Host without Hoster?

[dan matney]

There is no way that using cds can be as fast or faster than hoster, and because the player you put the cds in has to read the cds before it can play it so this is the time saved, which to me is very significant, it is only a couple songs extra maybe per hour but anythng that keeps the show moving, is worth the effort. I average 18 songs per hour.
Danny

[capnvic]

Originally Posted by dan matney

There is no way that using cds can be as fast or faster than hoster, and because the player you put the cds in has to read the cds before it can play it so this is the time saved, which to me is very significant, it is only a couple songs extra maybe per hour but anythng that keeps the show moving, is worth the effort. I average 18 songs per hour.
Danny

The only time not accounted for with hoster is the amount of time it takes for one to get to the microphone. Outside of this time factor, Hoster will be much more efficient with time since one should be able to generate their songlist and be off and running.....

[muzicman144]

Originally Posted by dan matney

There is no way that using cds can be as fast or faster than hoster, and because the player you put the cds in has to read the cds before it can play it so this is the time saved, which to me is very significant, it is only a couple songs extra maybe per hour but anythng that keeps the show moving, is worth the effort. I average 18 songs per hour.
Danny

We hashed this over before. Lonman will come in on this and set you straight. I agree with you. No way disc is faster, though i doubt one can do more songs per hour one way or the other, but Hoster just makes it so much easier.
muzicman

[dan matney]

Ihave a home computer that I do all my business stuff on, I order allmy music on line and a lot of other stuff I do for a couple of busniess, that I run, I even keepmy books for my songs on this puter but always email my song books to myself so if anything happens I have it on line so I can down load it again, if anything happens. I really worry about loosing my song book, that are stored on the puter more than anything it would take months to redo them, or would have to rely, on the hoster books, which I dont like, but never put my work puter or the one I use in shows on line, at all, but like I said mtu makes you do that to get the newest software and I need to do that right now.
kowboys karaoke.....Danny

[Lonman]

Originally Posted by dan matney

There is no way that using cds can be as fast or faster than hoster, and because the player you put the cds in has to read the cds before it can play it so this is the time saved, which to me is very significant, it is only a couple songs extra maybe per hour but anythng that keeps the show moving, is worth the effort. I average 18 songs per hour.
Danny

18 songs? That would make every song about 3:30.
Anyway, I will argue the point & you would just have to see it in action to believe it.
A single disc player is slow & Hoster is MUCH faster than that. Multiple disc players - not talking like a dual or triple tray, but 2 separate individual players. The next song is always cued up while the current song is playing.

[bryant]

Originally Posted by Lonman

18 songs? That would make every song about 3:30.
Anyway, I will argue the point & you would just have to see it in action to believe it.
A single disc player is slow & Hoster is MUCH faster than that. Multiple disc players - not talking like a dual or triple tray, but 2 separate individual players. The next song is always cued up while the current song is playing.

Except when the next song's singer wants to change his mind, I let them do that because I have Hoster, and they do it all the time (oh, you pick one for me). Then you have to take out the new disk, find it first, exchange it while you are getting ready to stop the first guy that is ending his song. oops, lot of silence there. Then I get to say something about how I can readily do this while the other guys with discs can't, and they all chant "that's why we come here instead. I'm makin' this announcement, getting all this positive feedback while you are looking for the next singer's disc who didn't even write out a slip (just named the song).

[Lonman]

Originally Posted by bryant

Except when the next song's singer wants to change his mind, I let them do that because I have Hoster. Then you have to take out the new disk, find it first, exchange it while you are getting ready to stop the first guy that is ending his song. oops, lot of silence there.

True, but even that isn't a huge issue but yes Hoster is much better in that respect. I do not use cd books, all discs are clearly labled in their jewel cases, on the counter & easy to grab in a flash - I still use slips with disc numbers so no looking up songs. But yes this would be the only drawback, but not a major time constraint unless it happened every song - which it doesn't. I get people that want to change their song at the last minute once maybe twice a night. Usually if they want to change, there would be plenty of time to reload it before it came up.

[muzicman144]

My last two cents in. Lonman will argue his speed forever and it is not the question here. You can only have so many songs per hour no matter how fast you are with disc or hoster. When you factor every possibillity in, you can't out run the clock. Only so many songs per hour. I can fill up an hour with the same amount of songs with or without hoster, no matter how fast i do it, the songs still have to play. Talk all you want about how fast you are, the amout of songs you can possibly play an hour remain the same. Speed is not the answer, management is. Hoster makes it easier.
muzicman

[marklwood]

Originally Posted by muzicman144

Speed is not the answer, management is. Hoster makes it easier.
muzicman

The real gist of this thread is not to ever be in this situation. This is why I ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS have my backup computer with me during a show. I can change it out in under 3 minutes. I keep an MP3 player handy to play 1 dance song while I make the change. I have only had to do this once or twice a year until lately The most unnerving time is running the show on my backup computer until I get the other one fixed.

[muzicman144]

Originally Posted by marklwood

The real gist of this thread is not to ever be in this situation. This is why I ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS have my backup computer with me during a show. I can change it out in under 3 minutes. I keep an MP3 player handy to play 1 dance song while I make the change. I have only had to do this once or twice a year until lately The most unnerving time is running the show on my backup computer until I get the other one fixed.

You are 100% correct. I carry two of everything to every show, and keep another old shuttle at home to backup the backup. You can pick up a backup computer for almost nothing. I will never understand someone who doesn't, but that's a personal choice that is sometimes financially based.
muzicman

[Lonman]

Originally Posted by muzicman144

My last two cents in. Lonman will argue his speed forever and it is not the question here. You can only have so many songs per hour no matter how fast you are with disc or hoster. When you factor every possibillity in, you can't out run the clock. Only so many songs per hour. I can fill up an hour with the same amount of songs with or without hoster, no matter how fast i do it, the songs still have to play. Talk all you want about how fast you are, the amout of songs you can possibly play an hour remain the same. Speed is not the answer, management is. Hoster makes it easier.
muzicman

Actually I had another rebuttal posted, but you aren't worth the arguement. Believe what you want Just because you can't do it, must make it true!

[muzicman144]

Originally Posted by Lonman

Actually I had another rebuttal posted, but you aren't worth the arguement. Believe what you want Just because you can't do it, must make it true!

When i meet people with your attitude, i immediately dismiss them as pure jerks, and don't even bother with them.
Muzicman

[bryant]

Originally Posted by Lonman

True, but even that isn't a huge issue but yes Hoster is much better in that respect. I do not use cd books, all discs are clearly labled in their jewel cases, on the counter & easy to grab in a flash - I still use slips with disc numbers so no looking up songs. But yes this would be the only drawback, but not a major time constraint unless it happened every song - which it doesn't. I get people that want to change their song at the last minute once maybe twice a night. Usually if they want to change, there would be plenty of time to reload it before it came up.

I see, Lonnie. Before we had Hoster my wife and I were considered pretty quick with the discs too. I do see where you're coming from too. We tend to promote (and maybe too much) song switching and just "tell us when you want and when". So we spoiled a lot of friends (live in small town and personally know the drunks too) and now get a lot of weird requests at the last minute. Then again, you're right when you say that when using discs, most ppl won't expect that to happen anyway, and know that to change a song last second wouldn't even be a reasonable request.