ok you lot kept that quiet eh?

i just assumed it would be part of the software - there's no reason why it shouldn't be an option..

i _need_ pitch lock - i often mix stuff 20%+/- or more..

if i can't have a definitive answer as to when it's going to arrive (assuming it does..) i'm going to have to switch to FS2 - which is a big shame - the rest of serato seems excellent.

hope they take it back.. :/

Maybe you should investigated it more befor you bought it instead of just presuming it had it.

too right!

it's obviously not hard though, traktor etc. and more have had it for years.

Yeah, they had it for years and it sounds like the algo's been there for years. You should compare the sound quality of the PnT examples on serato's website with the key-lock sounds from NI.

yep...no comparison really. NI key lock sounds very grainy when compared to PnT. btw jeff, if you choose to go with FS over SSL simply because of the lack of a key lock function (which really is not a necessity if you think about it--funny how DJs have been getting by for over 20 years without it) than that's your loss bud. FS is simply an inferior product...this is a well-known fact. but in the end...it's your choice...

I must endorse what Feniks said. Final Scratch is a bullshit product and is so far below SSL in almost every aspect, that opting to switch to it because of one feature, would be tantamount to slashing ones wrists. Besides, several years ago there was no pitch lock, and djs still managed to mix, and mix well. If SSL doesn't add that feature for another century, there is no way i'd revert to fucking Final Scratch. NEVER!!

BTW I have Final Scratch.... gathering dust in a nether corner of my bedroom. I wish I could sucker some unsuspecting fool into buying it.

ok i realise this is not the place to get sympathy - to be honest i just posted because i was angry.

SSL does indeed seem a far superior product, BUT

personally i need pitch lock! - i'm well aware djs "managed fine" before it, but they didn't have decks capable of +/-50% either. DJing has changed, and i'm surprised SSL hasn't kept up. Their only rival has a feature they don't - in my book that is an error on their part.

I'm aware the FS pitch lock is not particularly high quality, but it is reasonable, and is there as an option. i don't think people would look down on SSL because they provide a feature that matches their opponent, over leaving it out all together.

I mix with my flatmate sometimes - he mixes breakbeat and i put acapellas over the top - sometimes these need to be slowed down as much as 25% or speeded up as much as 30% - in a loud mix any sound degredation is not noticable, especially given that some of the acapellas are "home made"

Without pitch lock that would sound awful, with it, it often sounds great.

I also use it to shoe-horn tracks that wouldn't work together otherwise.
It also means that once i've mixed one into another i can speed up the second to its original speed without the listener being overly aware.
Maybe i should be picking tracks that go together, i hear you say, but pitch lock gives me more freedom in that respect.

All in all i've learnt to dj using pitch lock - it's an integral part of my mixing, and as much as i've enjoyed the other excellent features of SSL i tried out today, that lack means it's not a viable option.

If pitch lock isn't important to you, by all means pick serato - it's brilliant. but not good enough for me.


As for FS2 - if the people i bought serato from give me my money back in full, i think i will probably struggle on with FS1 for a while - if serato come out with a plugin after christmas, i'll buy it again. if not, FS2 by january.

- the difference is you can USE the NI one.

Just trying to keep you away from Final Scratch dog thats all. I fully understand the functionality and relevance of pitch lock. Hell, I use it from time to time myself to do remixes,(ACID). But until SSL includes it, (in my spookiest horror movie voice)"stay far from that disease called Final Scratch"!!

i have used final scratch 1 for a year or so - i know all about its evils ;)

at the same time i'm used to it - and while serato is better, FS is NOT THAT BAD - it was a close thing for me between FS2 and serato for a while. I chose serato, now i'm changing my mind.

jeff, no offense, but i think you should gather information about a product before buying it, specially if it is a expensive one.

anyways, i never use any kind of key lock nor even when using traktor dj studio, but i understand your point. a lot of djs have been suggesting a key lock feature in SSL before.

im totally sure SSL developers team are listening to you, i bet its just a matter of time they implement a key lock feature. while we are writing this, they are working on making SSL better.

one more thing, i would like to suggest you to not depend on features like key locks so heavily. basic mixing/scratching skills, good music collection and crowd leadership are the keys of djing. IMHO, if you are forced to switch SSL with FS2 just because of pitch lock, you are doing something wrong...

BassChamber, I agree with your general comments, but independent management of pitch and tempo is the key to a whole new level of DJ performance: harmonic mixing. I'm a Traktor user, and stick wtih the software because it is the only product which gives me this capability with any degree of reliability. I'm in these forums with the hope that Serato will bring out a product which is turntable-independent (I smiled the day I traded vinyl for CD, and again when I traded CD for WAV), and which offers high quality control of tempo AND pitch.

basscamber - i agree entirely with your first comment! i will make absolutely sure next time i spend so much, don't worry..

i've mentioned before why i want/need pitch lock - wihout it i would have to change to a much more orthodox style of mixing, and at the moment i'd rather stick to horrible FS1.

I'm sending serato back today but rest assured it will be top of my list when pitch lock comes along (and hopefulyl at a cheaper price by then too!)