The centre platter display - How will you use yours?


#25

No, not currently. It’s either one or the other at the moment.


#26

we hope this additional possibility will be implemented


#27

Any risk of burn in on the center display if we’re not letting it change with cover art?


#28

Good question :slight_smile:


#30


#31

Circle of… chromaticism? Just of of curiosity, is there any reason why you prefer that over the circle of 4ths/5ths as a key chart?


#32

It’s harder to count by seven than by one, I guess? The strangely-ubiquitous sequential one used by DJ_Boothe seems pretty useless to me, other than seeing which Camelot number is which letter key. The circle I posted is the incremental conversion Camelot key chart in roughly 6% increments of pitch change. To me that’s always been the only useful version. Maybe I’m missing some secret appeal to the sequential one that’s already in the order I can easily count? If so, please educate me. Actually, the one I posted is rotated once clockwise from what it’s supposed to be, but I can’t fine a Camelot version that’s better. All I did to it is blacken the center.


#33

Is that this one?


#34

Yes. The entire point of the camelot system is that it is a renumbering of the harmonic circle of 5ths in order to help people pick compatible keys to mix. Key compatibility is determined by the closeness of keys within the circle. Therefore:

  • Mixing in the same key is very compatible.

  • Mixing to the relative minor / major (Swapping A for B and vise versa) is slightly less because of the modal shift.

  • Mixing one degree (a perfect 4th or 5th) means that there is only one sharp or flat difference and is reasonably compatible.

  • Two degress are less compatible because they differ by two sharps or flat… and so on…

Which bring me to why I’m a bit befuddled about your chromatic system. Going one over on a chromatic chart (Going from C/8B to Db/3B for example) is an absolute train wreck of a harmonic mix. They couldn’t clash more.

I guess the only reason one would use a chromatic system is if they were reference it for purposes entirely separate from harmonic mixing, but then, that’s the whole point of the camelot numbering system.

Could you perhaps explain your own workflow? That would shed some light on why you find more sense in it.

:no_mouth:


#35

HI,
I’m not using the chart to know which keys sound good together. In Camelot, I intuitively know that A and B with the same number are near each other and that sequential numbers with the same letter are, too. I’m using a Camelot wheel at all for the unintuitive rough pitch conversion calculations of key.

My understanding is the point of the Camelot system is to make the key compatibility intuitive without the need of a chart. The only usefulness I see from the conventional, sequential chart you favor is to find out what a given letter key converts to in Camelot code, but I don’t have the letter keys on my tracks anyway (just Camelot) and my favored wheel (the conversion chart) has that too, anyway.

What I need a chart for is to know how keys convert to each other when I change their key through the use of the pitch fader with keylock off. If key changing in increments (say with the encoder while holding key button) and key locking away from zero (hitting keylock when pitch is not at zero and keylock was previously off) become possible on the SC5000, this other wheel I’m using will only become even more useful.

My habit of pitching away from zero with keylock off comes from years of using digital media players with inferior negative keylock to the SC5000’s Elastique v3. So there was perhaps more sound quality utility in turning keylock off if I was already in negative pitch on older players and thereby jumping to another key. However I still do this on the SC5000, though not quite as much as on my Pioneers, old Denons, and Hanpin players. I would either move to the nearest divisible of 6% pitch spot and just turn keylock off, or I would move the pitch fader to zero where the audio processing is bit-perfect, say, on the Pioneers. The former option of choosing a nearest divisible of 6% spot, though, allows a lot more freedom with key compatibility for mashups of tracks that are otherwise going to clash where I can optionally keylock just one track and have the other track at one of those new key spots on the pitch with lock off.