What do you think about Gemini MDJ-1000?

[deevey]

What do you mean?

I mean guy who designs or programs something should never be the one who "tests" the final product prior to a release.

Testing should always be done by impartial target beta-user groups who can give constructive feedback and bug reports on the multitude of various features - thats how you could avoid the issues that plague the MDJ in the first place.

[ENLEE]

Is my post #113 pretty consistent with what you're experiencing? Do my user suggestions mitigate some of these issues slightly?

I can't say whether these issues will be resolved any time soon. I have no idea.

It would not be prudent in light of the current issues, however, to keep them past the return window. That does not mean I am recommending Pioneer and Denon, though, as there are much cheaper options to those that do the basics at least as well for a far lower price and are not exhausting to use like the MDJ.

If you've got access to a very el'cheapo controller, hide BPMs and waveforms in some DJ software, and then be patient for a few months. Quite a few new products are on the horizon from various companies, and who knows, Gemini might add a Passive Mode that deactivates analysis and drive writing, get rid of the split screen, and fix some of the easier bugs I've mentioned. If that happens, they'd essentially function as well as the Hanpins I love, and the "cake frosting" extra features could potentially be improved later.

UPDATE: I appeared to have dodged a bullet Reticuli!

I just couldn't deal with the idea of waiting for Gemini to provide a fix on the issues (through firmware updates or otherwise) so I requested an exchange for some Reloop RMP-4s and frankly...I'm so happy with my decision

The Gemini's are already on their way back to the store and I am happy to never see them again!

I cannot believe Gemini would have released such a buggy and frankly subpar player in this market place?! I can see what Gemini were trying to achieve (i.e. comparable budget player to the NXS2000) but if you cannot at least provide a stable player than whats the point?!

When I requested the exchange I asked the customer service manager what he thought of Gemini, and his words were "Gemini is a shell of its former self". They really have fallen from grace and I will personally never touch it again without some real convincing.

I truly feel for anyone having gone through these issues, as it was driving me insane

[Reticuli]

UPDATE: I appeared to have dodged a bullet Reticuli!

I just couldn't deal with the idea of waiting for Gemini to provide a fix on the issues (through firmware updates or otherwise) so I requested an exchange for some Reloop RMP-4s and frankly...I'm so happy with my decision

The Gemini's are already on their way back to the store and I am happy to never see them again!

I cannot believe Gemini would have released such a buggy and frankly subpar player in this market place?! I can see what Gemini were trying to achieve (i.e. comparable budget player to the NXS2000) but if you cannot at least provide a stable player than whats the point?!

When I requested the exchange I asked the customer service manager what he thought of Gemini, and his words were "Gemini is a shell of its former self". They really have fallen from grace and I will personally never touch it again without some real convincing.

I truly feel for anyone having gone through these issues, as it was driving me insane

The biggest thing that bugs me on the RMP-4 is the lack of SPDIF, but if you don't have a mixer with those inputs, obviously no big deal. The pitch bend on the jog is finally rate-based and not time-based, so it's a lot more like Numark, Denon, and Pioneer units than Vestax and older Hanpins like the ADJ, Stanton, and Reloop RMP-3. Hopefully the RMP-4 isn't too sensitive. The over-sensitivity of the jog bend on many of the older Hanpins (minus the DJ Tech, which is actually too insensitive in jog bend) is kind of made up for by the time-based nature of the bend... i.e. very brief nudges mitigate the over sensitivity on the Stantons and the ADJs. BTW, there is no limit to the number of Hanpins that can be linked together with USB to share drives... at least on the older ones.

[ENLEE]

The biggest thing that bugs me on the RMP-4 is the lack of SPDIF, but if you don't have a mixer with those inputs, obviously no big deal. The pitch bend on the jog is finally rate-based and not time-based, so it's a lot more like Numark, Denon, and Pioneer units than Vestax and older Hanpins like the ADJ, Stanton, and Reloop RMP-3. Hopefully the RMP-4 isn't too sensitive. The over-sensitivity of the jog bend on many of the older Hanpins (minus the DJ Tech, which is actually too insensitive in jog bend) is kind of made up for by the time-based nature of the bend... i.e. very brief nudges mitigate the over sensitivity on the Stantons and the ADJs. BTW, there is no limit to the number of Hanpins that can be linked together with USB to share drives... at least on the older ones.

I did notice there was no SPDIF input but I'm not too phased.

I also heard about the sensitivity of the jog wheel, so I will report back on that one. I will say thought, that I will take a sensitive jog wheel over a crashing/buggy unit any day!

It seems Reloop were definitely on the money with their link technology which I will most definitely utilise

You seem quite clued up on the Reloops Reticuli...did you know if the beat loops were fairly accurate/quantized? I suppose they would only be quantized after analysing tracks with Reloops dedicated library software right?

Also, completely unrelated question on Pioneer nexus 900s/2000s...did these units go off the BPM in the tracks ID3 tag? I'm playing out at a club this weekend with (apparently) nexus 900s and was hoping that the BPMs were just read as per each tracks tag (I keep my ID3 tags in meticulous order haha).

[Reticuli]

I haven't tested the newest Reloop analysis software. Sorry. I own DJ Techs, ADJs, and Stanton versions of the Hanpins.

I don't think the Pioneers use the ID3 tag for the BPM. It either comes from analysis at that moment or from the Rekordbox data for the track. If you're worried about quantize and using them live, you should analyze your tracks with Rekordbox.

[Reticuli]

By the way, the RMP-4, while it is stuck at only 0.1% pitch resolution on every range (apparently), has an interesting solution to this downgraded pitch res from the RMP-3 (a processing bandwidth or memory issue with the increased features?) -- shift plus pitch bend buttons changes it in 0.01 increments at any range. Pretty interesting solution. The RMP-3 and Radius 3000 have 0.05 resolution or better at 16% or lower ranges on the pitch fader (some firmware versions get 0.02 at the lowest range), but lack this curious new feature. So you're stuck at 0.1 increments at 100% range on the older models (just barely useable with only slightly annoying nudging unlike the old Denon SC series' pathetic 1% increments and the newer Pioneers' almost as annoying 0.5% increments in Wide) but you don't have to mess with those buttons to dial in at the lower ranges. The Gemini's pitch has recently been improved a couple firmwares back, but is still only about as good as somewhere between the Denon SC series and newer Pioneers, and of course, right now the Gemini can't do over 24% range when linked.

[Reticuli]

Found another bug that might be the root of some issues with cue, hot cues, and loops.



Solution for the time being appears to be to set cue, hot cues, and loops when track is actually playing and your hand is on platter. Not reliable operation if track is paused. I will append this to post #113.

[JeanSB]

I mean guy who designs or programs something should never be the one who "tests" the final product prior to a release.

Testing should always be done by impartial target beta-user groups who can give constructive feedback and bug reports on the multitude of various features - thats how you could avoid the issues that plague the MDJ in the first place.

Absolutely right. Is Gemini so poor that they can't afford a beta tester?

[ErikMinekus]

Of course they are poor, their products are cheap and no one buys them, so there is no money for R&D and testing, which results in more crappy products.

[Reticuli]

Of course they are poor, their products are cheap and no one buys them, so there is no money for R&D and testing, which results in more crappy products.

Beta testers are essentially free.