Welcome Guest  |  Login  |  Forum Registration

Whats next in Firmware/Hardware now that SSL is tits up

Detroitbb

Detroitbb 3:23:45 - 28 September 2013

I agree - my second layout pic is better suited for all applications. Though I didn’t move the outside knobs slightly towards the center (1/4 inch maybe?). You get the general idea though…

DJ Joshua Carl

DJ Joshua Carl 4:08:58 - 01 October 2013

Boom. obviously off-seting the whole strip would mean basically a whole new mixer, and not just a swappable rotary/fader section

Image Attachments
rane-sixty-four-RT.jpg
DJ Joshua Carl

DJ Joshua Carl 4:23:30 - 01 October 2013

This is probably much more doable from a swap out perspective

Image Attachments
rane-sixty-four-RT2.jpg
DJ Joshua Carl

DJ Joshua Carl 4:24:42 - 01 October 2013

Lets see how Instagram Reacts to it… hehehehehee
Im at @JoshuaCarl

Detroitbb

Detroitbb 11:36:58 - 02 October 2013

I like the second picture you posted, JC (nice mockup!)... but did you mean to post it with the first message?

Did you do any with the reverse layout? You know, with the middle knobs at the top and outer ones closer to the crossfader?

DJ Joshua Carl

DJ Joshua Carl 11:42:58 - 02 October 2013

Yeah the first pic has the gains and eq’s all offset.
But after I realized that would require a whole new mixer basically
And not really worth it for Rane

Which brought me too the second one
The knobs are a bit bigger, but spread out more vertically on the mixer.
Gotta make sure they steer well clear of the cross fader!

Some of the peeps on Instagram and Facebook are like “yesssss! Where did u get it?” Lol

I did it do any others
(Those are knobs from the 2016)

DJ Joshua Carl

DJ Joshua Carl 11:45:44 - 02 October 2013

The MORE I look at it, the more I realize the entire group needs to come up the mixer 1/2 - 2/3 of an inch.

The fader are could be problematic for guys who do some wild cuts

Detroitbb

Detroitbb 12:03:27 - 02 October 2013

I took your mockup and did one with the other layout. I like this version better as there isn’t any potential conflict with the crossfader - or with the ‘Depth’ knob (left side) and the ‘Pan’ knob (on the right).

Image Attachments
64.jpg
DJ Joshua Carl

DJ Joshua Carl 1:17:14 - 02 October 2013

Yes, good call
And I think that looks better as well

I would say a tad more space between line 2 & 3

Detroitbb

Detroitbb 2:06:33 - 02 October 2013

DJ Joshua Carl - 02 October 2013 01:17 PM

I would say a tad more space between line 2 & 3

Agreed.

I was a bit ‘off’ as I was eyeballing it while rushing to post it up!

Shaun Whitcher Rane Forum Admin

ADMIN
Shaun Whitcher 1:47:28 - 03 October 2013

Detroitbb - 02 October 2013 12:03 PM

I took your mockup and did one with the other layout. I like this version better as there isn’t any potential conflict with the crossfader - or with the ‘Depth’ knob (left side) and the ‘Pan’ knob (on the right).

Looks dope to me!

Detroitbb

Detroitbb 1:49:22 - 04 October 2013

Shaun Whitcher - 03 October 2013 01:47 PM

Looks dope to me!

Me too.

So I humbly offer up my services, free of charge of course, to test a prototype of a rotary 64. Get on it, Shaun!

wink

Shaun Whitcher Rane Forum Admin

ADMIN
Shaun Whitcher 2:29:30 - 04 October 2013

That is very kind of you. You’re a gentleman and a scholar. haha wink

DJ Joshua Carl

DJ Joshua Carl 2:40:57 - 04 October 2013

http://askmarcbarrett.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/star-trek-make-it-so.jpg


Boom!
Yeah, I’ll def beta test the shit out of that Minx!

The Return of Dj Sparky

The Return of Dj Sparky 3:18:13 - 17 October 2013

Shaun Whitcher - 15 September 2013 06:44 PM
Auttomattik - 14 September 2013 01:02 PM

Thank you for the compliment.  For real though, How was the 64 developed that far part from the 62 that it was developed for a different software?  They seem so similar, and the desicion to dump SSL seems so huge, I don’t see how all these things don’t coincide?  I’m also not in the hardware/software developement business.

I’m not one of the hardware design engineers, but it seems to me that the Sixty-Four was originally intended for SSL, which is why it’s so similar to the Sixty-Two (only a few minor button re-mappings). I honestly don’t know when the decision was made by the Serato team to assimilate SSL and SDJ, but I’m glad things are solidifying for Serato. Serato’s software development from here on out will be more focused and more efficient. What this means for users is tighter quality control and more time for Serato to work towards expanding and adding new features DJs have been waiting for.


So you’re more or less saying the sound card in the 64 is compatible with ssl as it was designed for it but it will be locked to serato dj

  • Page 3 of 4
  •  < 1 2 3 4 > 
   
   

To participate in this discussion we need a few basic details from you

Publicly visible when you post in this forum discussion
Passwords must be at least 5 characters long

User Log-in


  Forgotten Password