1) Already on the list, not sure if/when it will be added.
2) A highly requested feature we hope they will be able to implement soon. It's a very technical hurdle, but they are aware of the importance of mixed-media playlists.
3) You can already do that using the "matching" feature on the right side of the waveform area:
Clicking that button with two tracks loaded will link them in a "match" and can be recalled later with various criteria in for smart playlists, etc.
4) Again, highly requested, and that horse is taking a beating.
5) Personally, I hate that functionality, but you're certainly welcome to request it. ;)
6) That ability depends entirely upon the type of effect, and how/where it would be applied to the audio dependent of the audio device configuration. Unfortunately it is the way it is because of those limitations.
7) While not readily export/importable, you could do this yourself:
I'm not on my Windows machine to confirm, but the path there may be:
If you have customized USER1, then copy the User1.pad.csv file.
8) That's about controlling the GUI for consistency and ease-of-use. While we'd love for it to be flexible and accommodate every DJs' preferences, the current configuration reflects the use and preference of the majority of users. Allowing it to be modified is not a simple task and would certainly result in additional support requests when users can't figure out why no information is showing due to their changes.
9) You could record the output MIDI using a 3rd party application, but there are other MIDI functions I feel should be improved before a request like that is even considered.
10) Oh man, we need UNDO so badly for so many things.
11) I don't know if I agree with that assessment, I can't think of too many practical applications where that would be desired or useful - perhaps there's something you've thought of that I can't envision?
12) If you're talking about direct hardware function - that has to do with limitations of the hardware itself. Here's what I posted to a topic about the beat jump on the XDJ-RX2:
Yes, it is a memory issue -- because in order for the unit to have the ability to jump immediately to 16 or 32 beats ahead (or back), it has to contain that audio within its buffer, and the ability to then rapidly buffer an additional 32 in that same direction in case you press it again. For a simple example, let's take a 120BPM track...
16 beats would be 8 seconds, meaning 16 seconds total (combining 8s ahead and 8s behind the play position) would need to be buffered, with the ability to buffer an additional 8s nearly instantaneously should the DJ jump forward or back. Note that we don't need to buffer a full 16 seconds on a jump, as if we jump forward 16 beats, those 8s we just jumped were previously ahead of the play position, but are now behind the play position. It just takes some fancy memory management to shuffle that addressing around so it doesn't need to be loaded twice, but is still accessible in the right order. So the player would need the ability to buffer the maximum amount of audio needed after a jump (8s), and with the highest quality file supported by the CDJ-2000NXS2 being a WAV / AIFF at 24bit / 48kHz, the player needs to call up 2.25MB of audio instantaneously, while continuing to stream that song at 2304kbps. It's not just pulling the data from the USB drive at that speed, as I mentioned before - it has to process it as well. It's not just a matter of filling that memory buffer bucket. I know it doesn't sound like much, but this unit is a purpose-designed piece of DJ gear, not your computer running a CPU on a bus capable of handling massive amounts of data and flexible in its operation to perform different things a different times as needed.
Want to make that 32 or 64 beats? Just double or quadruple the numbers I've just posted (except the streaming rate, that's the same for the maximum quality audio).
This is not an official statement, but if it were already possible, they would have included it. The fact they never did tells me that the hardware in the unit is simply not powerful enough to provide that kind of performance.
As always, thanks for your feedback!