Sign In:     

Forum: General Discussion

Topic: Sound Quality: The Missing Piece in VirtualDJ's Excellence
I would like to add something that has honestly been bothering me for years because, in my opinion, it is the most important issue that VirtualDJ should have addressed long ago: sound quality.

I have been using VirtualDJ for more than 15 years, and I truly love it because it allowed me to learn and develop in this art that I am so passionate about. However, throughout all these years, I have constantly heard criticism and negative comments about it. I know this is not because VirtualDJ is not the best DJ software, because in many ways it absolutely is, thanks to the countless tools and features it offers. The problem is that many people perceive its sound quality as being below the level of other professional DJ platforms.

I have experienced this myself, and many other DJs feel the same way. What I still do not understand is why this aspect has never been given the same level of attention as the software's other innovations.

Sound quality is fundamental. Some people consider it a minor issue, but believe me when I say that in professional environments, especially when working with Hi-Res audio systems or large-scale concert sound reinforcement, the differences become much more noticeable compared to other software platforms. That reality genuinely frustrates me.

It is painful not being able to defend the software that helped me grow as a DJ with complete confidence. VirtualDJ means a lot to me. It has provided me with professional opportunities, helped me make a living, and allowed me to develop my skills beyond what I ever imagined.

In my view, this is one of the main reasons why many well-known DJs still consider VirtualDJ to be an entry-level or lower-tier platform, even though we all know that is far from the truth. The software's power and versatility are unmatched, and every month the developers introduce new features that leave the community impressed.

However, there is still a perceived gap in audio quality that many of us consider essential. Closing that gap would finally allow us to say with complete conviction:

"I use the best DJ software in the world, in every single aspect."
 
Posted 8 hours ago
What makes you think the sound quality is less than other software? Do you have any specific comparisons where we can hear the difference?
 
My limited experience is the opposite. Little obvious glitches and subtle sound quality differences made me skip Rekordbox to invest in VDJ.
 
The genre where you can most easily compare and evaluate the differences is Techno. To truly notice them, you should listen through a professional sound system or a pair of Hi-Res headphones, as this is where any loss of quality and definition becomes most apparent. Personally, I can detect these differences even on lower-end audio systems because I have trained my ear over many years of listening and working with music.

Most techno tracks rely heavily on the contrast between bright high frequencies and deep low-end elements, making details, transients, and frequency cuts much more noticeable. In VirtualDJ, I have observed that these distinctive characteristics often sound less vibrant, with the highs feeling somewhat dull and lacking presence. Likewise, the bass tends to lose some precision, punch, and detail.

Dynamic range is not VirtualDJ’s strongest point. I recommend comparing the same techno track in FLAC format using Rekordbox and then playing that exact track in VirtualDJ, paying close attention to the finer details. The differences become much easier to identify when focusing on clarity, transient response, and overall definition across the frequency spectrum.

In any case, thank you very much for your comment and for sharing your perspective.
 
With all due respect, please stop posting about things you don't know about. People have already told you, in other posts what you need to learn about the situation and why certain decision were made, to give meaningful feedback.
When you get the required knowledge and understand the components, then come back and read the topics of interest again.
 
I don't find your comment respectful at all, as it comes across as rather arrogant. Nevertheless, I will respond.

First of all, I would like to clarify that this is my first time participating in these forums. I joined because I wanted to better understand the experiences and perspectives of other users.

Second, this is a public forum where freedom of expression is encouraged, so you have no right to tell me what I can or cannot post.

Third, whether I know a lot or very little about a particular topic is not something you can determine with certainty. I would therefore invite you to learn a bit more about the person you are addressing before making assumptions.

Fourth, nobody has explained anything to me, as you claimed. As I mentioned, this is my first time participating in these forums.

Finally, I am fully aware of the reasons why part of the audio quality may have been sacrificed in VirtualDJ.

My post is made with complete respect toward the programmers, developers, and everyone involved in the creation of this outstanding software. They have my appreciation, respect, and admiration.

The sole purpose of this discussion is to encourage interest in addressing what I personally consider to be an important aspect of music playback and listening.

I appreciate your comment, but I respectfully disagree with it.

Best regards.
 
The comment is quite respectful and gets to the point - you have to learn about what actually matters objectively when it comes to audio quality, and what are personal preferences, because your entire post states I have a preference I'm accustomed to, and I don't understand the choices made by the devs.

What's disrespectful is posting a story, in bold, and not listening to what people are actually telling you, not because they think they are more correct than you but for you to understand why things are as they are and isn't wrong/rather is what software should be aiming for, because it shows you don't want to listen to/learn the why, you just think you're right.

You're not the first person to comment on this, there are many posts before talking about it, so we've seen the claim before, it's just not one based on objective, measurable deficiency, it's based on personal preference (which you can adjust for to taste).

So the takeaways to highlight on the learning aspect (which is what others pointed out):

  • What does bit perfect mean, why it matters (probably the only truly objective measure to start with), and how was it confirmed for VirtualDJ
  • EQ, compression and why it would desired, and which software may be appling some form of it
  • Why Atomix decided to leave that out (and up to you to decide)


Even after all of that, the devs asked you for an example (quantitiative of course) to prove the claims - if you can come up with that then moves can be made. What you hear, is not objective, it's preference.
 
And here I thought it was just the name that was holding Virtual DJ back.

Suggestion: Why don't you null test the same song file in VDJ against any other software and post the results. Then we will know for sure.
 
And @PaulMcKenzie the A/B test stated doesn't tell you much about audio quality, it tells you about the choices made for A and B respectively. Worse case you have two applying different types of compression - they both are ultimately distorting/degrading the quality.

Also, you have to factor in that most sound engineers are gain staging and EQing most likely with specific software, where specific choices on coloring/compression are made, and so software that made a different choice will sound different (and could be (imo incorrectly) perceived as less quality).