|
final scratch v1.1 vs V1.0
|
View this Thread in Original format
| opianstate |
I found FS v1.0 for $415 shipped, but I'm not sure if thats the way to go. I've heard that 1.1 is a bit more buggy, but it has more features. Is it worth the money to go ahead and get 1.1 or will 1.0 do the trick? Somebody who has this software clue me in.
Thanks. |
|
|
| auujay |
I bought FinalScratch when version 1.1 came out almost a year ago. I have never used version 1.0 but you get it free if you own 1.1 (aka TFS). I believe most users find that 1.1 is actually better but some people have been able to get 1.0 to work great on there computer and not 1.1 For these people obviously 1.0 is better but for people who can run both I believe they prefer 1.1. Let me try and list a few advantages of 1.1 over 1.0:
- Mac OS X support, though because you are considering 1.0 I guess you already have a PC.
- Can strip (analyze) songs and manage the song DB within TFS instead of booting into windows to do it. I cannot imagine what a pain this must have been (well I can, I am just glad I did not have to).
- A "smoothness" adjuster which allows you to set how closely TFS matches the song to the timecode. At first you would think you want it to be as sensitive as possible, but this means every little particle of dust that causes a momentary loss of signal will sound bad (as the song jumps to the new place in the mp3). To get around this NI has a feature that will instead of jumping to the new location in the mp3 it will speed the song up or slow it down to that location. If this is set too high it can sound like you are pitching the record up and down, but at the right setting it is perfect.
- Very fast song DB search (I am pretty sure it is faster than version 1.0)
- BPM detection (which is pretty bad but it gets in the ballpark)
- Arguably better sound
- 1.1 has a better looking interface
Those are all I can think of now. IMO these features are well worth the 50 dollar price difference. Do you know about the new version for Windows (version 1.5)? I have not used it and am considering getting it, but it is a 50 dollar upgrade and I am super broke. |
|
|
| opianstate |
I guess I'm wondering whether it is a better deal to go ahead at get 1.0 and see if i like it and upgrade later if needed, or just bite the bullet and go 1.1 . . . the upgrade is only $50, so we'll see.
I'm not sure if I'm going to spend that much if I should go ahead and just get 1.5, or maybe serato scratch live.
oh man. |
|
|
| opianstate |
ya i think going linux might be a better idea . . .
how did you guys go about formatting your disk to FAT32? |
|
|
| opianstate |
| partition magic 8 . . . is this a free download or a purchased program? |
|
|
| dj_pontiac |
| i want to get final scratch but i was wondering how long do those vinyls last... i mean the time code ones, since iŽll be playing them over and over and i donŽt want to get new ones every week... |
|
|
| auujay |
| My records last a long time. I am on the original records that my TFS shipped with about 8 months ago. If you have decent carts (I use Ortofon's) and not a lot a tracking force they should last a long time. I also believe that mine last so long because I am not scratching on them or anything, just playing the song straight through. I never do backspins on it which helps, unfortunatly the reason I don't is that it sounds like ass. I am convinced that these records skip less then others because they are very solid (120 grams or something which is the thicker vinyl, like the stuff I have from Vandit or Codeblue). Another reason may be because the groove is very even because the timecode is consistant. Both these things let me use low tracking forces. |
|
|
|
|
