced 3 and 5, and leave scratch on simple. Note the CPU usage. Whilst the song is still playing, enable advanced scratch. Watch what happens lol.
My only conclusion is that they require each other to work correctly. Also, I did a bit of searching and found some other people have stated the same in the past.
Regards,
Scott
geposted Tue 02 Sep 08 @ 10:28 am
Andrew87
I just tried this and it's exactly like you said, how bizarre! Either this is a bug, the feature is poorly documented or at least one of the algorithm's are very inefficient considering a deck playing in one direction is hardly emulating a scratch. Perhaps then the master tempo section should be greyed out if simple scratch is selected?
geposted Tue 02 Sep 08 @ 11:27 am
SBDJ
As far as I know it's been that way since v4 came out..
geposted Tue 02 Sep 08 @ 2:13 pm