Sign In:     

Forum: Wishes and new features

Topic: Fluid Beatgrid vdj 2027 !!!!!!
Subject: Feature Request: Bring back Manual Fixed Tempo Markers alongside Fluid Beatgrid

​Dear VirtualDJ Team,

​In previous versions, VirtualDJ led the way in handling sharp tempo changes (e.g., jumping from 120 to 140 BPM). It worked flawlessly using manual markers, a feature so effective that other platforms like Traktor and Rekordbox adopted the concept.

​While the new Fluid Beatgrid is great for tracks with constantly changing live tempos, removing the manual fixed marker tool created a big gap. Many tracks have strictly defined, constant BPM sections rather than fluid variations throughout. Automatic detection alone often struggles with these explicit tempo jumps.

​Please consider restoring the old manual fixed-tempo marker feature or keeping it as a separate toggleable mode alongside Fluid Beatgrid. Giving us the choice between full automatic fluid analysis and classic manual precision would make grid editing perfect again.

​Best regards,

Moamen Kwamney
 
Posted Tue 03 Nov 26 @ 8:40 am
This already exists today.
 

​Dear VirtualDJ Team

​Although you claim that this feature is already available, the reality in the latest version is completely different and far from being user-friendly.

​Previously, before the Fluid Beatgrid was introduced, everything was extremely simple and smooth on Rigid. We didn't need to analyze the track with Fluid just to make manual adjustments. We could easily go to the transition point, drop a marker, type the exact target BPM (like 140), and instantly solve the problem. In fact, other competing software originally copied this brilliant concept from VirtualDJ because it was so efficient.

​However, right now, even though you say it has been addressed, the software still forces us to re-analyze tracks using Fluid Beatgrid, and adding manual markers is no longer smooth or practical. Not every track has a shifting, fluid tempo; many tracks rely on strict, explicit BPM changes. By focusing solely on Fluid, you have left behind users who rely on precise, rigid tempo management.

​We urgently need you to bring back the true, frictionless classic manual fixed-tempo marker workflow so we can work on strict BPM changes quickly and easily, just like before.

​Best regards,

Moamen Kwamney
 
Please stop posting AI paragraphs to say one thing.

It's still there though (it never left), it's just the way you go about doing it is different (right click on measure lines to add an anchor manually, right click drag of anchor to abitrarily place it and measure line drag to adjust the BPM to the correct value relative to last anchor, instead of immediate, arbitrary anchor placement, and drag of measure lines to change BPM).

The only thing that may be missing is direct BPM entry for current anchor, but if you can drag a measure line to get the right BPM, it probably takes 1-2 seconds max to drag the measure line to the right BPM value.
 
Mo2mn Kwamney is right, though.

The new beatgrid is a mess in handling with hardstyle tracks that shift from 150 to 128 to 150 to 190 to 150 ...

I upgraded VirtualDJ to Build 9246 (2026-03-31) when it released and regretted it instantly when I saw the new beatgrid editor. Some multi-BPM tracks in my DB have completely f-ed up BPM values and it wasn't worth the hassle to edit every broken grid. If fluid beatgrid detects a part of 148.3 bpm where it is actually 150 and it placed the anchor so bad, I want to be able to MOVE it and TYPE the bpm value by hand, so it can be accurate. That's not possible anymore.

That's why I stayed on Build 9005 and I guess I won't be able to upgrade anytime soon as long as we don't get the old beatgrid back! Make it a permanent legacy option to have the old grid, at least... and don't f with the databases we build with it!!
 
So you are talking about something else - the quality of the BPM Fluid Analyzer.
He is talking about manual corrections, and as I described, everything, except for manually specifying a BPM value for an anchor, is possible.

What you may want is an update to make it analyze problematic tracks better, but I'm sure virtually everyone agrees that the Fluid Analyzer, for the fair majority of tracks, is bettet that the multi-BPM analysis that used to exist.

Als, if you already scanned or manually gridded a song, the software would not overwrite th e BPM unless you explicitly scanned the song.
It is honestly more productive if you actually reported the problems so that they can solve them, thank sticking on older versions, which will be missing much needed fixes and will become obsolete soon, even it it is by the more recent versions of OSes no longer supporting its run.
 
I’m also still using build B9005. I’m sticking with it until an update arrives that allows for manual editing of anchor points the way it worked in previous versions without having to rely so heavily on AI. My tracks are already edited in Ableton Live, with their BPMs and transitions precisely set.

When I installed the latest update, the BPMs no longer aligned correctly, which is why I reverted to B9005. Hopefully, an update will be released soon to address this and provide a fix for everyone.

Best regards,
 
DJ VinylTouch wrote :
So you are talking about something else - the quality of the BPM Fluid Analyzer.
He is talking about manual corrections, and as I described, everything, except for manually specifying a BPM value for an anchor, is possible.


For me, it's also about manual corrections in the beatgrid...?
Don't get me wrong, I still think that the fluid beatgrid analyzer is good, but absolutely not for tracks that have fixed BPM.
It's more for old tracks where there is a variation of BPM within like a few BPM.
For example older house or trance that have BPM in a range from 133.5 to 134.3 BPM - That's where it comes in handy!


DJ VinylTouch wrote :
What you may want is an update to make it analyze problematic tracks better, but I'm sure virtually everyone agrees that the Fluid Analyzer, for the fair majority of tracks, is bettet that the multi-BPM analysis that used to exist.


Yes, but not with fluid beatgrid analyzer, because an "AI" to analyze the BPM of a static BPM track will fail by some degree, either by not recognizing the BPM count correctly, having the grid off beat or recognizing interludes, bridges or vocals without clear beats as multiple BPM. Currently, correcting this is a pain for me and many others, too.

Having the "old" but very much working static beat grid including the manual multi-BPM editor would make a BIG difference, as it would allow us to have old tracks with BPM ranges (like said: 133.5 to 134.3 BPM) analyzed with fluid (which would be GREAT!) but also newer tracks that have very much fixed values. (150 - 128 - 150 ...)


DJ VinylTouch wrote :
Als, if you already scanned or manually gridded a song, the software would not overwrite th e BPM unless you explicitly scanned the song.


Maybe it's like this in your setup, but not in mine. After upgrading to the Build 9246, the BPM were still there, even with multi-BPM. But I can't see any anchors, I can't see any start or end of a BPM frame.

VirtualDJ also seems to "forget" a track once in a while - and no, I'm not editing the database or the tracks or the filenames. It's all up to VirtualDJ. But that's another discussion.


DJ VinylTouch wrote :
It is honestly more productive if you actually reported the problems so that they can solve them, thank sticking on older versions, which will be missing much needed fixes and will become obsolete soon, even it it is by the more recent versions of OSes no longer supporting its run.


I already opened a case in April. I have stated my concerns, but support staff referred me to the fluid beatgrid and then closed the case. After re-opening the case, they closed it again without further notice.
 
Kenneth wrote :

Yes, but not with fluid beatgrid analyzer, because an "AI" to analyze the BPM of a static BPM track will fail by some degree, either by not recognizing the BPM count correctly, having the grid off beat or recognizing interludes, bridges or vocals without clear beats as multiple BPM. Currently, correcting this is a pain for me and many others, too.


So you admit that you can manually correct this currently (that is, the ability to manually add markers and adjust the BPM of the area the marker covers is still there (it never left), it's just that the way to do it has changed from the multi-BPM days).

Whether or not it's more cumbersome to do currently is a matter of opinion/largely influenced by comfort/familiarity. I've personally corrected quite a few songs manually since (I've identified all of them as problematic tracks on the forum post dedicated to that).

Kenneth wrote :

Having the "old" but very much working static beat grid including the manual multi-BPM editor would make a BIG difference, as it would allow us to have old tracks with BPM ranges (like said: 133.5 to 134.3 BPM) analyzed with fluid (which would be GREAT!) but also newer tracks that have very much fixed values. (150 - 128 - 150 ...)


Read what I said before - all the functionality is there, it's just the way you would do it has changed, so to me, the only big difference would be how you go about accessing the functionality.
Based on your description, your issue isn't with manual correction, you issue is with the quality of the fluid analyzer when it comes to a particular type of song (transition tracks), and that has been raised before. If the track doesn't change BPM, then it's fixed (i.e. the fixed analyzer is used) - a track that ping-pongs in BPM is not a fixed BPM track (by definition).

Kenneth wrote :

Maybe it's like this in your setup, but not in mine. After upgrading to the Build 9246, the BPM were still there, even with multi-BPM. But I can't see any anchors, I can't see any start or end of a BPM frame.

I've not looked at the older gridded tracks I've done in a while, but I'm curious - why would this be an issue if you already spent the time to properly grid the track correctly the old way in an older version?
If it was done the old way and its correct, you leave it alone (no rescan is needed - the manual grid is used when you load the track).
If you rescan it with the new fluid analyzer, you get the updated grid, and you correct it manually if necessary.

Kenneth wrote :

VirtualDJ also seems to "forget" a track once in a while - and no, I'm not editing the database or the tracks or the filenames. It's all up to VirtualDJ. But that's another discussion.


I've never had this happen (and that would be a bigger problem).
"Forgetting" a track would mean it was lost from the database, or it's filepath changed somehow - both operations you can verify by looking at the database itself, and to me, the only way that can happen is through outside intervention (tracks on an external drive not plugged in, manual OS manipulation of files after addition in VirtualDJ, third-party database tools use, corruption of the database itself externally).

Kenneth wrote :

I already opened a case in April. I have stated my concerns, but support staff referred me to the fluid beatgrid and then closed the case. After re-opening the case, they closed it again without further notice.


That's unfortunate. The questions to you (and others) still are:

  1. Have you actually tried to make manual corrections to the fluid beatgrid?
  2. If so (1 is true), did you read the updated BPM editor page to see how it's done now?
  3. If 1) and 2) are true, what do you think is missing/you can't do now?


I've personally went through manual grid editing for tracks analyzed with the new fluid analysis, and went through those steps, and I found I was able to make all the manual corrections needed, and now that I'm more familiar with it, maybe even faster than before as anchors are only initially placed exactly on beat lines (vs playhead placement, which could be arbitrary and would virtually always need repositioning on the last valid beat line).
The only thing I saw missing was manual BPM specification for an anchor, which only ever was useful for transition tracks at the beginning and final BPM areas (where the exact beginning and end BPM was known) - everywhere else I would be guessing, and I ended up dragging beat/measure lines to the right transients and depending on the BPM arrived at from that as that was ghe faster method to get there (which you can still do now).
 
I agree with VinylTouch. The ability is still there, just accessed differently.

If anything though (and it's already been suggested) maybe it would help to have a "partial analysis" option as well as the current "all or nothing" system i.e.

Analyse from here
Set BPM from here

Ableton Live has those (plus others) and they're the O.G.
 
Look, I get where you're coming from, but honestly, you guys just don't like having an honest discussion about things. When you see us sending messages and replying a lot, it's really unfortunate that you end up blocking our messages or even banning and blocking the email addresses we use. That's just disappointing.

​Thanks for your time, but unfortunately, there's a real issue here that you guys refuse to acknowledge. You've genuinely gone backwards with this. Back then, setting markers manually and typing in the BPM was easy, but you won't admit it, and you probably think it's just one or two people struggling with this.

​Fine, I won't send any more messages, but this is a real issue that's actually happening. It's just a shame that every time I try to write to you, you block me and block my messages. Thanks for the support and thanks for your approach.
 
Mo2mn Kwamney wrote :
setting markers manually and typing in the BPM was easy


I agree, It was sooooooo much easier. Now everything is hidden and Ive just quit doing it altogether now. To much of a pain to go through now.
 
Tbh once you know the new way it's actually quick. The only thing that is missing is manual BPM entry and that is only useful if you already know the BPM of the zone of interest. You'll use beat line dragging for BPM recalculation in virtually all other cases, both before and after the fluid grid update.
 
A bit concerning the OP says his posts are being deleted. What's he said for this to happen as his comments in general seem to have been reasonable?

I get if someone is being abusive and such but he's far from the first person to raise questions about the new fluid editor.
 
Repeated ai duplicate posts, after several warnings and a ban, patience is wearing thin with this one.
 
I am writing to you directly to clarify things. I am a real working DJ, not a bot or an AI.

​Because I do not speak English, I used AI tools solely to translate my thoughts and express what I need for my DJ setup. You need to understand this — I am just trying to communicate and share my technical feedback.

​I apologize if the translated posts caused any disruption, but I am a genuine user who relies on VirtualDJ and just wants to participate in the forum.

​Thank you,

Moamen
 
DJ VinylTouch wrote :
Tbh once you know the new way it's actually quick. The only thing that is missing is manual BPM entry and that is only useful if you already know the BPM of the zone of interest. You'll use beat line dragging for BPM recalculation in virtually all other cases, both before and after the fluid grid update.


Is there a video some where I can watch?? ive read the manual and its a real pain to set. Idk, Im all for moving forward and have been a VDJ user since 4.3.
 
Tbh I don't know of a video that shows it (maybe Klaus has one out, I'm not sure?), but the BPM Editor section of the User Manual has been updated to have all of those manual edit options described adequately in terms of how to access and use them.