Serato Software Feature Suggestions

What features would you like to see in Serato software?

Relative mode rules already, but...

G-man NYC 12:39 AM - 19 July, 2004
I'm sure you guys already thought of this but just in case...

I LOVE using relative mode for almost everything... it's such a great feature, especially when trying to scratch on rubber band mounted tables. Drop the needle anywhere on the record and it starts at the beginning of the track (make sure 'start from the beginning' is checked). The only downside to this is if you're doing a long mix the only way to get back to the beginning is to take your mouse and slide the little arrow back up to the top of the waveform display ( or click abs. mode and then drop the needle back to the begining).

My suggestion is to have a 'jump to beginning' button, or better yet, an assignable function key of your choice, to bring the track back to a marker or at the bare minimum to the beginning of the audio file. If there was someway to skip back and forth to a marker in RELATIVE mode only (wouldn't make sense in Abs. mode, right?) it would enable DJ's to instantly toggle between scratch points and then to the point where the track will be mixed in. You could do some really crazy stuff that couldn't be done with conventional records I'd imagine.

If this function was available it would almost eliminate the need for absolute mode and also allow your SSL records to live a lot longer since you can drop the needle anywhere on the record to start the track.

The function keys that are assigned to jump to these cue points could be displayed next to the cue points perhaps with customizable labels like 'scratch voice 1' or 'start' or whatever.
DJ Dynamight 2:52 AM - 19 July, 2004
Interesting concept indeed. Especially since my records are already showing wear, causing SSL to shortly jump to incorrect time locations and then return to normal.
SpinThis! 3:29 AM - 19 July, 2004
i don't think i'd get rid of abs mode at all. the ability to needle drop is something very intuitive that having function keys take their place wouldn't work. plus that limits you to a more linear way of working (this cue point here and that one here).

for example, you have a battle record... i'll use my example of hee haw bryks by dj flare (quite possibly the most comprehensive library of samples ever on one side): to get to any sample, you def are going to want to needle drop to find what you're looking for.
G-man NYC 6:09 AM - 19 July, 2004
i'm not saying get rid of it completely... that would be silly. I meant to say it would be "almost" unnecessary once you've marked up your audio files. With new records you haven't listened to yet this thing I suggested wouldn't be that useful. For the way i like to spin. which is definitely not battle style, this feature would make my dj'ing experience that more hassle free. i.e. no skips, quicker ceuing, less records to buy, etc.
AJ 7:35 AM - 19 July, 2004
This feature is in the plan. Both rel and int modes will benefit from a keystroke that jumps you to one of the five markers in your song.
tashafa 1:27 PM - 19 July, 2004
is it seamless? as in does it pause for a microsec b4 playing at the cue it jumped too?
G-man NYC 3:23 PM - 19 July, 2004
AJ,

you guys are on it. Maybe you could make those stickers like AVID used to make for their customers keyboards... then the only time your keyboard would work as a typing keyboard would be when the search window is selected.
AJ 5:06 PM - 19 July, 2004
It will definitely pause for a microsecond, in fact probably several. But if you you think you can hear a microsecond pause, you have an inflated view of human perception. A single sample of CD quality audio is 22 microseconds.

But seriously, it will be seamless.
nik39 7:03 PM - 19 July, 2004
Seriously, a sample of CD quality is

44100 samples/sec => 1 / 44100 (sec/samples) =~ 0.22 ms

Not trying to be picky, but that makes a hell of a difference :) I can hear 22ms offset, but not 0.22 ms
radish 10:14 PM - 19 July, 2004
ms is millisecond. There are 100 microseconds in a millisecond. Thus, 0.22 ms == 22 microseconds.
nik39 10:28 PM - 19 July, 2004
The one who can read, holds the high ground. I read milliseconds, not microseconds and I apologize for being picky :-)
Steve W 11:54 PM - 19 July, 2004
There are 1000 microseconds in a millisecond, and 1 / 44100 s =~ 0.023 ms = 23µs (microseconds).
radish 12:30 AM - 20 July, 2004
touche ;)
nik39 1:40 AM - 20 July, 2004
omg, I have to apologize again, not only for not reading properly but also for not doing my maths homework :-( Didnt mean to confuse anyone (besides myself).
AJ 5:24 AM - 20 July, 2004
NP. You gotta be careful when you go up against the serato maths geeks.
Alexander 9:50 PM - 20 July, 2004
I hear you on that AJ...you guys are serious over there! :)