I hope VDJ 8 is ready for NI's new Multitrack file format...
http://www.digitaldjtips.com/2015/03/native-instruments-launches-multitrack-music-file-format/
Native Instruments has announced a new multi-track file format for DJs and producers, called "Stems". The new, open format allows a track to be released with four "parts" (or "stems") - for instance drums, bassline, harmony and lead - that DJs can then use for advanced mixing using isolated parts of each track.
This will mean instant instrumentals, acapellas, adding effects to only one part of a song and so on will all become possible, something facilitated by Traktor, which will have the ability to mix with Stem files built in as of this summer.
Juno, Beatport and Traxsource have all stated that they will be selling music in this format from June this year, and as the format will be open (all details on how to make Stem files and how to play them will be publicly available, and anyone can create Stems without paying licensing fees for creation, distribution, or use), it gives producers big and small the chance to release music this way. Any DAW in conjunction with the free Stem Creator Tool app ought to be able to create Stem files.
Stem files are "backwardly compatible" as they're based on the MP4 format, so you'll be able to treat them just like MP3s as far as editing metadata in programs like iTunes is concerned. Modern CDJs ought to play them fine too as will existing DJ software, although accessing the four stems will require software or players designed to do so.
What this means for DJing
This is something we've debated before (see this How Multitrack Files Could Revolutionise The Way DJs Mix from two years ago), and indeed it already exists (.mogg, or "multitrack ogg" is similar, and hundreds of songs are available in that format already). But this is the first time someone has announced something like this with music store support, DJ software and creator software all in place.
For NI, it is a logical addition to the company's "beyond two decks and a mixer" approach. It will be interesting to see how it fits in with the Remix Decks, which of course are also "four tracks in one". NI has attempted to kickstart an ecosystem of producers releasing tracks in Remix Set format for Traktor's Remix Decks which doesn't so far seem to have taken on its own steam, so maybe this is an attempt by the company to come at this idea from an additional angle.
See the link for more details.
http://www.digitaldjtips.com/2015/03/native-instruments-launches-multitrack-music-file-format/
Native Instruments has announced a new multi-track file format for DJs and producers, called "Stems". The new, open format allows a track to be released with four "parts" (or "stems") - for instance drums, bassline, harmony and lead - that DJs can then use for advanced mixing using isolated parts of each track.
This will mean instant instrumentals, acapellas, adding effects to only one part of a song and so on will all become possible, something facilitated by Traktor, which will have the ability to mix with Stem files built in as of this summer.
Juno, Beatport and Traxsource have all stated that they will be selling music in this format from June this year, and as the format will be open (all details on how to make Stem files and how to play them will be publicly available, and anyone can create Stems without paying licensing fees for creation, distribution, or use), it gives producers big and small the chance to release music this way. Any DAW in conjunction with the free Stem Creator Tool app ought to be able to create Stem files.
Stem files are "backwardly compatible" as they're based on the MP4 format, so you'll be able to treat them just like MP3s as far as editing metadata in programs like iTunes is concerned. Modern CDJs ought to play them fine too as will existing DJ software, although accessing the four stems will require software or players designed to do so.
What this means for DJing
This is something we've debated before (see this How Multitrack Files Could Revolutionise The Way DJs Mix from two years ago), and indeed it already exists (.mogg, or "multitrack ogg" is similar, and hundreds of songs are available in that format already). But this is the first time someone has announced something like this with music store support, DJ software and creator software all in place.
For NI, it is a logical addition to the company's "beyond two decks and a mixer" approach. It will be interesting to see how it fits in with the Remix Decks, which of course are also "four tracks in one". NI has attempted to kickstart an ecosystem of producers releasing tracks in Remix Set format for Traktor's Remix Decks which doesn't so far seem to have taken on its own steam, so maybe this is an attempt by the company to come at this idea from an additional angle.
See the link for more details.
Posté Tue 07 Apr 15 @ 12:21 pm
Yes, it would be nice to have support (once the info is released) but IMO it's not going to take over the world. :-)
There's actually nothing stopping us using multitrack stem files (from studios, not the NI "new" format) in DJ s/w right now. They are usually in sync with each other, so it's just a case of dropping each file onto a deck or sample pad/slot and starting them at the correct time (all together). There wouldn't be a 4 track limit either!
There's actually nothing stopping us using multitrack stem files (from studios, not the NI "new" format) in DJ s/w right now. They are usually in sync with each other, so it's just a case of dropping each file onto a deck or sample pad/slot and starting them at the correct time (all together). There wouldn't be a 4 track limit either!
Posté Tue 07 Apr 15 @ 12:41 pm
This would be great if the major labels would jump in on this but I see this as only small time Indy labels jumping in. Honestly none of that stuff appeals to my audience.
It's so hard to get even accapelles now an days unless you have the hookup. Just look at album singles. Every one I bought back in the day had an instrumental and an accapelle, now you get none or just the instrumental.
Hopefully I'm wrong but I don't think so.
It's so hard to get even accapelles now an days unless you have the hookup. Just look at album singles. Every one I bought back in the day had an instrumental and an accapelle, now you get none or just the instrumental.
Hopefully I'm wrong but I don't think so.
Posté Tue 07 Apr 15 @ 3:30 pm
No so true, if you dig round soundcloud you can find pop stems right now.
like groove says solo tracks would be better.
like groove says solo tracks would be better.
Posté Tue 07 Apr 15 @ 3:42 pm
From a major label?? Most of the stuff I find is DIY crap.
I have made a few connects so I can get some from major labels .
But like I said I do hope I'm wrong as the labels release some stems.
I have made a few connects so I can get some from major labels .
But like I said I do hope I'm wrong as the labels release some stems.
Posté Tue 07 Apr 15 @ 3:50 pm
I've found plenty of pro stems, it kind of makes sense for the label & artists, yes there'll be plenty of CC remixes but anything made that is money worthy then there's licencing, that and the artist gets a bump on their mechanicals.
Posté Tue 07 Apr 15 @ 5:00 pm
Please don't get me wrong.
I'm going to express my PERSONAL point of view, so whatever I say has nothing to do with how Atomix will proceed regarding Stems
To our point now:
Multitrack recording and multitrack production is not something new... It has been around for decades.
A lot attempts have been made to promote a multitrack format to the mass, but they all failed.
They failed because in order to promote something new you need A LOT of BIG companies to support and PROMOTE it, something that's not easy. On the contrary it's quite hard!
There has always been a war between various formats. You can see this war easily on DVD's area (DVD-R, DVD+R) on BluRay vs HD DVD e.t.c.
Even the CD-DA format has passed a long way to become a widely spread format.
The sad news is that our beloved CD-DA was NOT the "best" format for the job regarding user friendliness. Originally CD-DA was developed by Philips in the early 80's and Sony followed up a little time after. Both companies decided to join their forces in the mid 80's to promote it further.
It was not up until mid 90's that CD-DA started to spread the world...
In the meantime Sony developed the CD-DA format further to create it's own mini-Disk (MD) format that tried to promote on early 90's
MD format was superior to CD-DA for several reasons: Despite offering the same audio quality as CD-DA, it was writable AND rewritable, it could join & split tracks, re-arrange tracks order on the disk, and it provided some sort of "tagging" of the tracks (Similar to CD-Text)
So, despite the fact that MD was more user friendly than CD-DA it failed and it's officially a piece of history now (Sony ceased support for it on March of 2013)
The reasons it failed was the competition (Philips DCC format that also failed) and the fact that Record Companies didn't want a writable and re-writable medium to spread the world offering such a high quality of audio information.
Sony which was one of the leaders in Hi-Fi audio in the 90's and early 00's failed to promote and standardize it's own format because it couldn't find the right partners and because it couldn't make the right allies (record companies)
Same rule goes for Stems or any other similar format.
NI promotes Stems as the "next big thing" for Dj's, and the next big thing since sliced bread. It has to promote it as such if it wants to succeed.
However, the success of Stems is something that will be judged in time. NI has to collaborate with others (even with it's competitors) if they want to succeed. If they fail to do so, the format will fail as well. First of all they will have to convince a lot of popular DAW creator companies to include support for it. Then they will have to convince producers to use it and release tracks in it. Finally they will have to convince other DJ software companies to support the playback of it.
Also the format itself contains a few risks:
1) The fact that it targets a particular market (Dj market) means that the demand for such files will not be that big and several producers or record companies will wonder if it worth the trouble to compile such a file (create a 4 bus release of the track)
2) The fact that it's multi-track (4 track) means that the producers will have to decide if they want to give away the ability for the average "dj" (or even bedroom dj) to mess around with their work and create a ton of "bad" remixes
3) Finally the two facts above could end up affect the format's pricing policy which would be the greatest risk of all.
The only good move for now, is that the format is "open" but I don't know if it's open source or just "open"
PS1: If the CD-DA vs MD war seems irrelevant I could post another history lesson how MP3 won the war versus WMA despite the fact that WMA was better in audio quality terms and non commercially licensed as MP3 is
PS2: The fact that NI provides a tool to create "Stems" is just a work - around IMHO. They will need proper support of the DAWs if it's to make Stems a "standard" format
PS3: That's not about "Stems" but for multi-track recordings used by dj's:
It won't be an easy task to produce an interface (software or hardware) that will allow you to have full control over 4 buses per track.
That's equivalent to 8 decks mixing for those that work with 2 decks and to 16 decks mixing for those that work with 4 decks.
Having the ability to adjust EQ or apply different effects independently on 4 buses is cool on paper or on studio. In real-time action though, having 16 EQ strips could end up a really mess. That's something that's also going to affect the format's success. Seeing the tendency over the last years (everything is getting smaller because everything should fit in a back-pack) this whole "multi-track dj mixing" seems bound to fail...
Finally an interface to handle all these controls should be intuitive. Dj's are not used to "DAW's" logic, and multi-track recordings unfortunately are bound with that logic.
I'm going to express my PERSONAL point of view, so whatever I say has nothing to do with how Atomix will proceed regarding Stems
To our point now:
Multitrack recording and multitrack production is not something new... It has been around for decades.
A lot attempts have been made to promote a multitrack format to the mass, but they all failed.
They failed because in order to promote something new you need A LOT of BIG companies to support and PROMOTE it, something that's not easy. On the contrary it's quite hard!
There has always been a war between various formats. You can see this war easily on DVD's area (DVD-R, DVD+R) on BluRay vs HD DVD e.t.c.
Even the CD-DA format has passed a long way to become a widely spread format.
The sad news is that our beloved CD-DA was NOT the "best" format for the job regarding user friendliness. Originally CD-DA was developed by Philips in the early 80's and Sony followed up a little time after. Both companies decided to join their forces in the mid 80's to promote it further.
It was not up until mid 90's that CD-DA started to spread the world...
In the meantime Sony developed the CD-DA format further to create it's own mini-Disk (MD) format that tried to promote on early 90's
MD format was superior to CD-DA for several reasons: Despite offering the same audio quality as CD-DA, it was writable AND rewritable, it could join & split tracks, re-arrange tracks order on the disk, and it provided some sort of "tagging" of the tracks (Similar to CD-Text)
So, despite the fact that MD was more user friendly than CD-DA it failed and it's officially a piece of history now (Sony ceased support for it on March of 2013)
The reasons it failed was the competition (Philips DCC format that also failed) and the fact that Record Companies didn't want a writable and re-writable medium to spread the world offering such a high quality of audio information.
Sony which was one of the leaders in Hi-Fi audio in the 90's and early 00's failed to promote and standardize it's own format because it couldn't find the right partners and because it couldn't make the right allies (record companies)
Same rule goes for Stems or any other similar format.
NI promotes Stems as the "next big thing" for Dj's, and the next big thing since sliced bread. It has to promote it as such if it wants to succeed.
However, the success of Stems is something that will be judged in time. NI has to collaborate with others (even with it's competitors) if they want to succeed. If they fail to do so, the format will fail as well. First of all they will have to convince a lot of popular DAW creator companies to include support for it. Then they will have to convince producers to use it and release tracks in it. Finally they will have to convince other DJ software companies to support the playback of it.
Also the format itself contains a few risks:
1) The fact that it targets a particular market (Dj market) means that the demand for such files will not be that big and several producers or record companies will wonder if it worth the trouble to compile such a file (create a 4 bus release of the track)
2) The fact that it's multi-track (4 track) means that the producers will have to decide if they want to give away the ability for the average "dj" (or even bedroom dj) to mess around with their work and create a ton of "bad" remixes
3) Finally the two facts above could end up affect the format's pricing policy which would be the greatest risk of all.
The only good move for now, is that the format is "open" but I don't know if it's open source or just "open"
PS1: If the CD-DA vs MD war seems irrelevant I could post another history lesson how MP3 won the war versus WMA despite the fact that WMA was better in audio quality terms and non commercially licensed as MP3 is
PS2: The fact that NI provides a tool to create "Stems" is just a work - around IMHO. They will need proper support of the DAWs if it's to make Stems a "standard" format
PS3: That's not about "Stems" but for multi-track recordings used by dj's:
It won't be an easy task to produce an interface (software or hardware) that will allow you to have full control over 4 buses per track.
That's equivalent to 8 decks mixing for those that work with 2 decks and to 16 decks mixing for those that work with 4 decks.
Having the ability to adjust EQ or apply different effects independently on 4 buses is cool on paper or on studio. In real-time action though, having 16 EQ strips could end up a really mess. That's something that's also going to affect the format's success. Seeing the tendency over the last years (everything is getting smaller because everything should fit in a back-pack) this whole "multi-track dj mixing" seems bound to fail...
Finally an interface to handle all these controls should be intuitive. Dj's are not used to "DAW's" logic, and multi-track recordings unfortunately are bound with that logic.
Posté Tue 07 Apr 15 @ 5:58 pm
PhantomDeejay wrote :
1) The fact that it targets a particular market (Dj market) means that the demand for such files will not be that big and several producers or record companies will wonder if it worth the trouble to compile such a file (create a 4 bus release of the track)
2) The fact that it's multi-track (4 track) means that the producers will have to decide if they want to give away the ability for the average "dj" (or even bedroom dj) to mess around with their work and create a ton of "bad" remixes
1) The fact that it targets a particular market (Dj market) means that the demand for such files will not be that big and several producers or record companies will wonder if it worth the trouble to compile such a file (create a 4 bus release of the track)
2) The fact that it's multi-track (4 track) means that the producers will have to decide if they want to give away the ability for the average "dj" (or even bedroom dj) to mess around with their work and create a ton of "bad" remixes
This is exactly what I was saying, I just don't think the "Major" labels will jump onboard because theres not enough money in it for them.
Blaze explains it right here........
Posté Tue 07 Apr 15 @ 7:32 pm