No, no… Bulshit. Denon DJ Prime series IS primary STANDALONE SYSTEM!!! Don’t you understand what the term Standalone means? Dear mate. Speak or write on your behalf! Not on behalf of all Denon DJ users. Not us, we need… You need! If you need primary controller functions, then get a MIDI controller and not a standalone system. That’s it. It’s very simple…
1 Like
Know it all. When you plug in the Midi and the cord goes off. What are you doing? I’ll answer you. You’re standing there like a ■■■■■ and throwing up your hands.))))))))))) Do you want to get away from your laptop? SO DON’T PLUG IT IN!!! And others need this feature!!! And the comments proved it.
There is also the reality of development resources. If you look at the most wanted features in the feature request section, and think about the time they have been wanted vs the time it takes to develop them (raw estimates), a good conclusion is that InMusics resources on developing the Engine platform are somewhat limited. If you then look at the effort needed to make Engine Desktop a full fledged DJ platform, well, I don’t think it’s gonna happen anytime soon.
Also, I notice a lot of hate in this topic. Could it be we are all frustrated because the features we are asking for for so long aren’t happening, that we see any new/different ideas as a threat to our own wanted list? Admittedly, I sometimes do.
1 Like
engine dj is only software for making and preparing you’re playlist and this is cool for standalone controller’s.
2 Likes
Off you go then… and if you can have your programming done by a week Thursday, great.
Oh… and when you’ve programmed Engine to work just like Traktor, will the price tag be the same as Traktor? Or did you want engine to be a on-stage performance DJ package because Engine DJ is free (unlike Traktor, Virtual DJ, Serato etc)
1 Like
That can be solved: Rekordbox is free for preparation just like Engine Desktop, and unlocks its Dj software features when connected to an eligible device (CDJ, XDJ-RX, …). If you want to use it with third party controllers, you have to pay for a license, just like Traktor, Virtual DJ, … IMHO I think that’s a fair system. The big downside (IMHO) of Rekordbox is you can only “rent” the license, not buy it… But that is also the case with software like Lexicon DJ, which is praised by most on this forum, so it would seem many people are ok with it…
(and sorry for only comparing against Rekordbox, but to my knowledge Pioneer and InMusic are the only manufacturers of standalone DJ hardware?)
I use MIXXX it is playable, free, cross platform OS, has all options of commercial software and more. Is fully customizable using MIDI scripts as well as GUI front end to your own liking, etc
Mixxx - Free DJ Mixing Software App
And it has a ENGINE DJ export function as well …
Thanks for the tip!! And I see they are reverse engineering the Pioneer HID protocol, and welcoming any developers who tries to make Rekordbox USB stick export work (source: Mixxx - New in 2.3: Importing tracks and cues from Rekordbox removable devices). This would solve any cross platform difficulties imposed by commercial software…
Open source can be a great alternative!
I admit that reading the comments on this thread, I don’t understand the reaction of some people, who don’t want to see an evolution of Engine towards a kind of performance mode at some point.
When Rekordbox came out, the philosophy was exactly the same as Engine today, to be only a preparation software, and leave the computer at home.
Then Pioneer introduced the performance mode in addition to the Export mode used for preparation only. And that’s probably where Rekordbox started to take off.
And you know why? Because by making this move they attracted many users who were used to using Serato, Traktor or other DJ software, and thus brought them into the Pioneer ecosystem.
And it’s probably one of the best moves they’ve made to attract more users. They also needed proprietary software to run their consumer-oriented controller range. Otherwise, they would have been forced to continue to rely on third-party software, make partnerships, and pay licensing fees.
Now some will say, “Yes but Denon DJ” only makes standalone products, they don’t make controllers".
That’s true for Denon DJ, but not for Numark or Rane, which are part of the same group. And InMusic is still forced to rely on third party software for those products.
Developing a performance mode in Engine may not seem relevant to Denon DJ, but if you broaden your vision to sister brands then it becomes very relevant to have a common performance software for all InMusic DJ product brands.
Look at what almost happened when Pioneer tried to buy Serato, a lot of questions were raised because InMusic were caught off guard. What if tomorrow whoever bought Serato, and the new company decided they didn’t want to work with InMusic for whatever reason, what would happen with no fallback?
All this to say that if you don’t need performance mode, and you still want to use your units in standalone mode, then continue to use Engine as usual and don’t use performance mode if it were to be implemented.
But be open-minded and don’t prevent people who would like to see a performance mode implemented from expressing it by saying “no that’s not the Denon philosophy, blah blah blah…”
What difference would it make to you if such a mode existed? If you don’t have a use for it, don’t use it, but let others use it if they want.
8 Likes
It could also be looked at from the other side. DJ software already exists, in the form of many popular programs. Is there really a need for another one?
The available software is much more established and fully featured. The equipment is supported. Why not use what’s already there?
There’s far too much of this “it’s essential because Pioneer do it” mindset, and people buying kit designed for standalone use, then wanting to use it as a controller.
If you like the way Pioneer do it, buy Pioneer. If you want a controller, buy a controller.
1 Like
Is a evolution or a devolution?
InMusic goal specifically from buying DenonDj brand was to be a standalone solution.
Imagine what kind of signal would be to now switch to DJ software+controller products.
1 Like
I am totally happy as it is right now with Denon DJ …
Where I have the best of both worlds 
I have a Numarks Mixstream Pro & Mixstream Pro ‘Go’ model at hand. Both running on Engine DJ OS.
When I play long sets I bring over the PC for convenience reasons using MIXXX as DJ software.
It supports also multiple external libraries from other DJ software brands …
When I play smaller sets I don’t attach the PC and can use MIXXX to export the tracks to USB. So Engine DJ OS can access them offline. Or even online if you export to Dropbox for example
It has never been better 
It’s not a question of being “essential because Pioneer does it”, I cited the example of Pioneer because they too started with this philosophy of “leave your computer at home, Rekordbox is just a preparation software”.
They defended this vision for years and did not want to budge. Until they understood that they had more interest in introducing a performance mode to bring all the users of competing DJ software into their ecosystem.
I will take a concrete example.
Case number 1, Let’s imagine that I am a beginner DJ, I bought a Numark NS4FX delivered with Serato DJ lite. I start to progress and after a while I want to evolve to a higher category controller. I could go for a controller like the Rane Four, but I could just as easily decide to go for a Pioneer controller like the FLX 10, which will offer me Serato compatibility in addition to Rekordbox compatibility.
I have done my entire collection, all its organization, playlist, cue points in Serato for years and I have gotten used to Serato, so the only ecosystem in which I am locked is that of the Serato software environment.
Case number 2: I have the same profile as case number 1, except that my Numark NS4FX came with Engine DJ with a performance mode. I am used to working with Engine since the beginning, I have organized my entire collection, playlist, cue points, etc. there… As in case number 1, I want to continue working with the software that I am used to using. However, I would like to move towards a more professional controller or one with more options. Logically I will necessarily go to Rane if I do not want to go standalone.
And the fact of having already done all this work of managing my collection on Engine for years could even encourage me much more to move to the standalone products of the Denon DJ range.
Just like in case number 1, in my DJ journey, I am captive of the software ecosystem, because changing software platforms is often a brake for many DJs who have their habits.
If you educate me and teach me from the start in your software environment, there is a good chance that I will stay in this environment too.
Pioneer understood this well with their range of controllers which serve as an entry point to be captive of a software environment.
But since Engine DJ does not have a performance mode, you cannot make beginners captive of your software environment by using controllers as an entry point.
And again, when Pioneer introduced the performance mode, all those who were used to using Rekordbox in export mode just for the preparation and management of the collection were able to continue using rekordbox as before. It didn’t change anything for them.
So if tomorrow Denon DJ were to introduce a performance mode, it wouldn’t change anything for you either, neither your workflow, nor anything else.
So I really don’t understand such distrust towards the idea of having a performance mode.
It’s a great gateway for first-time users who could then evolve in the Engine ecosystem, and potential future customers for the Denon DJ and Rane brands.
You are only thinking about Denon DJ, not globally.
Pioneer has only one brand for all DJ equipment ranging from the entry point with beginner controllers like the FLX 2 / FLX 4 to the XDJ AZ and the CDJ3000 / DJM V10 couple. The whole range is gathered under one and the same brand (even if it gradually becomes alphatheta)
InMusic has a completely different strategic positioning and has divided the segments according to the brands it owns:
Numark: Controllers and standalones oriented towards beginner / amateur DJs
Rane: Performance-oriented controllers for advanced / experienced DJs / Turntablism
Denon DJ: standalone units oriented towards semi-pro / pro DJs / mobile DJs (it seems increasingly clear that they follow this positioning)
So in your reasoning you totally exclude the Numark and Rane brands which belong to InMusic.
5 Likes
…except it is, because you keep referencing Pioneer. The comment wasn’t just a response to your post either. I’m sure you’ve also seen all the posts here asking for Pioneer style waveforms, Pioneer style effects, Pioneer style jog info, Pioneer style tags… and on and on.
This is the Denon forum, not the Pioneer forum! Want Pioneer style X, Y or Z? Then why did you buy Denon? 
I’m not saying it shouldn’t be done. I’m questioning the need for it, and saying it doesn’t seem necessary. If Denon decide to do it, so be it - but I reckon there’s a strong chance they have the same POV as the “distrusters”.
1 Like
Well, I have another use case:
I used to use Traktor. When CDJ’s where provided I connected the CDJs in HID mode, when none where provided, I used my Kontrol S4. But indeed, I got tired of dragging along a laptop and using a small controller like the Kontrol S4. I wanted a full DJ booth.
I doubted between Pioneer CDJ3000’s and SC6000’s for a while, but choose the SC6000s because of the augmented feature set. But the downside of this choice is that at events where CDJs are provided, I had to drag around Denon kit, or go through the hoops and loops of maintaining 2 libraries. I didn’t want the former, didn’t want the latter, but then I realized I am a 40+ DJ who doesn’t play much bigger events with a full lineup anymore, and mostly plays small events where I DJ the whole evening. So that downside was a really small one.
Now image I was a younger DJ: I would still played a lot of gigs with 5-DJ lineups, and CDJ’s provided as standard. tearing down DJ booths and swapping CDJ’s with SC’s in the middle of a gig is a lot if stress for me, the DJ before and after me, the rental company and the promotor. Now this small downside becomes a big downside, and I probably would have chosen Pioneer anyway, just to be able to use a small handy USB stick, and not stress-out the whole backstage…
Now, image Engine DJ has a performance mode, and supports CDJ’s in HID mode. Well, admittedly I can’t use an Engine USB stick on CDJ’s. But I can still bring my laptop with an Engine DJ library to that multi-DJ gig, and connect it without tearing down the whole booth mid-gig. And if I play all-night events I can bring my own Engine gear and use a USB stick…
It’s all about options and being flexible…
1 Like
Yes - imagine a world where everything just works with everything else, and companies don’t make proprietary stuff, and everyone loves each other.
Imagine if every DJ program supported every controller, and every program was available for every type of computer. Imagine if you could run Windows software on Macs, and Mac software on Windows.
Imagine.
1 Like
Everything would be beige and boring so that the lowest, cheapest thing could work with everything else - innovation would be suffocated.
1 Like
Here is my point of view on why Engine Dj should not become a Performance software:
-
The laziness of sorting your library, so that it is more visible, being obliged to fill in the tags of the files for the passage of the dj software to the autonomous mode and to put everything in storage media (It takes time all that!) whereas if the work is already done it allows to be flexible and to have a more intuitive organization and search, but it requires a lot of work, whereas with the computer it is easy: we download, we put in a folder and that’s it. But the work of the DJ does not stop there, ideally it is necessary to tag them it also allows to realize that we can have files in X copy and to do sorting to lighten the library.
-
To no longer do without the computer for reason 1 since it will be like for some who still use mixing software like: SDJ, VDJ and others (too lazy to start from almost zero!)…
-
Another reason for the style: the comfort of the larger screen. Fortunately they do not use a vinyl turntable lol (there is no screen) and those who use the CDJ 2000 X/Y or 3000 do they complain about the small screen well no (it is the DJ standard) lol.
-
And finally… the most important “I think”!!!
Users will abandon the autonomous part for the performance software part, the products will keep and accumulate bugs over time and they will never be corrected and we will have a step back on the evolution of future autonomous products. Not to mention the feature requests which will be quite confusing because you will have to be in the minds of the users who will not be precise (is it for: the Dj Performance software or for the standalone mode???) and I won’t tell you the work that this will require from the developers, the updates will be slower and less regular whether for fixes or adding functions, so it is better to leave the Performance software part to other developers who have already had their hands on the products that have existed for several years already, who correct and evolve their software.
However, I am not against a Denon product where we could have on two decks “3 / 4” or “1 / 2” a partner dj software mode (without interruption of the autonomous part, as is the case with the competition). I could use SDJ Pro with MixEmergency to carry out my Karaoke evenings.
(Well, John Lennon made a song about this… They said he was a dreamer too…)
In reality, With CD’s and Vinyl this became reality. With MP3 too, but DJ equipment manufacturers decided to put metadata in a proprietary database. I get the database part (performance), the proprietary part is a plain vendor lock in. And Vendor lock in is equally bad for innovation as the scenario @Pasha describes, let alone pricing…
Even if Engine were to have a performance mode one day you can immediately forget the idea of having Pioneer hardware natively supported via HID, or even mappable.
The goal would certainly be to support Numark and Rane controllers as an entry point into the Engine ecosystem to then promote migration to standalone.
In the same way that Rekordbox in performance mode is not compatible with Rane, Numark or Denon products, In Music would have no interest in opening Engine to Pioneer equipment.
I don’t agree with you here, especially regarding your argument on the last point because having a performance mode would not mean that no one would use the preparation/Export mode intended for exclusively standalone use.
You will still have a large majority of existing users who will use the standalone mode and who will not change their habits. This would only add an additional segment of users coming from InMusic controllers or groups by dissuading them from migrating to other ecosystems.
The two types of users can coexist, in the same way that these two types of users currently coexist very well on Rekordbox. Pro DJs prefer the export mode, Home DJs or first-time users prefer the performance mode which does the job very well for mixing at home.
One does not prevent the other, and once again this leaves everyone the choice to use the software according to their needs and do as they see fit.
It doesn’t change anything for you, it just expands the potential market segments.
3 Likes