who cares SSL mastered it :)

To put in perspective how much effort has gone into our product, Steve W therorised the exact method we used to operate Scratch Studio Edition, back in *1995*. Yes, almost 10 years ago.

Those same records were used for the initial builds of Scratch LIVE until the amazing noisemap technology with it's great advantages was proposed. Scratch LIVE was already well on the way in terms of initial theory work _years_ before FS debuted at any tradeshow.

After teaming up with AJ, the two spent the intervening time building Serato into a world beating plug-in developer, Pitch 'n Time is used daily on blockbuster movies and platinum selling albums the world over, and is still after 5 years on the market the single best regarded plug-in of it's type, let alone one of the most expensive you can buy for Pro Tools.

We didn't see a demo of FS and say "hey we could do that" we already knew it, and had tested ideas well before then.

That's how we made this the bomb-ass product it is! Time, scientific investigation, and loads of work. No biting necessary.

Nice!

Anything to read-up on how the code works? I heard rumors of a white paper.

So if you have the L and R plugged-in opposite, the record plays in reverse...so obviously the record has a signal that's unique playing forward, which is then reversed for the other channel. That's about all I know and probably all I need to know. ;)

It is quite misleading the way latency is listed on the comparison. The comparison is obviously talking about the internal delay before the system works out its absolute position after a needle drop. However this does not take into account the other delays inherent in the system like buffering, bus transmission and even digital conversion.

When you create a system for tracking absolute position on the disc, you have to make a tradeoff between reliability (through redundancy) and decoding time (through compactness). We went one way, and FS went the other way. Our control signal takes much longer to decode after a needle drop, but it is so robust and clear that you can decode it at any speed in any direction, and also it is no subtle compared with the directional carrier signal, that it does not destroy the all-important speed detection part, which is where frequency distortion comes from.

The FS timecode has compressed twice as many bits per cycle into the carrier, and the bits are at least twice as loud as the SL NoiseMap, however this compactness comes at the cost of smoothness and reliability at changing speeds.

In essence, the main difference between the two systems is that FS cares more about working out where the needle was dropped as fast as possible with little regard for how good it sounds, and SL cares more about staying locked to the movement of the record with little regard to how long it takes to work out where the needle was dropped.

We still think that this is the best way to go, because as long as the system can work out where you needle-dropped within say a 20th of a second, who cares how long it takes? On the other hand the quality of the sound and the fidelity of the scratching movements are so crucial, that sacrificing them just to speed up needled dropping seems crazy to us.

I first heard of a system like this from BPM studio A few years before FS bUt I don't Know for sure. One thing si Serato/Rane is the one who got it right ;)

I'm just glad that it works ... and spot (my dog) agrees.

RZA invented it