Native VCI-300 Support (NI VCI-300.TSI?) :)

Wanted: Native Instruments Vestax VCI-300 TSI

Robins TSI is ok, and i'm greatful for his contribution, but it's still a bit buggy, (its not 100%, and no overlay exists), and DJTT's TSI *still* hasn't emerged, so NATIVE support would be REALLY nice.

http://www.native-instruments.com/forum/showthread.php?p=697280

http://www.djtechtools.com/forum/showthread.php?t=7780

http://www.djtechtools.com/forum/showthread.php?t=15455

http://www.djtechtools.com/forum/showthread.php?t=11030&page=3

http://www.djtechtools.com/forum/showthread.php?t=15455&page=5

http://www.native-instruments.com/forum/showthread.php?t=108856

P.S. i know some ppl may think i'm asking for a bit much but i figure its a popular (and old enough) product by now, maybe Vestax and NI could team up on this? (to promote/sell more product?)

 

Seriously, what is the big deal with this request?

(This product is popular enough, and has been out for two years already).

Is there no department at NI that does this?

If not, would it not make sense for such a department (of TSI programmers) to exist?

Or is the only thing NI cares about regarding Traktor is future TS4 sales?

Just does not make any sense to me, and Traktor is giving me a headache and hindering my creativity at this point (see following vci-300 TSI request poll & posts).

http://www.djtechtools.com/forum/showthread.php?t=17616

Can we have a similar VCI-300 TSI request poll here also please?

Not everyone wants to tinker around with TSI settings (that somehow get broken by future Traktor updates).

 

The VCI-300 isn't a Traktor controller. It's an ITCH controller. It comes with ITCH.

Also, although you can map most of it properly with MIDI, the platters use some kind of HID.

You won't get NATIVE support out of NI unless Vestax/Serato let them in on the HID secret.

So try getting onto Vestax/Serato and ask them to get together with NI to make a native mapping. Of course this ain't gonna happen.

This is not NI's fault or their problem. You've got an ITCH controller.

 

I used Zac Kyotis tsi that solved the Jog Wheel issue and built on top of it and had a working tsi for the 300 in a matter of hours. The VCI 300 is a piece of cake to map.

but yes your correct NI does not consider the 300 as a Traktor controller. Unlike Itch you can use any controller with Traktor.

Baffles me why people think it is NIs obligation to make a mapping for every damn controller out there. Vestax should have mapped this thing years ago.

If a company wants to make a controller to use with Traktor thats fine but they should expect to make a tsi for themsleves.

Of course Vestax wont because of the politics with Serato and Itch and because they did not make the 300 to be used with Traktor.

Thats just the way it is.

 

Ok, thanks for the input, but; regardless of who manufactures what device, it's Native Instruments' Software;

The ITCH vs Traktor argument is moot. It doesnt matter if its ITCH capable or a Traktor controller or not. Are Pioneer CDJ's Traktor controllers? No, And for that matter how many actual "Traktor controllers" exist?

The point here is;

If Native Instruments wants us to use their software, then really the onus is apon them (NI) to support ANY capable MIDI controllers that we may want to use with their software, especially if they want more sales.

And regardless if it's been designed for ITCH or not (which is a "free" competing product per-say), the onus is not on Vestax, as ITCH was only intended as an additional feature/selling point, (and a deal was made with Serato for that purpose), so Vestax will hardly want to get involved with helping NI compete with that arrangement/agreement.

The manufacturers of these devices don't care what we use as long as we buy the product. Once the product is sold it's a done deal for them, but for Native Instruments....making TSI's equates to selling more product, so it is really only in Native Instruments' best interest to make the TSI's we need (and hence the suggestion for a dedicated TSI deptartment), instead of putting the onus on us (the customer).

Btw, mapping may be easy for some ppl, (like you are implying Karlos), but not everyone has the time or inclination to program their own controllers, and Traktor is great and all, but it already gives me enough headache (as a result of numerous unresolved bugs and crashes and general weirdness) as it is.

As a side note I think we need the ability to to create polls for our requests to correctly gauge interest/demand.

 

Yeah but:

Traktor does support any MIDI compliant controller out there. It has stock maps for many of them. The stock maps are basic and, imho, rubbish because:

Give 2 different DJs the same MIDI controller and they'll want it mapped 2 different ways.

NI could spend all their resources on making different .TSIs for every different controller, but the truth is:

a) you can put one together yourself with a bit of effort
b) you can adapt someone elses with a lot less effort
c) you can usually use someone elses .TSI which better suits you than a stock .TSI woiuld anyway

Case in point is the VCI-100. I use upgraded firmware from DJTT, with a .TSI that I've modified extensively from the DJTT one to suit my needs (and is integrated with my second controller, a NanoKontrol, and avoids duplication of functions). NI could never have come up with the .TSI I use.

How many controllers does ITCH support anyway? 5?

---

I think NI would do better having an easily accessible repository of user-created .TSIs which can be searched, rated and commented on by users...

 

I agree with the repository, but your missing the point Pizzle. You say "you can this you can that". Native Instruments can do this and do that also, and Native instruments should. Why? Becuase they want to sell more product. Pretty simple concept. Build it and they will come.

What does ITCH really have to do with anything? (The platters are MIDI map-able) How many Traktor specific controllers are there exactly? The same?

Normally i think pretty highly of what you have to say pizzle, but the ITCH vs Traktor thing is a pointless debate and not pertinent or even constructive.

Its not about what WE can do. I'ts about what Native Instruments can and should do, to make their product friendlier and available to more users which equates to more sales.

The more .TSI's the better. 2 deck/4 deck, whatver options we want can be provided by NI. Yes we can do it ourselves but not everyone wants to, or you wouldnt have bothered using DJTT's TSI yourself, just like Karlos wouldn't have bothered using someone elses TSI to being with also. You are basically proving my point here, we should not have to look elsewhere for TSI's for our devices. They should be available or be made available, and if they don't exist basic (working) mappings should be provided, especially if the demand is there.

Everything we want, can be done by NI themselves, and they can do a better job than us also (if they want to), because it is their product, and nothing annoys me more than a company who figures their users/customers can do all the work.

Do they want to sell more product or not? And if they want to sell more product at least do a better job at gauging and implementing the requests and TSI's we need and want. I've seen enough requests for VCI-300 TSI's even elsewhere to make it feasable and not an excessive consumption of "all of" NI's resources as suggested (which is laughable).

Remember, the customer is always right.

 

I can see your points commentator, and in an ideal world it'd be nice to have everything mapped.

Unfortunately the VCI-300 isn't cheap (double the price of the VCI-100). It comes bundled with ITCH, which is a decent bit of software by all accounts. Despite the vocal presence of people on this forum, your demand is essentially limited to those that have bought the bundle and then want to switch to Traktor.

Your idea about polls might help with gauging demand in this regard.

I think the word here is 'opportunity cost', and NI will use their resources on other things such as better HID support for the Pioneer decks, for example.

I just feel it's much more likely that a user will come up with a good .TSI in this case.

 

I wasnt asking for everything to be mapped. I'm just asking NI to provide even a basic TSI for the VCI-300. It's like Karlos was suggesting...its not exactly rocket science, but the onus should never be on the end user.

Sorry, but what does that have to do with the price of sliced bread? How much are CDJ's in comparison to a VCI-100? There are plenty of ppl out there that have purchased the VCI-300 and have requested the TSI, and NI can make one, (if they want to), simple as that. They can even contact Vestax about HID support if they want to and I am sure Vestax would have no problem providing that support, as it would equate to more sales for them also.

It is becoming quite evident to me that NI at least seems pretty lazy with respect to Feature Requests and TSI Requests, and that they prefer to focus their efforts elsewhere.

I appreciate that, but I think NI might be afraid to implement polls, because it would mean more work for them (implementing those suggestions based on demand), because otherwise ignoring those polls might make them look bad. I cant' see any other reason not to allow or include polls, they are a common vbulletin feature, but supposedly (from what i've been told) only one person (The Forum Admin) decides what's worthy here. Which makes me wonder, how many of NI personnel are actually monitoring our feature requests? And who makes the decisions to implement them? All the +1's are not as clear (nor as simple) as a poll's would be, that is for sure, so why not use both methods?

Agreed, but that is concentrating on supporting much more expensive products, thus limiting their overall sales potential. There are alot of MIDI devices out there, and it would be in NI's best interest to support them, because supporting them equals more sales and more sales equals more profits, and so on.

Eventually perhaps, but how many diff ppl have been using the available TSI's made by others and are STILL requesting a VCI-300 TSI to this day (two plus years after product release)?

Even DJTT hasn't come through yet on the VCI-300 TSI, and they could be selling overlays with them, but they are a much smaller organization and hardly have the same resources NI has.

DJTT VCI-300 TSI Request Poll:

http://www.djtechtools.com/forum/showthread.php?t=17616

 

OK dude, I've haven't got much to add to this now!

I don't think NI have to provide a .TSI for every controller out there. As you say, it'd help their sales if they do; but how much and at what cost, I can't say. I can't gauge the demand for a VCI-300 mapping or where it comes in the 'league table' of controllers. My own guess is not that high. It is a guess though.

I don't think Traktor is a buggy product. There is an issue with .m4a, and a couple of things with the browser that drive me mad, but apart from that it is solid for me.

Your wider points about transparency, feedback, and customer input are completely valid. I'm a firm believer that developers that engage in dialogue with their customers do well. The On The Forum is good in this regard (of course, no On The Forum for months now, sigh).

My own concern, for example. is that NI are putting all their efforts into the S4 and it'll be too long before their TPro users see the benefit.

Anyways, if the VCI-300 mapping comes out, I'll buy you a virtual pint mate. Cider obviously.

 

I agree, they don't have to, but they would stand to gain more market share if they did. As for the VCI-300...It's on the bottom of NI's list from the looks of it, if even on the list at all.

Thank you, i appreciate that, and agree with you 100%

Traktor hangs all the time for me; but it does seem to be mainly with browser based actions. If i sort by bpm one day np, another day hang/crash. I can search for bpm one day, nps, but another day, crash. I can't even get it to analyze bpm on newly imported tracks on some occasions because it will hang as soon as i initiate the command.

And then there is the rewriting the 01-01-YEAR dates for each tag, which completely messes up my smart playlists for syncing. If that's not buggy i don't know what is, and it makes the product very frustrating to use to say the least. Almost as frustrating as trying to get polls implemented for feature (or TSI) requests.

That is certainly what it's starting to look like. When anyone even asks a question about Traktor Pro S4 software features being available in Traktor Pro/Scratch Pro anytime soon...boom...Karlos is directing them to the S4 product info page/s and closing the thread, which comes across as basically saying there is nothing more to discuss (without any discussion taking place).

Do they really think we are all going to run out and buy their hardware just because it includes new software features, when we already own controllers? I think not.

Wouldn't it make more sense if the existing software was updated to include those features that we have been requesting for ages, before the new hardware? Do we not deserve at least that much for taking the time to give them our ideas (freely)?

And it just dawned on me now, that Vestax (or any other related hardware manufacturer), is hardly going to want to work with NI or give them any help any longer because now they are in direct competition with each another. That is *real* smart isn't it. Maybe they should get their software straight first before moving their focus to new hardware products. And it sounds to me like they don't do hardware too well either. I've heard of ppl returning the X1's for example because of a cheap/flakey USB port, that i was considering purchasing until the latest tease (of upcoming TSP features).

Thanks Pizzle, definitely appreciate your feedback, and i'll have to take you up on that offer, (if that day ever comes), does a DJTT TSI count? lol

 

Flash just posted a pretty damn good TSI for the 300. Still needs some fine tuning, but this is the best one out.

http://www.djtechtools.com/forum/showthread.php?t=18123