Let me know what you think... and all the mistakes I made ;-)

No one listened?

Common... there is some good old fashioned NI bashing going on hehe ok I tried to keep it clean.

i listened. neva knew how serato came about....btw, are nemonic & hobbes still using FS2?

Hobbes is more of a Traktor studio user rather then an FS2 user. I think nemonic also owns it as well.

i was troubled by the fact that a couple of the other guests seemed to be getting behind FS...?!?

I know nemonic was a long time FS user, Phil is more a Traktor kinda guy, but they don't fall short from speaking about the problems with the SA1 or SA2.

Both programs serve a purpose. Each one offers things the other doesn't. As for our backgrounds, Phil and I are both beta testers for TDJS. I was a beta tester for FS1, 1.5, FS2, and some other Stanton hardware as well (just so that's clear).

I've been lucky in that FS in all it's versions has always pretty much just worked for me (until TDJS 3.0, which I have some problems with). But I've also had SSL in my home studio for a week playing with it (this was about 6 months ago) and loved it. When the PnT patch comes out of beta and I can get a look at how SSL 1.5 handles looping, it might be an attractive package (these are must have features for me). But right now TDJS 2.6 with the FS2 hardware gives me everything I need and then some. If ANYONE comes out with better technology and/or a product more suitable for my needs, I'll be all over it like hot sauce on wings.

I think you'll find that I've ALWAYS been very fair when it comes to SSL and TFS2. And generally I'm not a "drink the KoolAid" kind of guy. I buy and use what is best for my application, and I don't need to mindlessly hype something I own just to reinforce it's value. I end up recommending SSL about as much as I recommend TDJS 2.6 - it just depends on their intended application.

I'll let Phil speak his own mind, but will say that he is just as upfront and open about TDJS as I am. He's also one of the best beta testers I've ever seen, and goes to insane lengths to try and bring bugs/issues to the devs.

Damn it's creepy hearing people talk about what you're working on.

Why is that?

Just takes some getting used to, is all.

Phil said, you (or any of the Serato / Rane team) are free to come on the show and talk about it yourself. I'm sure you will do a much better job then me.

----


mastir ill, in regards to what Nemonic said:
He is right, both products have different things to offer. I came to serato because I thought it was worth the switch TO ME, and others have done the same. Some people stay with FS(2) cuz it works for them and they are fine. Some moved from SSL to FS(2).

The point is, we use what we do cuz it works for us.

..If anyone was wondering, I did go to work that day ;-).

What, and put an end to all the rumors, myths, and misinformation? :-)

If you can without violating the terms of an NDA, then of course.

nemOnic, is it true that the purpose of NI's NDA is to stop testers telling how bad it really is?

what's NDA?

Non disclosure agreement. Just means you want talk about what they are working on... as to not leak information like new features...etc.

Was the interviewer a Kiwi?

Yes!

Just had a listening (didnt have time), mex did a good job in holding it up.
One part which I really dont understand is when you guys talk about the faulty USB soundchip. nem said that using the chip was not that bad, the problem was putting it out as a prof. product. I strongly disagree! The buginess of the soundchip has been known for a long time and still selling the product w/o any mentioning that problem is lieing to the user, thats a rip off. On top of that all the freaking time NI declined any issues, *that* was the really bad thing, leaving the customers in the dark. Sucks. There is also another bug on some SA's cause the firmware is faulty. Bad thing again, no official comment from NI/Stanton, and no (arg, I am getting angry while writing this) attempt to fix this issue. When I asked about the problem all NI said was, well, its not our problem, contact Stanton. Stanton did not reply at that stage. In the end it was a user who found a fix for this problem, and posted it.

However, mex, the podcast was pretty interesting with you. I heard the previous podcast and was booooooring. Sorry. Phil is pretty neutral if you consider he is a NI forum moderator. Good job. It was also good that the latency was covered, esp the USB vs firewire myth, good to see nem0nic that you finally accepted that firewire did not improve the latency (you remember the long extensive exhausting discussion on the unofficial board).

Our discussions about latency were regarding the theoretical possibility that it could decrease overall latency. It could have had NI taken full advantage of the hardware, but they chose not to. In those threads, I also remember Adion (who knows more about the respective timecode of each system) schooling both you and I about how each system works.

Our biggest back and forth was about the need for a 24/96 interface, and whether the new bit depth would help with low level inputs.

As far as the Phillips chipset thing is concerned, again, MANY other companies based USB audio devices off that same chip. Like any other processor, it had documented bugs - this is common. However, I personally think that Stanton's biggest issue regarding that chip was it's implementation in a "professional" product. It was clearly not the right choice. But then again, it's really easy to be a Monday Morning quarterback. Without the successes and failures of the first FS, SSL (and all the other vinyl control systems) would not be the product it is today. Most of us have benifitted from those mistakes in one way or another.

I've been doing a lot of research on latency lately and it's starting to look like much of it is as big a dick measuring contest as high sample rates are. I would certainly agree that lower latency is good, but there are diminishing returns for anything under 30ms. For example...

It takes roughly 50ms for data from your eyes to get to your visual cortex for processing.

The brain does not distinguish between sounds that are less than 20ms apart (35ms is generally the accepted figure, but things like the Haas effect play into certain TYPES of hearing - like determining location in a stereo field).

I'll have a proper write up in a week or so, but the info gets really interesting when we consider latency in our specific context.

Please post a link to it when you are done. It will be on my "to read list", right after all the homework Steve M. gave me.

You thought the FS timecode was some SMPTE stuff IIRC. However, I outlined that the switch to FW would only make a little difference, cause the major part of the latency is not due to the bus latency. USB has about 1ms, FW 0.375ms. Compare that to the total latency of Final Scratch - its only a fraction. Switching (only) the bus system shouldnt and didnt make a big difference. That was what the discussion was about.


Yes, but keep in mind SSL was in the heads long before FS came to the market. So it was not a kind of rip off. Ask the mods, they will confirm.


I think you are comparing two different things. One thing is to discover two sounds which are played near to each on a time scale, the other one is the correlation of your bodymovent (record movement) to the sound you are hearing.
I read that a human drummer can feel/hear the difference down to 2ms, and if you ask a DJ whether he can feel the difference of 8ms latency or 22ms latency he most probably will answer "yes", so do I. Thats why I dont think its just some marketing cheating/tech geek issue. But feel free to convince us of the opposite. A double blind test would be interesting.


Keep us informed.

I am also very surprised to hear that the (PnT) latency with the TTM57 will be lower than with a SL1. Is this correct, mods?

And what about the 5ms, you talked about... I've never seen any number being mentioned as the additional latency caused by PnT. Just curious.

The TTM57SL will have built in DSP. So there will be processing done in the mixer itself, this will reduce how much information is sent to SSL from the mixer.

Let me find the links to that and the 5ms...

Are you sure PnT can be run on the DSPs solely?

Not sure about that, but the control vinyl can be "pre-processed" in the mixer.

scratchlive.net <- click, quoting Sam:


So I'm a bit surprised how you (nem) come to that 5ms value and that it works fine with the TTM but is too slow on the SL1 right now.

Before Adion chimed in with the results of his research I assumed that the timecode FS used was based on SMPTE timecode with the unnecessary bits removed (for those of you that don't know, Adion is the guy who wrote DJDecks - a vinyl control system that allows use of FS and SSL control vinyl but requires no special interface). Our discussion never solely focused on the use of firewire, but system latency in general and the things that comprise it. That is why we were talking about timecode and bit depth as well. There is more to latency than the physical layer of the chosen interface.


Don't try it. While it might have been "in heads", N2IT announced FS1 in 1998, well before anyone else brought a competing product to market. Between 1998 and 2000, FS was publicly demonstrated at several music and technology conventions. Hawtin was spinning out on it regularly by 2000, and Wired did an article about FS in Oct 2001. FS hit retail in 2002. Serato didn't release their scratching plugin (then only for DP) until 2002. Their standalone SSL didn't come out until 2004. No one said anything about a rip off. Did Pioneer "rip off" Technics because they released the CDJ1000 (2000) after Technics released their first DJ oriented CD player, the SL-P1200 (1986)? Of course not, but you can bet your ass that they benifitted from the mistakes Technics (and others) made in their early units.


I thought I had made that fact perfectly clear. As far as your ascertations about stimulus-response latency (they type of latency that is actually important in our work), the numbers get worse than the ones I posted earlier, not better. This is what I was hinting to in the last sentence of that post. As far as anyone percieving latencies in the single digits, it's utter bullshit. It takes longer than that for signals to travel from their respective receptors to our brains (again spacial hearing deserves a caviat because of things like pinna effects and the Haas effect, where single digit latency differences ARE percieved by the brain).

I know a lot of DJs that blame thier bad mixes on wow and flutter too, but that doesn't make them correct either.

The 5ms number came from a mod post on this forum. I can't remember the poster for sure, but I think it was either Josh or Sam.

And before this turns into some kind of fanboy bandwagon, I want to re-iterate that I'm all for whatever is the best product FOR ME. Right now it's TDJS 2.6 with FS2. If that changes in the future I'll be the first to plunk down my money. To that end, I'll be driving back to Atlanta when the TTM57 goes full retail and properly check out the new toy. While I wouldn't be interested in the integrated mixer, I think the 57 will be a good idea of things to come for SSL in general.

this thread got me thinking

someone should devise a double blind study to determine whether it is at all possible for humans to detect the difference between software and vinyl in respect to latency.

some people wont believe numbers.

I would guess that the hardest part would be a perfect emulation of the analog sound, or reverse.

who here knows how to conduct a real double blind study?

maybe I should start a dif thread

Did you mean this one here scratchlive.net <- click, ? That one does not draw any connection to the TTM57 (how could it.. its 2 years old) which you mention in the podcast.


I didnt decline it, so I still agree. But I dont think the impacts were dramaticically. Thats my personal opinion judging from the fact many things Serato has made differently, starting from the vertical views, ending with a relative mode etc. But maybe someone from the mods could comment and add some SSL history lessongs.


You didnt understand the point.
You have two events, separated by 1ms, the travel time, lets raise it to 1000ms. You trigger the events at t=0. The first event will reach the brain at t=1000, second at t=1001. Just because the signal path took 1000ms, it doesnt mean the brain cant distinguish both events. What I am trying to say, the signal path latency does not necessarily affect the resolution of distinguishing different events. You are reasoning that the resolution of distinguishing events cant be a one digit ms value, cause of the signal path latency. Thats a wrong connection.
[ Also when I say a drummer can feel the difference down to 2ms, it doesnt mean he/she can distinguish two events down to a difference of 2ms, it means you play the same part of the song in two versions, the normal one, and the other one where one snare hit is 2ms earlier/later. He will be able to hear a difference. ]

You said that the event resolution of the brain is higher than 20ms, this might apply to the average listeners, but you also should take into account that DJs (usually) have trained ears.

I definitly know when someone has played with my USB latency setting and its set to 10 instead of 1, so this is definitly a proof that your reasoning is flawed somewhere and the latency is not just a marketing gimmick. Ask around here, start a survey and I bet many DJs will be able to distinguish low latency differences.

Anyway, waiting for your paper, so we can discuss this issue properly.

Sure I do. You seem to have the problem. Again, we are talking about stimulus-response latency. As it applies to us, it's the latency between the event that is supposed to cause a sound and the sound. It's the same kind of latency you deal with when you're making a hearing aid, designing a vocal effects processor, running a monitor mix, or doing a remote live event. And better (IE smarter) people than you or I have well researched and established numbers for what is acceptable latency in this situation. And NONE of them are as low as 8ms. This is because the brain has to PROCESS the information in order to tell the body to then react to that information. So the signal path has to be figured into the measurement (as well as the response determination and it's subsequent signal path). Another good example of this type of latency is to put a delay inline with a microphone and route the output to a set of headphones. Set the delay up for 15ms and talk. Hear an echo yet? Move the latency up to 50ms and try the same thing. Notice that you immediately react and slow down your speaking (which causes the echo to slow down and you to react, thus speaking even slower).

By your own argument, your drummer asertation is worthless since that's not the type of latency we're talking about. If a drummer WAS able to percieve timings that low (and could react to them), he would be driven crazy by the relatively slow speed of sound and all his drums would have different latencies depending on how far away they were from him (roughly, you're talking about 1.1ms delay for every foot away from the source). Human beings can percieve TIMING differences as low as 1ms, so in that you're correct. But we're talking about latency, not timing.

As far as DJs having "trained ears", I would also disagree. Trained in what? Only a small portion of DJs ever have to deal with latency like vinyl control users do. And of that small portion, most aren't smart enough to set up their own kit or accomplish basic things like recording their own mixes. Determining a proper SPL, dealing with feedback, and achieving a good overall sound on the dance floor is a mystery to even many seasoned touring professionals.

for real b, you need to ease back with that shit son.......

Ok, I understood now what you were trying to say in the first part, and it makes sense to me to some extent.

This one has confused me
cause that has also not really something to do with the latency we are talking about here.

DJ wise, a DJ who scratches a lot certainly trains his ears and his movement in terms of latency. I can certainly say that stuff which I haven heard 5 years ago, I listen to it now, and I can hear how some stuff sounds odd. My body movement has improved as well as my listening abilites.
And still I am able to say whether someone has moved my USB latency or not, definitly I wouldnt be able to tell whether you have increased it by 1 or 2 ms, but that doesnt mean that anything below the given number of 30ms is/feels equal to me. Also, I dont think its an off or on process, this is not discrete space we are talking about. If you scratch you would know the difference SSL has made compared to FS, not only soundwise, but definitly latency wise... And we know, that both systems run below your given number of 30ms. It makes a difference, maybe not for you, but for many others. Ask around, start a survey or whatever.

Still curious about your paper.

Maybe you're taking this a little personally. My comments are based on my experience. I've been DJing for the better part of 18 years, and I've been an audio professional for the last 10 (audio engineer, mostly for live television and post production). I've designed nightclubs, and DJed in events with artists from Icey and Chris Fortier to Kid Unknown and Joey Beltram. I will certainly not "ease back with that shit".

nik, I'm not trying to argue about what system has lower latency or compare SSL to FS2. The scope of this project is to determine which numbers being thrown around by product manufacturers are valid and which are just dick measuring (just like sound card sample rates). I'm covering things like zero latency monitoring and MIDI as well. I have always maintained that latency is not the factor by which I chose a vinyl control system, but features. But it IS certainly a feature of any vinyl control system, and that's why I'm exploring it.

I can come in here and whip out a big dick too.

If Im taking it personal its because of all the troubles Ive had to deal with over the years, being ignorantly summed up by fellows who tend to make generalised sweeping judgements based on whatever they criteria they choose. it causes unnecessary problems and there is nothing to gain from it. there is absolutely no need for the generalised disparaging remarks. Im sure, since you are so smart you could make your point without them. and you need to boost your ego, I would suggest refraining from doing it at other peoples expense.

just advice from probably someone to stupid to record his own mix. ease back.

You have your experience, I have mine. I was directly addressing a comment made by another poster. Nothing I said was incorrect or exaggerated, and I did not single anyone out. We all know the kind of people I was referring to. I'm not about to go editing what I say in fear of bruising your apparently tissue paper ego, to take that however you want to.

I didnt take it personally, but I dont doubt that you might just as easily put me in your "most DJs" category. If you come in here acting like youre so beyond most everyone else it gets in the way of the science of what your talking about. You can say what you need to without acting like your so far above everyone else. ease back. just say what you gotta say

I wouldn't lump anyone into my statement that could mod an SL1 into a mixer. You are obviously not the kind of person I'm talking about.

I agree with AKIEM here. With some of your comments you still remind me of that cocky, arrogant behaviour you showed as a moderator on the now shut down ex-Final Scratch 1 Stanton boards, which the majority of the users hated you for. :-) It would truely stand in the way of conducting a professional discussion.
Hope is the last to die.

So.. back to the topic of this thread, did my voice sound sexy or what? ;-)

Also, I'm suppose to talk about the Pink.. but I havent had time to grab a new soundcard to play with it. It's been a couple months since I had time so it might have to wait till the end of April till I write up some goodness to talk about.

You'll excuse me if I take anything you have to say about behavior with a grain of salt, since you once saw fit to try and take things out of the forums and went after my website. Right after I had posted the video scratch tutorial actually. I didn't jump into this thread telling anyone to "ease back with that shit".

Don't sweat it mex. Since you're the only one I know of that actually bought the system, I'm sure you could shed some light on it's operation even if you haven't played with it in a while. It WOULD be cool if you could touch on the Max/MSP type stuff, but we could always break it up into a 2 parter.

Oh, old accusations. Do you really think that your website with its big forum and approx. 5 users on it after some years, is so important that it would be worth to hack it? No man, still the wrong guy.

But we could talk about some *facts*. Accusing me as trolling while I was just dissecting your posts and revealing them as (in your words) "utter bullshit". Yes, again the example about the latency discussion, while I was pointing out that its not the USB vs Firewire latency which will make a difference, you were calling me a troll and other insults. Haha.

Or shall we talk about some other *facts* on the old Final Scratch Board? You were killing threads, cause they were dealing with the truth and were revealing what a shady business Stanton were running. You blocked any critical posts, and people who needed assistance could only eat your cocky and arrogant comments. One of the reasons why the situation escalated and you were one of the reasons why they shut down the board, with your attitude. All the old forum members know that, and some of them are now here on this board and can confirm that, I bet even the SSL mods know about you and your attitude. So please dont *you* talk about behaviour.

Anyway, this does not belong here, so lets get back to topic.

Please inform us when you have that paper ready, nem, I am interested in it.

mex, I would like to hear more about Miss Pinky, esp the video capabilites. Maybe in a future podcast?

Yes in a future dcast forsure... I'm just really busy right now (I'm running on 3hrs of sleep, which was in my lab) due assignments.

thats fine, sure you would have if I was new here, new to ssl, whatever...

point is ultra cockyness is counterproductive and gives nothing of value to the discussion (except for the entertainment)

I am sure the kind of person (persons) lumped into that category to are the "rate my poo" type people.

Unfortunately during those sad FS days there were very many of them on thst FS site. I wasnt rating my poo in those days, but I was sure as hell banned for the damn site. That fucked up saucer was not working, they would not help me nor take their shit back and refund my $$. Very frustrating indeed. I will attest to the fact that the mods were very arrogant and their superior than though attitude did not help either.

I got fed up and in one moment of rage, I told them on the site what I thought about FS. Just as expected, I got banned ... for seeking truth. Go Figure.

I narrowed it down to a Class C IP address. Only you and another person had ever posted or emailed from that Class B address, and only you from that Class C. That fact was also corroborated by a mod on another FS forum. Googling your email address (nik39@gmx.net) revealed that you also know the tool used to launch your crude DoS (WGET) and Linux. You're telling me that out of 256 people going to the U of F, that there's more than one that (a) knew who I was and my site, (b) had a beef against me, and (c) uses WGET and *nix?

Like I said in my email to you, you either did it on purpose or you wrote a sloppy script and did it by accident.

The reason I called you a troll in that thread is because you were one. You were in there simply to generate noise.

As for the old Stanton forums shenanigans, I shared with you via email the reason WHY I had to be such a hardass. I was given very specific instructions by both Henri and Pablo regarding moderation. These instructions were given after the forum closure had been hinted at, and were put in place in order to try and keep the forums open. The fact that I shared this info with you (copying and pasting the emails from them into my email to you) and you acting like we haven't had this discussion before just reinforces my belief that you are a troll and nothing else.


I've never been down on new people. In fact, the bulk of my website is geared towards helping new DJs learn about everything from music theory to scratching.

You seem to have a big phantasy. Instead of asking me first you put my name on your website claiming I hacked your server, that is perfectly in line with your behaviour and attitude. As said before I really dont care much about your big-traffic-10000-hits a-day-website so why should I bother hacking it? Who would notice anyway? Besides this, I really doubt that from googling an email address (is this really my address?) you could judge whether someone would be able to attack your server or not. However, we all know, you know better... which leads us to


See, what people mean with your attitude? You cant stand it when you are wrong, and your response is a.) block the post, b.) ban the user, c.) call him a troll when you are not the forum administrator. In this case, the topic was latency. You claimed that switching to FW bla bla. We know what you said and how wrong you were. Look, there is nothing wrong if you say something wrong. Just dont claim that you have knowledge about a topic when in reality you do not even know that it is not a SMPTE code. At that time it has been posted why the FS code was weak, and why FW would make no improvement. But when I brought up that issue, I was the troll. Right. That was option c. cause you werent the mod of that board.


You can keep a board clean without being an ass. But you've choosen to do both and that since day one! There is a reason why the FS users were so unhappy, and you are a big part of it. Was FS bug free? No. Is SSL bug free? No. But its the way how the users on the baords are treated differently, you treated them like shit. This can be confirmed by several ex forum members.


Yeah, the problem is you've been an evil mod since day one, and you dont want to tell me that since day one you had the closing pressure.

You're pathetic. I have you cold on this and you know it, hence your flying off the handle here. I didn't say you hacked anything. It was a weak ass Dos attack, and you did it because you were pissed off and wanted to play intarweb tough guy. You were sloppy, and didn't even bother to change the user agent. That email address was certainly yours, because I've emailed back and forth with you using it. I got your IP address from the forums archive and email headers. I verified your Class C with mods on other FS forums and they corroborated the info (in another funny twist, I didn't mention your nick to one of them - he gave me yours).

The reason I call you a troll is because in my experience you are one. Your behavior on this board might be different, but we used to laugh at your post history on the old Stanton boards because you had so many posts and none of them had anything but trolling, flaming, or intentionally breaking rules of the forum. To that end, I find it funny that in the "Official Beef Thread" here that was just started, you're the first forum member mentioned, and it only took 5 posts. You used to be so over the top that I thought you were a gimmick (like a GNAA member).

I treated people like shit that treated me and/or the forums like shit. I'm funny like that. You tried to make it your mission to cause as much noise and trouble as you could on the Stanton forums, and you succeded in taking away the only real method of support many users had. Good job!

Sorry, you cant read. You certainly did not use that email address to contact me.
But thats not the point. Before asking me, whether it was me Dos'ing you posted some crap info that it was me putting your website down. Dos'ing a website is not so hard to find out. I never denied that I have the knowledge to Dos' a website, but thats something you could find out in 5 minutes of research. However, 1st I do not have the technical possibility to Dos your website (I assume it has a fast line speed), 2nd if I had, I would have done it in a way that you couldnt trace it back, cause I do have the knowledge. Again this is no mysterious voodoo. Think about it.


That only shows your arrogance once again - you didnt give a shit about user problems. Thats in perfect line with the experience others had with you.


Lol. You cant read. :)


Haha, you are so cute. Its so obvious that *you* had the people pissed off. Go ahead and ask around. Ask the moderators, they also watched the old FS boards, and most certainly what kind of ass you were. Ask other ex-FS users. They remember you as being a plain asshole. You removed any post which started critizizing you or Stanton, blocked them, and bla bla.

Anyway, this company has good support and an even better product, and FS is history, so lets not talk about those old stories anymore.

Let's see if everyone else can read. Here's the email you sent to me telling me to take your info off my website...

www.nem0nic.com

Notice the web page behind it? It's the domain you emailed from. Know what happens when you type in www.gmx.de It redirects to the .net address. It's the SAME provider. If you don't believe me, try it yourself. Type both www.gmx.de and www.gmx.net in a browser and see it redirect to the same site.

Now, lets look at the sig in your email. Pretty particular isn't it? nik-da-3'9" Can't be too many of those out there can there? Let's Google it and see...

www.google.com

Look at that. Alot of admin shit. And all of them have YOUR email address as nik39@gmx.net.


You're right on this one. It only took 4 posts. I know the whole thing is in jest, but it's still funny that you were the first one people thought of.

Now that we can all see that you are a liar, here endeth the lesson.

I said you cant read cause these are clearly two different email addresses, that was not the one you used to answer back. And as said before that is *not* the point. The point is that before you posted my email address and your whole story that I Dos'ed your site, you did not ask me what happened from my said, nor gave me any chance to "defend". You built up your own story based on some weak researches, proven by the fact that not even the email address you posted on your website (your statement on your website was "here ist the email address bla bla I hope your mailbox gets flooded by spam bla bla let your name be connected to my website and my story til the end of time") was correct. That is the problem. Thats how your attitude is. You could have confirmed back with me, you knew on which boards I was hanging around. But instead *you* decided to be mr. wanna-be-columbo.

Lets get to the next point.


What new facts do you want to proof with your google results? As said before:


Can you read? If so, what does that mean what I wrote? I do have linux skills, I have never declined it (your so called "admin" skills, lol). My linux skills are at least good I would say. So what you wanna proof with your google search? As said before, to Dos' a website you dont need to know linux well, anyone can do that with a little google help. You do need big internet lines to Dos' a website, whether or not I have access to these (I do not)... Again, my skills are good enough that if I wanted to Dos your website, I would have left no traces. Esp. no IP addresses which could be traced back to me. Its not difficult to hide your IP address, *that* is achieved with a very little effort. That can be confirmed by anyone who only knows little about internet security, obviously something you do not know much about. Thats the same with various topics before you think you do know everything and start babbling, but sorry man, you dont know ish. So you better watch out who you call a liar.

Sorry to bust your bubble of dreams+phantasies, but seriously you need to wake up and need some reality check, columbo. Instead of wasting your time with being a 3rd class detective, get back to being the nice moderator, cause we all know that is what you can do best. Register yourself www.finalscratch2.com , set up a board, and support your beloved crap. Or start applying to be a finalscratch techsupport, so you can look at the support requests and laugh with your friends about them, maybe you can even flame back as you did in the good ol' days. You even might be able to ban users. You love it, right.

You didn't flood my site. You downloaded the same file over 4000 times and put me over my bandwidth, thus taking my site down for almost a day. It's still a denial of service. You used WGET to do it. You were either too stupid or too sloppy to use a proxy or change the user agent in WGET. You did this from your school. You had posted from the same Class C address on multiple forums. Other admins pointed their fingers at you as well. So yeah, I'm still calling you a liar.

As for the rest of your blathering, I'll give it as much credibility as I give anything else you say.

There's something about people who stick with NI ... is it obsession??

It takes 30 seconds to find a proxy for WGET to hide the original IP address. It takes 5 seconds to change the user agent inside WGET so you can not find out which programm you had used. I do have good knowledge about internet security, and some standard internet protocols like HTTP which is used by WGET for example, which is also the same as standard internet browsing. So its very unlikely that I would not have change the first 2 points if I wanted to flood your site and cause damage, esp. if I would had done it from my "school" where you can easily backtrace the IP address and match them with browsing IP and/or mail/SMTP IPs from me. Ridiculous.

Anyway, I really dont care much what you do think about it, columbo. Believe in what you think is right or wrong, I dont mind about you and your big website promoting false accusations. Topic closed.

For the rest of my "blathering", people will agree, dont worry. They do know you, your tactics, your attitude and your behaviour. You have already shown some in this thread, and multiple times as the famous good administrator on the reputabable ex-Final Scratch 1-board, which was shut down due to your incompetent, offending and rude behaviour towards to the customers.

Not just "in heads" before FS came out. The idea for Scratch LIVE dates back to 1995 when James Russell wrote his seminal paper on controlling playback of digital audio files using turntables. At the time I advocated to him pressing the control signal onto vinyl, the detailed method and description of which he included in his report, along with other optical, magnetic, opto-mechanical methods etc.

That's what's so crazy about N2IT ever having been granted a patent in the Netherlands - the idea had been in the public domain since at least 1995. As you mention, N2IT publicly demonstrated the FS system as early as 1998. One of the most basic rules of patent law (in most countries outside the US) is that public demonstrations of an invention before putting in an application preclude obtaining a patent, since the public demonstrations themselves constitute "prior art".

As for this talk of latency, here's one way to think about it: At 33 1/3 RPM the outer groove of a vinyl record moves about 90cm (3 feet) in one revolution which takes 1.8 seconds. So the groove moves past the needle at 50cm / second. What that means is that each ms of latency is equivalent to the music on the record being 0.5 mm further ahead of the needle. And that's at normal speed.

So for example, 25ms of latency is like the "scratch sample" has moved half an inch forward of the needle at normal speed (wrt to stopped). And as the speed of the record changes, the sample will move by varying amounts. With a latency of 25ms, during a fast scratch movement at 4x normal speed it would be like the sample had moved two inches on the record. I think it would be hard for a scratch DJ to not notice that.

More talk about TTM57 and other good stuff here:

konstrukt.libsyn.com

(please no more beef on this thread :-) )

Konstrukt #12: The Digital DJ's Podcast.

Konstrukt Volume #12, Sunday April 23 2006. This week we have a visit form Mex to talk about Ms Pinky. In addition Phil, Mex and Craig cover Somewhere to host your Laptop DJ mixes, A quick review for the Pioneer DJM 800 More good words on Midi Control Surfaces, How to get in the Native Instruments MACTEL Universal Binaries Beta, and the good word on whats coming up soon.

konstrukt.libsyn.com