TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Music Discussion
-- Tranceaddict Mix Competition ! ! -->> 100% complete, it's finished ! ! !
Pages (8): « 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 »

Dj dawn, why would we need to tell the next dj what bpm we ended at? I thought that was all apart of being a dj. Beat matching. Not having the bpm handed to you. Know what i'm saying?

The cd idea is a good idea but too much time would be involved in that. Me and neo will be figuring out a time limit each main dj will have to complete their mix.

As for the quality loss. There shouldn't be any. IF the decode/encode are all done with the proper tools. I am guessing the latest version of lame would do so. And neo is correct in saying 192 will be the final. Maybe between the djz we will have a 320? For those you worried about quality issues. Tempez

quote:

Originally posted by TempesTrip Dj dawn, why would we need to tell the next dj what bpm we ended at? I thought that was all apart of being a dj. Beat matching. Not having the bpm handed to you. Know what i'm saying? The cd idea is a good idea but too much time would be involved in that. Me and neo will be figuring out a time limit each main dj will have to complete their mix. As for the quality loss. There shouldn't be any. IF the decode/encode are all done with the proper tools. I am guessing the latest version of lame would do so. And neo is correct in saying 192 will be the final. Maybe between the djz we will have a 320? For those you worried about quality issues. Tempez

i'm a n00b with dj-ing..but Tempes...my bf mixes with vinyl and he uploads his sets into the computer thru minidisc, so how is he gonna find out what the bpm of the previous mix is????

I'd like to take a stab at the early / progressive stuff

quote:

Originally posted by TempesTrip Dj dawn, why would we need to tell the next dj what bpm we ended at? I thought that was all apart of being a dj. Beat matching. Not having the bpm handed to you. Know what i'm saying?

i know what you're saying, but you don't know what i was saying
My idea meant that you do NOT have the mix from the guy before you. He leaves it on his PC and tells you the last track and the bpm so you can start there. Then you keep your mix and tell the next person your last song and bpm. When all are done, the "mastering guy" downloads all mixes and puts them together with cool edit. That way the final mix would have been encoded twice and not four times. k? it was just an idea, I'm fine with 256/320 encoding and then final 192 encoding, as NEO said this does not have to be studio quality.

quote:

Originally posted by Johnny Eckhardt More than likely, there's going to be the need for a "final" mixdown because when you have 4 different sets that were recorded on 4 different systems by 4 different people....well...the chances of the EQ and volume levels being the same are probably just a little better than the chances of winning the lottery......so someone (perhaps DJ #4) will probbably have to the final mixdown on it.

I'm going to guess that you have your own recording studio since you seem to have a grasp on the the complexities of working with other people's material that was recorded on a different home system than your own. The chances that someone else's setup are exactly the same as yours (including software and hardware) are probably nil to none. Who else out there has a 1202 Mackie 8-track mixer going into an M-Audio 2496 sound card via RCA cables which sits in a Gateway PIII 833mhz machine with Cubase VST 5/32 for recording (and WaveLab for mastering) as I do? See my point? These inconsistencies will have an effect on the quality of the recording. So, not to call you out Gibbo, but

quote:

Originally posted by Gibbo i'm sorry to point out the obvious but what the fuck is everyone on as long as the but rate of the mp3s is reasonably high the sound quality will be ok and wtf is everyone goin on about volume levels for its easy to balance them all that needs to be done is the next dj balnces out the decbel level on the mixer and sorted any dj with a quarter of a brain can achieve that.

There are many other elements that constitute high sound quality than decibel level and bitrate. You can have an absolutely shite 192 bitrate recording (Trust me, I've made some).


Now then, Wicked Neo had a good point as well.

quote:

Originally posted by Wicked Neo this does not have to studio quality

This mix, from what I've read, will be the first of its kind, so perfection isn't that important, IMHO. As more and more TA DJ's contribute to these recordings, the processes will smooth themselves out, I bet. I think it's absolutely great that people on these forums are co-oping on a singular project. Can't wait for the first mix.

not to call out any silly twat "race bannon" but i wasnt talkin about studio quality and it is very easy to match up decibel levels on a mixer and set the correct recording levels and you dont need to have the same sound card and all that other bollox you just sprouted so pull the stick out your arse and relax this is no crasher compilation we're talkin about its just a mix of ideas and a see how its goes kind of thing as long as the important factors are kept consistent it will be ok and when the fuck did i say the sound quality will be perfect you're like a bloody tabloid journalist twistin the words around to suit yourself.

*throws race bannon on the bon fire with all the other tabloid tossers*

jeez guys...take one of ABT's chillpillz!! even if this is english humour amongst english twats just cool it cuz it seems offensive

hehe..man i sound like a dork dorkESS i mean

i'll contribute with my essential haribo starmix

kids and grown ups love it so, you know

What an amazing idea! And yeah, I definitely want to enter the competition!
Progressive or uplifting... I'm a huge fan of uplifting myself but I can also manage with my progressive vinyls

I'm in, although nobody really knows me, i'll give it a shot.

I really like the idea, all except for the *start* where dj 2 left off etc... i dont think that is right... i mean how are you going to combine different bpm's... strings.. etc.. and (no offense)but in my opinion i'm sure some of you guys spin alot more cheesy progressive trance than others.. i think the mix should be 30 - 40 minute hotmix.. then decide on that..
just my .02...
adios!
-keeg

i've thought about this alot the past few hours... maybe it should be 2 djs per 'cd' but vs several other pairs.

just a thought. I know esp from learning to mix progressive type tracks it can take about 30 min to build up where you would start to throw in uplifting.

so maybe we can do pairs instead of 4's. with progressive house, that could be 2, maybe 3 tracks tops in 20 minutes, and in my tendencies is to start off strong, move into a mild song or three then, start to bring em back up again. i still lack the tracks for some van buuren / van dyk type sets but i'm pretty strong prog wise.

i've had too many shots of rum and i'm probably way off track. just my .02

I agree with you Miss P. Lighten up folks!
DJ DAWN--- even though I only have 3 brain cells left...I did understand right away what you were saying concerning the "BPM" issue and that is a viable way to do something like this.....I don't know if it would work too well in this particular case though....I could be wrong. Aside from that, I'm still trying to figure out why some people think that you're "cheating" if you know what BPM a song is.
Also, just out of curiosity, someone mentioned that if you're mixing with MP3s...not to use certain programs (don't remember exactly which ones...this system is real slow right now and I can't get back to the first page to see which ones....was it Traktor & cool Edit?) anyway, I don't use the programs that were mentioned...so I was wondering why they shouldn't be used....are they not good programs for mixing with? Or is there some other reason? Just curious.

quote:

Originally posted by Johnny Eckhardt I'm still trying to figure out why some people think that you're "cheating" if you know what BPM a song is. Also, just out of curiosity, someone mentioned that if you're mixing with MP3s...not to use certain programs (don't remember exactly which ones...this system is real slow right now and I can't get back to the first page to see which ones....was it Traktor & cool Edit?) anyway, I don't use the programs that were mentioned...so I was wondering why they shouldn't be used....are they not good programs for mixing with? Or is there some other reason? Just curious.

'bout the bpm thingy...same here.
And concerning those programs mentioned, some DJ purist said not to use them because Traktor has an automatic beatmatching function. I didn't get why you shouldn't MIX with cool edit, I don't even think it's possible. Cool edit is a wav-editor, I know you can do crossfades and stuff but doing THAT isn't mixing to me, either.

@phatdelt: I think the 4 people idea is better. True that you may not be able to build the energy over 30 minutes like you use to when spinning alone, but that's what the challenge is about. I think the original idea was to figure out how 4 different people (possibly on different continents) can work together to make a nice mix.

by wink:

quote:

I really like the idea, all except for the *start* where dj 2 left off etc... i dont think that is right... i mean how are you going to combine different bpm's... strings.. etc..

how are you going to combine different bpm's? Beatmatch!
I don't understand your idea with the 40 min "hotmix". It is possible to combine the different mixes, trust us. This is just an experiment to find out how well it goes...

my idea

This is my idea. We do what Wicked Neo said, but:

DJ number one mixes his set.

(record directly into .mp3. I recommend Total Recorder www.highcriteria.com and we agree of a codec to use, Lame, Blade etc) Why encode/decode to mp3/wav all the time when we can do this? Or does the quality get worse if we record directly into .mp3?

DJ #1 sends/uploads his set, and DJ number two downloads it. DJ number two has to play set #1 on his computer, and plugs a cable from his lineout to his third channel on his mixer, or just using channel 1 or 2 while mixing out set #1 (if you only have 2 channels)

I think this one is more simple.

But i don't understand why decoding to wav and the back to mp3, explain. Is it because those with software playback mixing should mix with wav?

to me this sounds like you just summed up what we wanted to do, anyway. Also, there is no difference between recording to wav and then encoding or recording directly to mp3.

Concerning the codec, I'd prefer LAME over blade or anything else.

DJ Dawn, DOH beatmatch, but obviously some djs spin (especially progressive trance) alot faster than others....

whatevah... not thatbig of a deal...

-keeg

Ok I'm one of those purist Dj Dawn is referring to and I'm probally going to start a war here, but this is a Dj thing right? I've read alot of post talking about different programs used to MIX, not encode or decode but MIX. IMO if your not going to do this mix with vinyl or **begrudging says** CDs, then your not really Djing and maybe you should be involved in the mix.

And if you don't already have the necessary skill to be able to blend a mix in where another Dj left off, you should probally practice more before entering.

I'm in

Neo, U naughty moderator, shouldn't this really be in the DJ section?

I will definately compete if I can ever get over the flu, first day up and out since Thursday

L8r
Luke

I'm in...I spin uplifing progressive. I also have all the equipment and software needed to do this....count me in!!

DJ DAWN- thanks for your answer about Traktor & Cool Edit. That helps me understand a little better.
That brings me to this point....DJing used to pretty much be a vinyl only thing....there were really no other choices. Times have changed and so have the tools that a DJ has to work with. DJing is about putting music together with the intention of having a finished piece of work that your listeners will hear. How that is accomplished should be of little importance....it's what your audience hears that's important. Being able to beatmatch is only a small part of it and it doesn't mean dick if your selections don't work well together.
If one wants a purist type thing, then wouldn't you have to rule out CDs as well? Don't a lot of the CD units beatmatch on their own? Two turntables and vinyl is probably the only thing that doesn't do it automatically for you. Today's DJs have so many different options at their dosposal and should be able to use what ever it takes to achieve the final result. All of that means little if you can't put music together inn the first place. Where you end up, I think, is more important than how you get there.

^^^Well said!

but I must say that to this day I have only heard two "good" mixes which were done using software only.

(Apart from the professional "mixed" CDs you can buy in the strores)

I have read all the threads above and want to add some comments:
01. The participants. Four persons. Why not fourty? As I see no much more than four DJs want to participate. How will we choose? It' the first level of discrimination. For example I have heard DJ Dawn mixing and I am 1oo % sure that he should take part in this action, he is a very good DJ. But I have never heard the mixing by taStemAdmin. he releases number of vinyls weekly and it's fine, maybe he is also a good DJ? How should th people decide, how to make the choice?
02. The "Competition". I don't see a normal idea or reason to make a competition. Four persons will mix twenty minutes everyone, I understand. But what's the idea of the action? To see who can pitch 120 and 160 bpm? It's really easy if you have two ears and two hands. Actually it is not interesting to listen how guys are bringin' tcks together; ripping groups hammer us with daily releases so we can neither download nor listen to them all. You want to hear the perfect mixing? there are hundreds of professionally made albums.
03. My own suggestion. Which tracks will our participants play? The most popular promos of January 2oo2 and the absolute classics? I myself think that we should call it not competition but, for example, "The official 2oo1 trancEaddict Mix" with the tracklist based on the most beloved tunes of 2oo1. This is already a real possibility to collaborate - at the end we will have a CD full of energetic sound which will be also an essential selection of our community. We all have seen these postings "TA week XX winner - Track XX - XX", let there be a mix, let's say, every three month.

PS CJ is NOT agressive, I've just tried to make some points of the upcoming event clear

quote:

Originally posted by gibbo not to call out any silly twat "race bannon" but i wasnt talkin about studio quality and it is very easy to match up decibel levels on a mixer and set the correct recording levels and you dont need to have the same sound card and all that other bollox you just sprouted so pull the stick out your arse and relax this is no crasher compilation we're talkin about its just a mix of ideas and a see how its goes kind of thing as long as the important factors are kept consistent it will be ok and when the fuck did i say the sound quality will be perfect you're like a bloody tabloid journalist twistin the words around to suit yourself. *throws race bannon on the bon fire with all the other tabloid tossers*

I apologize Gibbo, it wasn't my aim to sound negative or twist your words about. I got a bit carried away just because I am interested in this project and know a couple things about recording. Still, my fault.

You've got a good point there CJ....instead of looking at this as a competition...see it as a collaboration....you know...TAs working together.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.