possible will this be, but smart?
consider that a direct record in MP3 requires an on the fly compression to MP3 what will eat a hell off CPU load.

the risk to have audio drops or other issues within a gig scenario is not worth to implement this.

furthermore I can't total follow the issue. to convert the mix to MP3 is done with freeware in seconds afterwards?

Agreed. Juice = Not worth the squeeze.

convert afterwards mediamonkey is fine

I have a Thinkpad I7 2.9 GHz and 16GB of ram with an SSD hard disk and the NumarkNV on Win8.1
Actual load during a set never spikes more than 58% while live.
I would like to know why the MP3 format Is an option. If it's due to the added load a simple disclaimer and a minimum hardware requirement change should be enough.
Having to convert after the fact
is easy but the option should be available.
I must be missing something.

you miss the risk of drop outs even on high end hardware.
MP3 must be coded in real time...that is not recommended at all at the same time you do real time audio on the same system. (effects, P'N'T....)

last not least MP3 is a lossy format what means: each new coding generates additional quality losses. just due to that the decision to record in an uncompressed format is correct.
if file size matters....create the MP3 afterwards. But there is no point to loose quality already during the recording!

I get that bit and getting drop outs during a set is a valid concern. I'm just in the camp where i should have the option for compressed or uncompressed.
With the disclaimer proceed at your own risk.

far away from the risk: where is the total need in that?
You like to have a recording format that loses quality by default just to have it instant on mp3 with no more "work" to compress afterwards?

I would say it would be a massive design error if a recording function of a professional tool will reduce the quality directly during the recording.

the master recording should be in any case without losses. what the user does afterwards with this is his own thing....but in general it is more than correct to have not such option.
Just one additional point makes it clear why this is smart:
If you record it with a lot of headroom (what I do always to prevent clipping on transitions with full power effects on top) you need to normalize the recording afterwards. To do this with a WAV file is without any losses. To do this with a MP3 file is not, latest if you change something else what requires to, again, recode the stuff.


at the end: there is a recording in best possible quality. hard drive space is more more point today, the creation of a MP3 file afterwards takes one minute.

what exact added value is given if there is a compressed recording, with all risks and all facts, when the compression of the recording is done with freeware afterwards within a minute? on your hardware a compression to a 320 MP3 should take less than a minute per recording hour.

just my two cents...

For a pro set I would record lossless by default. However, if I'm just messing about making something for the car or during a practice session I would want the option similar to the OP.

It is one thing to be concerned about production issues, however it's not even a feature at this time.

If Serato can provide an FAQ that highlights why they won't or can't add it, the question becomes a non issue.

Without any direct answers we are left to speculate. I don't disagree with the points made in this thread but every community response to this has had the hardware capability being the issue and I don't believe in blaming hardware without proof. The functionality does not exist in the software. If the hardware does not have the capability and it is proven different story.

I just hope Serato answers the question directly or adds the feature.

One thing to bear in mind; Fraunhofer (the creators of MP3) charge licence fees for all hardware/software that reads MP3 files and another, higher set of fees for those that create MP3 files. That alone is a good enough reason for many companies to stay away from MP3 creation and is also why many who do use Lame as an encoder (it's also arguably the best).

There are so many converters out there and so many free ones, it's really no big deal to create them yourself. And as for the guy who said that MP3's have to be created in real-time, you make some good points but that's not one of them.

You can use ITunes to convert to mp3. To have that function add would squeeze the hell out any laptop don't care what make or brand it is

I'm a little lost.
My conclusion so far:
Many points clear named why there is good reasons to not implement this.
Only point from aceadoni: I need MP3 for car use and whatever.
Seems for me: just to lazy for a one minute job after the recording :)

I see not a single reason for Serato to
a) implement it
b) explain why they do not
c) go, knowing there are sooner or later tickets and issues, for a disclaimer approach

The feature request area is offered for just this reason though. Anyone is free to make any suggestion or request but the community will be quick to offer feedback as to whether it is necessary and/or desired. This one clearly did not pass the mark.

Simply put from the beginning.................

+1

...and AAC is better anyway ;)