4 ms·

In terms of beat mixing/matching, how does xwax compare to mixxx? They seem to be about the same age, but xwax seems a lot more lightweight/barebones compared t

• zbuf 2y ago
  xwax /is/ meant for end-users, but right at the beginning it only had actual live professional use in mind. I was literally DJ'ing in clubs at the time and I wanted the digital equivalent of playing vinyl records. I was collaborating with a friend on the early versions, to see if it could be commercialised to provide a "house" system for radio studios and clubs (much like the house provides CDJs or turntables). Today that's superseded by DJs bringing their own laptops, of course. I don't know much about Mixxx these days; that project was always much better set up to grow through a range of contributors (eg. with its scripting engine). But I think it's technical architecture is probably quite different. Whereas, xwax was designed from day 1 with the idea it was a realtime system with very tight latencies, taking input from one audio interface and responding to it on another. That was fun on Linux (and FreeBSD!) systems of the early 2000s.
• majikandy 2y ago
  From what I’ve read on Wikipedia, mixxx apparently uses the xwax source code. As does PiDeck. It would be really interesting to know what else uses it.
  • brobdingnag_pp 2y ago
    Serato DJ Pro and Traktor probably