WHY do so many people here use and suggest the S2/S4??

[Shishdisma]

As popinjay said, controllers send numbers to a program, the mapping part is to tell the software what to do when those numbers are received and that is done by someone whether it's you, DJTT staff, the work experience kid at the manufacturer or someone in the development team of the software you are using.

I strongly believe your beef is with the wrong people... Manufactures can't get perfect jogwheel integration because NI don't want to let them have it without paying for it. Mapping is only allowing enough functionality to shut people up If they are using unapproved hardware and probably only there currently there because of the legacy, otherwise it would be locked up faster than you can say "serato does it why shouldn't NI" especially at the ridiculous retail price it dropped to.

Of course I know that HID has to be supported by the software manufactures, the point is that you don't have to stare down the controller editor at any point, and the integration and mapping will be as tight as the hardware can manage, and the protocol allows. Which, in terms of firepower, HID has a massive leg up on MIDI. Stock mapping has some slightly loose jogs? Either open up the encoder preferences and spend a day tuning it, or eat shit. Buttons not arranged in a way that makes sense relative to the hardware. Either remap the surface, or deal with it. HID, at least in all of it's current implementations, gives you the CDJ level of control: every button does exactly what it says it does.

Which is why when Traktor finally got AHID integration with CDJs, everyone was super pumped to use an inferior protocol, what with the screen and stylus display feedback, and the great jogwheel control. Things like screen feedback and 1 to 1 jog contol are why AHID are better suited than MIDI.

When someone creates a MIDI mapping, the jog integration is a tangled mess of encoder tuning and sensitivity settings, while HID jogs, as far as I know, simply track the jog's movements, without the spaghetti mess of settings and such required to get the jogs to actually resemble 1 to 1 control. And no MIDI mapping or controller is capable of elevating itself above a box of knobs: no display feedback means the controller will always be limited with a laptop's screen.

[Saurus]

Wrong again! MAssive steaming pile of wrong!

Of course I know that HID has to be supported by the software manufactures, the point is that you don't have to stare down the controller editor at any point, and the integration and mapping will be as tight as the hardware can manage, and the protocol allows. Which, in terms of firepower, HID has a massive leg up on MIDI. Stock mapping has some slightly loose jogs? Either open up the encoder preferences and spend a day tuning it, or eat shit. Buttons not arranged in a way that makes sense relative to the hardware. Either remap the surface, or deal with it. HID, at least in all of it's current implementations, gives you the CDJ level of control: every button does exactly what it says it does.

Even after we've explained that mapping is the same across HID and midi, you still don't see how massively incorrect you are? as we've said a million times now, HID and midi are just protocols. You could make CDJs send high-resolution midi and do ALLLLL of the same things. You're backwards here, in that if you don't like the way buttons are laid out in HID, you can't change them with traktor, because traktor doesn't have HID mapping support. With midi, you CAN remap it, instead of "deal with it".

Which is why when Traktor finally got AHID integration with CDJs, everyone was super pumped to use an inferior protocol, what with the screen and stylus display feedback, and the great jogwheel control. Things like screen feedback and 1 to 1 jog contol are why AHID are better suited than MIDI.

The only people who were pumped were people who, like you, don't understand the difference between midi and HID. And what the fuck is 1 to 1 jog control...? Are you talking about in reference to a turntable, or...?

When someone creates a MIDI mapping, the jog integration is a tangled mess of encoder tuning and sensitivity settings, while HID jogs, as far as I know, simply track the jog's movements, without the spaghetti mess of settings and such required to get the jogs to actually resemble 1 to 1 control.

wrong wrong wrong. Like we've said, HID and midi are just protocols for sending data. You still have to go through alllllll of the same steps. You've just seen them done for you with HID more than you've seen them done for you with midi. They're just as hard to deal with across both. The slight exception that comes to mind is that HID only sends data when activated, whereas midi constantly sends the last integer it was set to, but as far as I know, this isn't really an obstacle at all, it's just a difference.

And no MIDI mapping or controller is capable of elevating itself above a box of knobs: no display feedback means the controller will always be limited with a laptop's screen.

Wrong again! display feedback is completely possible with midi! It's all still just numbers, champ. Only difference is if you were going to be sending text. You'd need to figure out a system of translating single integers into letters... Which I'm positive could easily be done, using the SIXTEEN THOUSAND ticks of 14 bit midi.

I can't imagine it being possible to send video through HID, IF it's even possible to send pictures... So I don't think we need to worry about that.... any other display feedback you think HID can send that midi can't? It's possible that there is some obscure thing, but it doesn't come to mind.




Jesus christ, where's Nem0nic already?? He can explain why 14-bit midi is better, more eloquently than I can, AND he can explain why he used it on his CMD series.

[Jack Bastard]

It never ceases to amaze me how many people on this forum drink the manufacturers' kool aid and repeat marketing blurb with no understanding of what it actually means, maybe just making some shit up along the way.



Here are some facts for you -

The S4 is a pretty great, if plastiky controller.
14 bit is just as good a protocol for control as HID. HID's only real advantage is for CDJ integration. Other than that the only reason to use it would be for locking down the device a la the NI F1. It's really not needed on controllers.
NI will frequently fuck up the Windows drivers and blame windows, then fix these 'windows' problems in the updates of their drivers. That doesn't mean it was a windows problem to start with.
Lastly (and this is more of a question than a fact) who the fuck would scratch on jogwheels?

[Shishdisma]

Ok, Saurus is just trolling at this point. You obviously don't understand what MIDI is. It's a series of control signals. The resolution of those control signals is meaningless, because the messages sent and the amount of messages available are extremely limited. Not to mention that it can't accurately track a jog's movements, without precisely calibrated encoder settings and modifiers. Why dont we use MIDI for everything then? Things like mice and keyboards? According to you, it's "just a method of sending data."

[Jack Bastard]

Shish, I think you might be one of those people just making shit up.

Are you really asking why we don't use MIDI for everything? You must be asking a rhetorical question because otherwise.....

[Jester]

Pool is closed people.

[tekki]

Ah dammit... You went in and closed it, just before I went in!