It’s a fair point, but good to keep an open mind with these things, sometimes I can be pinned down to Engine.
Did that influence you to vote in a particular way in the poll?
I exclusively use SanDisk Ultra Dual Drive. This one
I experienced the same lag when using a Crucial MX500 internal SSD. I had to move away from using that though because the sync workflow was too much of a pain.
a USB 3.2 drive will give you a massive increase in speed over that.
Yea, I should point out that it’s variable. It can work fine 75% of the time and then for no apparent reason it takes forever.
Do you run the disc cleanup regularly?
Cover art is uniformly stored as 256x256 PNG images in the database. Independent of the source format in the file tags, i.e. no optimization possible.
https://community.enginedj.com/t/store-albumart-as-jpg-instead-of-png-to-save-storage-space/61446
Im talking about shrinking the size of the cover art on the original music file, not on the DB. There are some discussions around this topic and people have found that large album art is causing issues with performance.
1 Like
I suppose that Engine ignores and skips unused metadata like huge cover art when loading tracks. Only the audio stream is needed when loading a track into a deck.
Cover art and all other metadata is exclusively loaded from the database, once the files have been imported and analyzed. Scrolling through tracks doesn’t access any audio files.
…with one exception: Marking missing files in red. But for this the file size doesn’t matter either.
All i know is that various people have reported performance issues in several places, and in each case a link has been found to large artwork being attached to the track, in some cases as high as 40mb.
i don’t know what has changed within Engine to produce this issue, just asking people to consider it and see if reducing it also reduces the issue.
2 Likes
Slightly different issue but having sent my sc live for in for a diagnostic due to audio drop outs, the repairer advised i needed a replacement unit ( thank goodness for insurance) Denon (in my experience at least) has not done well on reliability my x1850 needed a whole new board put in, my sc live now has to be replaced and I have only had it for two years. Of course any tech can break but for me something is wrong with how Denon has built the current hardware, they are great products no issue in that context but the new hardware really needs to be built better, yes this may make the product slightly more pricey but if it lasts for the next 6/7 years it would be worth it having to replace a device after two years is poor in my view
Did it really need a whole new board though? I’d guess it was just simpler to do that.
Fault finding down to component level needs skill and takes time & equipment, but swapping boards out is quick and can be done by anyone. Swap boards until it works.
With no new hardware on the horizon (that we know about anyway), paid features would be the way to go. The Akai update got a few grumbles, but a lot of people seemed to happily fork over $99.
Stability updates are always expected.
Phil Morse said on his stream the other day, “Denon have released gear every single year since XYZ, and I’ll just leave it at that” in answer to someone asking about new gear.
1 Like