|
The 0.2 vs 0.5 resolution debate.....! (pg. 5)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Ryan0751 |
Yes but you are forgetting one thing: drag. The tonearm cause more drag on the record when it's near the edge, as it gets closer to the center the drag is decreased. A high torque quart locked table like a 1200 makes this minimal, but you also have to figure in that we use slipmats.
So the record really DOES speed up as it gets to the center, but it's of course very slight.
| quote: | Originally posted by Stu Cox
Not the case - the speed will only change if it's pressed (or was produced) really badly by some complete retard.
The needle only speeds up in terms of radial speed; in terms of the speed along the path of the groove it actually slows down (same revolutions per second but shorter radius = shorter circumference and hence less distance covered per second). And remember the cutting needle also changes speed in the same way when it gets nearer the centre, so it ends up playing back at the same speed, as long as the record and playback speeds are both constant.
(If someone wants to try and point out that commercial records are pressed rather than cut, I want to pre-empt them by pointing out that the stamper for the pressing is made from a master which is cut as you might imagine your deck might if you strapped a Stanley knife on instead of a needle)
If you think about it, the inside ring circumference of a 12" single is less than half the circumference of the outside ring, so even if the needle's speed did make a difference, the change in speed would be more than a factor of 2, implying the track doubles or halves in tempo over the course of the record - which obviously isn't the case or every house tune would become happy hardcore by the time it finishes. |
|
|
|
| DJ RANN |
| quote: | Originally posted by Ryan0751
Yes but you are forgetting one thing: drag. The tonearm cause more drag on the record when it's near the edge, as it gets closer to the center the drag is decreased. A high torque quart locked table like a 1200 makes this minimal, but you also have to figure in that we use slipmats.
So the record really DOES speed up as it gets to the center, but it's of course very slight. |
I would suggest that the drag you mention is so minimal (unless you're using sandpaper for slipmats) that it would affect the spped less than the 0.02 differential of resolution. Try it: set a program to record 30 second at the outer edge, then 30 seconds from the inner edge. Check the BPM. It will be a difference in the 1/1000's.
Think about it: maybe 3g of downwards pressure via a calibrated and suspended stylus vs 2kg (2000g) of lateral torque. Not gonna happen even with lax slipmats |
|
|
| Stu Cox |
| quote: | Originally posted by DJ RANN
I would suggest that the drag you mention is so minimal (unless you're using sandpaper for slipmats) that it would affect the spped less than the 0.02 differential of resolution. Try it: set a program to record 30 second at the outer edge, then 30 seconds from the inner edge. Check the BPM. It will be a difference in the 1/1000's.
Think about it: maybe 3g of downwards pressure via a calibrated and suspended stylus vs 2kg (2000g) of lateral torque. Not gonna happen even with lax slipmats |
Actually I think better slipmats would make it more likely - it's a matter of drag at the needle overcoming the friction between the platter and the record, which will be more likely if the slipmats are slippier.
I can sort of imagine that yes, this drag could possibly make the record slow down an almost unnoticeable amount every few seconds... but I'm not entirely convinced it would overcome the friction even with a really good slipmat.
Either way, not really sure if that suddenly makes it an "artform", just because you might need to adjust the pitch slightly as outgoing record nears the end. Not too fussed either way, just wanted to point out the flaws in that particular common misconception. :) |
|
|
| Zild |
1000s are so much easier to keep in time than 1200s
at that is at .05 since i prefer it over .02 |
|
|
| epdarks |
in the real world a good pitch bend can go a long way imo
from a practical standpoint, a .05 + a good pitch bend is a better setup than a .02 on a CDJ-200 (for example) |
|
|
| DJ RANN |
| quote: | Originally posted by Stu Cox
Actually I think better slipmats would make it more likely - it's a matter of drag at the needle overcoming the friction between the platter and the record, which will be more likely if the slipmats are slippier.
I can sort of imagine that yes, this drag could possibly make the record slow down an almost unnoticeable amount every few seconds... but I'm not entirely convinced it would overcome the friction even with a really good slipmat.
Either way, not really sure if that suddenly makes it an "artform", just because you might need to adjust the pitch slightly as outgoing record nears the end. Not too fussed either way, just wanted to point out the flaws in that particular common misconception. :) |
Slidey slipmats is what I meant by "lax" slipmats, so we're talking about the same thing. :)
and I too don;t think it would make a shade of practical difference.
There's also a BIG psychological reason why some people think they can match better on 1000's as opposed to 1210's:
1000 shows you the BPM and the pitch adjustment, whereas with 1210's it's more tactile guesswork, especially in bad lighting, therefore it's harder to get the minute adjustment closer. |
|
|
| palm |
| quote: | Originally posted by Zild
1000s are so much easier to keep in time than 1200s
at that is at .05 since i prefer it over .02 |
when it comes to easeness when comparing sl1210 and cdj1000 its your own skills that limits you on the 1210, not the actualy slider. as i said before pitching on 1210 are endless resolution so if your good enough (touch + ears + experience) a mix on 1210s can be much better and last untouchable for minutes. But if ur a noob ofcourse its easier on a cdj1000 but ull get outphasing in the kick if not carefull. |
|
|
| elFreak |
| do you ever make posts that aren't stupid? |
|
|
| TranceOwnsLol |
Wait, what's the difference with resolution and pitch?
I have CDJ 400s and use +10/-10 all the time even though I have +6/-6. Does that mean I'm using 0.05 resolution? And if I use +6/-6 I'm using 0.02? Cause +6/-6 is usually to just get the beats matched more precisely and never really bother as long as the mix is good enough on +10/-10...
What's CDJ 400's resolution? |
|
|
| Zild |
| quote: | Originally posted by palm
when it comes to easeness when comparing sl1210 and cdj1000 its your own skills that limits you on the 1210, not the actualy slider. as i said before pitching on 1210 are endless resolution so if your good enough (touch + ears + experience) a mix on 1210s can be much better and last untouchable for minutes. But if ur a noob ofcourse its easier on a cdj1000 but ull get outphasing in the kick if not carefull. |
No. I've owned 1200s for 5 years now and been using 1000s in clubs since 2006 (don't like to take my own gear). Most of my experience is on 1200s. I still find 1000s to be much easier to keep in time. |
|
|
| Wayne_B |
Hey guys:) I own a pair of cdj500s.I think the pitch increments are 0.05% although the readout only measures at 0.1%. I feel that it just isn't good enough. Sometimes you'll sync up a song perfectly.. because the desired adjustment falls directly on one of the .05 increments but.... sometimes it doesn't and that's where those finer increments come into play.
I often find myself see-sawing in a mix with the following. example: +1.2 is too fast and +1.1 is too slow and I just cant seem to get the spot inbetween. Granted my cdjs are pretty old now so a little wear and tear might be contributing.
I also have a pair of Vestax pdx d3s mk2s. The pitch sliders are top class its just that its harder to sync with turntables so I could imagine someone blaming their pitch sliders for shoddy mixing when in reality its their beat matching that needs practice.
If you're on the hunt for new cd players i recommend .02% increments on the pitch sliders although I manage quite fine with .05%:) |
|
|
| palm |
| quote: | Originally posted by Zild
easier |
exaclty what im saying too. but it wont be perfect |
|
|
|
|
