MIXVIBES Dj Community old forum

Hi everybody!

This topic results out of the
"Mapping controllers multiple times" Tutorial where DzsoniB had this nice idea. I give some thoughts about to realize this:
First it must be clearified how the FilterFader shoudt work.
The 4 easiest ways are this:


Unfortunatly both, the FX section´s high-/lowpass filter and the Mixer´s bi-filters don´t cutoff the sound completly. To workaround this it wouldt make it nessesary to additionaly use the FX filter within this frequency range.

A other idea results out of my Zero 8 Mixer where
i can change my EQs to Kill or Filter mode:
Why not using Hi and Low EQs as High and Lowpass Filter?

If you are interested, some statements or ideas woudt be nice.

Cheers Marxon

I already suggested, that Cross should have two bi-filter modes: the classic, that is currently in there, and the "full", which should fully cut of everything when turned all the way to the sides.
I also mentioned this to be good for filter mixing...
NO response yet for this BTW.

the breakthrough would be to include real VST plugins ...
No effects of kids we have at the moment ... This would avoid solutions operating "complicated" to overcome the deficiencies of the software ...

P_Jean wrote:the breakthrough would be to include real VST plugins ...
No effects of kids we have at the moment ... This would avoid solutions operating "complicated" to overcome the deficiencies of the software ...

To Implement VSTs into Cross would be amazing! Why didn't i think of that for a suggestion..I use them all the time with Abelton
Again P_jean, you have amazing ideas!!
there would almost be no limit to the effects you could use.

The only drawback would be the load on the system, but the responsibility would be on the end user to manage the PC/Mac resources, not on the MV development team
+ 10000000000000
Cheers

hemskoc wrote:

P_Jean wrote:the breakthrough would be to include real VST plugins ...
No effects of kids we have at the moment ... This would avoid solutions operating "complicated" to overcome the deficiencies of the software ...

To Implement VSTs into Cross would be amazing! Why didn't i think of that for a suggestion..I use them all the time with Abelton
Again P_jean, you have amazing ideas!!
there would almost be no limit to the effects you could use.

The only drawback would be the load on the system, but the responsibility would be on the end user to manage the PC/Mac resources, not on the MV development team
+ 10000000000000
Cheers

The CPU load will not be that big, because the VST concept is designed to light on CPU loads.
Because it just a shared .dll loaded into memory associated with the software running VST, sinc most VST plugins are put into a directory, from where VST-available softwares can run it.

But the major thing will be the mobility of the software, and it would make huge sales for the MixVibes team.

Instead of filter mixing, I think compression mixing would be a lot more efficient since it would happen automatically. For example, I have a switch that controls whether or not the compression is on, and another switch that determines whether A or B is the dominant frequency. The benefits are that it happens automatically since it's compression based, that way you don't have to worry about whether or not your filter might be active in the case of having it also mapped to the crossfader. I've always found this topic intriguing, and that's just my two cents.

P.S. I'd be in favor of VSTs in Cross, but let's not forget how much "fun" it was to use them in DVS

phadedvision wrote:P.S. I'd be in favor of VSTs in Cross, but let's not forget how much "fun" it was to use them in DVS

How much "fun" was it? I was not in DVS so IDK!

DzsoniB wrote:

phadedvision wrote:P.S. I'd be in favor of VSTs in Cross, but let's not forget how much "fun" it was to use them in DVS

How much "fun" was it? I was not in DVS so IDK!

Ah! I'm borderline envious haha. It actually wasn't all that bad, but there were a few things (from my experiences) that I absolutely couldn't stand. Depending on the VST, sometimes you couldn't map controls properly, or sometimes they wouldn't load (or crash the software), and there was no global tempo in DVS, so using any tempo-synced VST was out of the question. Overall it was more of a headache than good, especially on the dev team's side.