Radio DJ

[Ed]

Well. It seems Radio DJ is now on the top of radio broadcasters lists, I find this software very tempting to switch from OTS, and the best part it's free!!!   http://www.radiodj.ro/

Your thoughts please?

[milky]

Radio playout software is a completely different beast from "DJ" software. True, they can all access a library of songs, they all have transport buttons to Play, Pause etc, but that is where the comparison lines get blurred.

Contrary to what Ots Labs would have you believe with the release of their radio/TV version, it is NOT really oriented towards a true radio automation system. Sure, it can be used to stream or transmit music, simply by continuously loading each deck with tracks, just the same as you could with two analogue turntables and a simple mixer, but, until they provide for more decks, voice tracking etc and also dramatically improve their log reporting and scheduling to (for instance) automatically phase out ads that have passed their "play until" date, they will never be a front-runner in the radio industry.

A complete turnkey solution for a station not only includes the playout capabilities, but also scheduling, reporting and accounting functionalities.
I own two terrestrial radio stations, but would never consider either offering for a complete playback/scheduling/reporting/accounting solution. On the other hand, Ots is perfect for my music studio and piped music through the house.

If I recall, you use Ots purely for recreational purposes, so you aren't even using a fraction of its advanced capabilities. Similarly, there would be radio-only features which you would NEVER need nor use in a lounge room environment. By all means, download it and give it a try, but I would be amazed if you would feel comfortable with it, after your long exposure to Ots.

[Lane]

Well. Maybe. It mentions advertisements in its events, and it mentions voice tracking. And I saw a mention of reports in the video. One would have to put these things through their paces to find out if they're really useful.

[Ed]

Yes milky, I do use Ots at home for entertaining myself and guests, but hopefully I do plan to expand into internet broadcasting one day, I am learning all the time and reading all I can on how to do it, that said, this is why RadioDJ "maybe" an option, of course i agree that a good radio station has a lot of parts, not just the playout software, but at this point I wonder about the future of Ots (like a lot of other folks) Ots is going to be hard to let go if I decide on something else, and I also agree milky, my long exposure using Ots will make it a difficult one...perhaps? One thing comes to mind right away with switching, and that is converting all my "ots" files back to mp3!

[dickus51]

I have tested RadioDj and it is a pain getting installed but after that works fine. Mp3 though is always Mp3. the OTS files sounds better in my ears and all my music is OTS though i left duplicates from those I done from my vinyls and tested them via RadioDj. One have to test and make up ones own mind. 

[Ed]

Yea, it seems the folks that have never used Ots and hear the Ots format can not compare the sound quality, I agree, I still think Ots is the best choice for now!

[milky]

the OTS files sounds better in my ears and all my music is OTS

The Ots file system is essentially a "wrapper" for the MP3 format (which is why it uses LAME to convert from the native PCM that is used to encode CDs), so an MP3 and an Ots file, assuming the same rip-rate and LAME settings, should sound exactly the same.

The advantage in using Ots format is because all of the settings can be encapsulated in one of the "chunks" that are part of its structure. If you want to edit a start or endpoint, it can all be done and saved along with the actual audio. If you elect to stick with MP3, all this control information is stored in an additional, external file, and must be updated each time a change is made.

[Mike Sinclair]

The Ots file system is essentially a "wrapper" for the MP3 format (which is why it uses LAME to convert from the native PCM that is used to encode CDs), so an MP3 and an Ots file, assuming the same rip-rate and LAME settings, should sound exactly the same.

The advantage in using Ots format is because all of the settings can be encapsulated in one of the "chunks" that are part of its structure. If you want to edit a start or endpoint, it can all be done and saved along with the actual audio. If you elect to stick with MP3, all this control information is stored in an additional, external file, and must be updated each time a change is made.

Milky, maybe the reason people think the OTS file sounds better than an MP3 isn't because of the file itself, but rather the Compression and/or EQ settings in OTS AV? Just a thought...