Eric Sands
I very often have to manually redo the BPMs on songs which have been scanned by VDJ. I usually do this using the Anchor method for 32 beats. Although this gives good results for the first minute or so of the song, it is not accurate enough to maintain the grid throughout, and has drifted too much by the time the outro comes.
I wonder if there's a way to have the algorithm "snap" to the closest probable BPM after we've given it the approximate BPM using the anchor method? Or is the only solution here to just count out the beats for the duration of the song?
I wonder if there's a way to have the algorithm "snap" to the closest probable BPM after we've given it the approximate BPM using the anchor method? Or is the only solution here to just count out the beats for the duration of the song?
Posted Fri 04 Apr 08 @ 5:30 pm
Rune (DJ-In-Norway)
New bpm engine in makings, and hopefully it will be great for almost all songs.
For the very very few (from 5.1) that arent, you need to be dead accurate on the anchor.
BUT, there is a HUGE but...
MANY, and I really mean many.. songs that lots download from p2p, limewire, and torrents, are recorded by users, with TURNTABLES.
And turntables arent perfect, and if a cheap turntable even worse.. It has bpm fluctations, because of imperfect motor in the turntable itself, as well as not DEAD center vinyl circle. The result being that be bpm isnt really 100% perfect.
Anways, new bpm engine is comming :)
Posted Fri 04 Apr 08 @ 5:35 pm
Eric Sands
No turntables here... I'll look forward to the new engine.
Posted Fri 04 Apr 08 @ 5:48 pm
Rune (DJ-In-Norway)
"snap to closes probable" is one of the new features considered... and tested ;)
Posted Fri 04 Apr 08 @ 5:49 pm
Dj Rhythm
i use the test bpm option on my pcdj and make the necesary corections and it is very true about consistencys on turntables
Posted Fri 04 Apr 08 @ 7:28 pm
Eric Sands
Yes... the "Test & Correct" feature on PCDJ RED is exactly what I mean. The calculated BPM is always one of a few possible multiples related to the actual BPM. So if that's the case, then no need to manually re-calculate from scratch.
That software is almost a decade old, so I guess it shouldn't be that difficult to do...
That software is almost a decade old, so I guess it shouldn't be that difficult to do...
Posted Sat 05 Apr 08 @ 12:26 am
andytaylor125
Sounds interesting on the new bpm engine.
Strange, because I'm sure most the time when I do the anchor method it works for the whole song, especially with a gap of 32 beats. Do you actually pause the song at the two anchor points and get it so it's dead on the beat? I guess you probably do, but thought I'd mention just in case. Also, to improve accuracy you could try counting 64 or 128 (or 256!?) beats between the anchors (if you've got lots of time on your hands! lol.)
Strange, because I'm sure most the time when I do the anchor method it works for the whole song, especially with a gap of 32 beats. Do you actually pause the song at the two anchor points and get it so it's dead on the beat? I guess you probably do, but thought I'd mention just in case. Also, to improve accuracy you could try counting 64 or 128 (or 256!?) beats between the anchors (if you've got lots of time on your hands! lol.)
Posted Sat 05 Apr 08 @ 5:28 am