Thanks! Reading that, I don’t think it’s necessary to have EP set the loop as being particularly special or an “active loop”. The Prime players should be able to do as I’ve described for any loop that’s already been created – loops created in EP or on the players themselves. It sounds like the creator of that feature request wants a special type of loop and wants it to trigger when you reach it regardless of what you do on the player… automatic. They also have no apparent method described to make a pre-existing loop “active” on the player on-the-fly. I have no problem with the idea of right-clicking and checking some box or something so that a particular loop is pre-activated in EP. There could even be a little “active” tag in EP next to each such designated loop. That feature would not affect this thread’s request or the feature request I made, except that the original poster here I suspect would also use EP for creating active loops to save him one less thing to do when DJing.
As something I used routinely on rekordbox I wish this was available. In some tracks where its hard to pin down (say a short 1 or 2 beat) loop live, having the loop set to ‘active’ during prep was a god send in rekordbox. In fact I’d go as far as to say that I don’t see the value of preparing loops in prime if I then still need to manually active them. Seems counter intuitive to me anyway
I used to do exactly the same in Serato; especially if the main 4 beat loop had the tail of a previous instrument so you’d need to 1 or 2 beat loop for a clean mix. Flip in Serato is also class as you can put different sequences together and have them auto activate when the playhead gets there.
Agree with the counter-intuitive part too, why make a loop in Prime to activate on the player when they could be switched on in the file.
Well, at this point it really seems that we are asking for ALL the killing features provided by PIO on their media players sticking with the most powerfull SC5000…I also miss all those intuitive features, that is why I use to play one set on the PIO HW and one on the DenonDj one…I’m lucky to have more than one DJ set available at all time… BUT each time I change to the Denon one I fill a little bit frustrated…I hope DenonDJ will solve this out in a relatively short time…
Question for you: I’ve never used search on the CDJ2000NXS2. I have used them many times, but always just went into folders manually. Is the search on them faster than the SC5000? SC5000 search is currently definitely much slower than the search on computer software. I can even just take a text file of all the exact directories and filename path strings for every track, search it on my phone, and then manually go to the directory sometimes faster than Prime.
Really that slow? How many tracks on your collection/sticks? I play progressive house/ melodic house and techno on 128Gb sticks with about 1200 wav files, search is almost ‘instant’.
Maybe it’s faster because metadata is stored in engine files, as wav files don’t support metadata?
2TB >80,000 tracks. No analysis files other than those generated by the players, rather only the database. Searching a text file of the paths/filenames on my phone takes like a second or two. On Prime, I am limiting the search to only two or three categories, too, and it still takes WAY too long compared to any other device or means. I’ve tried “optimizing” it. Seems to make no difference. On NYE in the middle of a big gig I also had the units freeze in the middle of a search and require reboot. Thankfully this only happened at 1:45am once, but the search in general was slow enough to be disruptive. Anyway, this is sort of a divergence from the original topic… sorry.
Someone in another thread who’s apparently a coding and database person I recall explained convincingly why it might be as slow as it is and what could be done to fix it. I think he like took apart the database files or something and analyzed what was going on. I don’t think they’re encoded/encrypted or anything like that. Not sure what the thread was called or who the user was. It was compelling and seemed to indicate this is software stuff with the players and Engine Prime.
Perhaps latency is the wrong term. People with 100000 tracks report a 10 second search time. I have about 10000 tracks on a SSD drive and it takes a mere second.
I think it was @JonnyXDA that opted tuning the database index or even the way it’s build up. That could improve search time. and that’s partly firmware related due to change in database structure and the related query to be executed.
Not sure what SSD has to do with anything. We’re talking about just a database that should be in active memory on the players at all times, right? How big could a database of the file names/paths and basic tag data for 100,000 tracks actually be? Too big to stay in active memory on the players at all times? I mean, we already know there’s a 270MB track size limit over link, which seems weird.