登录:     

Forum: General Discussion
Topic: [NEW VERSION] VirtualDJ Pro v5.1 - Page: 8

由于该帖子的部分内容已年深日久，可能包含陈旧过时或描述错误的信息。

listen2 wrote :
I think you increased the wrong portion of the wave, if you look it no longer fits into the selected outlining frame.

Exactly my point, I did as DJ format said though.
 
dhe8dave wrote :
TearEmUp wrote :
Look around this thread DJ Format gives instruction on increasing the size of the waveform display in the skins. But it is in this thread...like page 6 I think.







Try this little change:
<songpos chan="1" orientation="horizontal" rightclick="temporary" waveform="yes">
<pos x="75" y="148"/>
<size width="242" height="26"/>

height allows to raise height of wave whereas y allows to move upper or downer wave's position.
y=149 the wave is upper
y=147 the wave is downer

You could find a good compromise between height and y
 
just be sound wrote :
where can i downlaod this, in my downloads i only get 5.07...in doesn't give me the option


I think the cue upgrade is not out yet but it will be;)
 
sischo wrote :
dhe8dave wrote :
TearEmUp wrote :
Look around this thread DJ Format gives instruction on increasing the size of the waveform display in the skins. But it is in this thread...like page 6 I think.







Try this little change:
<songpos chan="1" orientation="horizontal" rightclick="temporary" waveform="yes">
<pos x="75" y="148"/>
<size width="242" height="26"/>

height allows to raise height of wave whereas y allows to move upper or downer wave's position.
y=149 the wave is upper
y=147 the wave is downer

You could find a good compromise between height and y


Fraid it cant be done, you cant get in anywhere near the height of old using those two parameters. Try it yourself and see, i'm using the Default "Full" Skin.
 
that sucks...i was realy happy about that....any time frame...hopefully not 6 months..
 
just be sound wrote :
that sucks...i was realy happy about that....any time frame...hopefully not 6 months..


It shouldn't be, they follow a short time after the VirtualDJ updates.
 
dhe8dave wrote :


Fraid it cant be done, you cant get in anywhere near the height of old using those two parameters. Try it yourself and see, i'm using the Default "Full" Skin.


you are right.
Anyway, if you try to see carefully difference between old wave and new type of wave, you'll notice that in the newest there are crowns lighter which make seem waves smaller (if those would be darker, the wave would be like before)
 
sischo wrote :
dhe8dave wrote :


Fraid it cant be done, you cant get in anywhere near the height of old using those two parameters. Try it yourself and see, i'm using the Default "Full" Skin.


you are right.
Anyway, if you try to see carefully difference between old wave and new type of wave, you'll notice that in the newest there are crowns lighter which make seem waves smaller (if those would be darker, the wave would be like before)


I dont think it's quite as simple as that, it may seem like it with that track example however look at the intro...
On the old there is a distict slight change in the wave form when the high hat comes in, where as in the new, this is not shown at all.

Also when the track starts to get goin after the inro you see there is no grey peak on either. The new wave is simply half the size.
 
dhe8dave wrote :

Also when the track starts to get goin after the inro you see there is no grey peak on either. The new wave is simply half the size.


Maybe, I don't know, I see only that clearer peaks are not showed in older version.
It would need some words about who changed this type of option to understand what they made
 
So noisemap = SSL correct? Also I have some old Final Scratch vinyl,will it work now?
 
sischo wrote :
dhe8dave wrote :

Also when the track starts to get goin after the inro you see there is no grey peak on either. The new wave is simply half the size.


Maybe, I don't know, I see only that clearer peaks are not showed in older version.
It would need some words about who changed this type of option to understand what they made


I am still missing the argument here as to what is the issue? Do you not use the Rhythm window to find the exact Cue Point any how ? The waveform is only there as a complete overview of the entire track, elapsed played position vs remaining by the highlight moving, and set Cue Point positions. If you are honestly telling me that you use the waveform for identifying Cue Points and not the Rhythm window -- then I guess I am at a total loss.

I have ever only used the waveform to skip through a track to a 'general' location then focus on the rhythm window and what I hear for identifying Cue Points. Does anyone not listen to their tracks anymore and only rely on what they can supposedly read from a waveform?
 
cstoll wrote :
sischo wrote :
dhe8dave wrote :

Also when the track starts to get goin after the inro you see there is no grey peak on either. The new wave is simply half the size.


Maybe, I don't know, I see only that clearer peaks are not showed in older version.
It would need some words about who changed this type of option to understand what they made


I am still missing the argument here as to what is the issue? Do you not use the Rhythm window to find the exact Cue Point any how ? The waveform is only there as a complete overview of the entire track, elapsed played position vs remaining by the highlight moving, and set Cue Point positions. If you are honestly telling me that you use the waveform for identifying Cue Points and not the Rhythm window -- then I guess I am at a total loss.

I have ever only used the waveform to skip through a track to a 'general' location then focus on the rhythm window and what I hear for identifying Cue Points. Does anyone not listen to their tracks anymore and only rely on what they can supposedly read from a waveform?


I'm with you on this one, I didn't notice any reduction in waveform size, I'm too busy mixing.
 
sischo wrote :
dhe8dave wrote :

Also when the track starts to get goin after the inro you see there is no grey peak on either. The new wave is simply half the size.


Maybe, I don't know, I see only that clearer peaks are not showed in older version.
It would need some words about who changed this type of option to understand what they made


Yeah I don't really know why they would have done it.

Heres another example if that helps...


When cueing I quickly use that bar to find the best point in the track to mix into the one currently playing. Then do the rest of the cueing by ear over the headphones. Much like you would reading the display on some CDJ1000s and looking at the groves on vinyl.


http://www.slaaudiovisual.es/tienda/images/CDJ1000MK3blolo.jpg

I don't use the rhythum window at all, the CBG is often wrong and missleading. You just need a set of headphones once you've found a good point in the track.
 
I use the waveform for orientation in my mixing!!!!
Old version was much better sorry to tell.
Agree with the people who are complaning about.
And why the Automix needs a 2. waveform in the same small display?????
Are you making the sofware for Dj`s or Automixers!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!??

 
yk23 wrote :
So noisemap = SSL correct?

At last, a question very interesting !!!
 
yk23 wrote :
So noisemap = SSL correct?


Give it a try, all you'll never Know.
 
Well it is now official -- Forward progress will always be perceived as backwards and Losing Progress will always be a better way ahead.

 
I think this old saying is just right for this thread.

"You may be able to please some of the people all of the time, and you may be able to please all of the people some of the time, but you'll never be able to please all of the people all of the time."


 
I think on the whole the new additional features and upgrades are great.
I've simply raised one issue and have not so much been given an answer as to why it was changed in the first place.

From what i read, some people agree with my views, other don't care either way. So why not just revert back to how it was?

The rest is great though, i'd be gutted to have to stay with 5.0.7 forever, especailly as i'm getting timecodes soon and want to use the new v5 engine.

Is the idea of this thread to voice views and opinions on the changes or am i wasting my time?
 
jimmy b wrote :
I think this old saying is just right for this thread.

"You may be able to please some of the people all of the time, and you may be able to please all of the people some of the time, but you'll never be able to please all of the people all of the time."



lol jimmy..say that backwards and as fast as you can...thats how bored i am at my work..lol...
 
48%