TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- DJ Booth
-- Tips on beatmatching for a newby?
Pages (8): « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8]

quote:

Originally posted by Rodri Santos Would be more logical: Fluffy trance->Progressive House-> Techno

Going softer to harder can be good. Out of curiosity, what bpm do you associate each of these genres with?

quote:

i hate RnB->House->Pop->Techno it's a weird combination i hear so often and raise you to fall deeper.

Hehe... In the past I have done a four hour
RnB/hiphop -> progressive house/pop -> progressive trance
set at a lounge because everyone has a wide range of musical tastes. The set partially satisfied everyone.

Although I much prefer to mix progressive house/trance exclusively, a gig is a gig.

Fluffy trance 130-132 bpm. vocals, unicorns and something between pop, house and trance.

Progressive House 128 bpm mostly

Techno: Usually below 128 , tech-house mostly real techno is faster. As all of them move in similar bpm brackets you can have all of them in a mix without much hassle. In a 4 hour set you can play whatever you want for 2 hours and still have time to raise a set from 125 bpm to 170 if you wish. Not the best idea though i think people who like slow stuff won't think the same about 170 bpm schranz and viceversa.

quote:

Originally posted by Rodri Santos Fluffy trance 130-132 bpm. vocals, unicorns and something between pop, house and trance. Progressive House 128 bpm mostly

Those are the same bpm ranges that I think of too.

I tend to favor progressive house before fluffy trance because progressive house feels slower and less intense to me. The buildups in prog house usually aren't as extreme as in trance and I feel like I can draw the crowd in more easily with prog house at the beginning of a set. Additionally, I like to increase the bpm as my set progresses (unless it is super long, in which case I may bring the bpm down for a bit before raising it back up). Going from 128 to 130-132 makes more sense to me, but it is just a personal preference.

Song selection is everything, of course.

quote:

Techno: Usually below 128 , tech-house mostly real techno is faster.

Ah, I thought you were talking about regular techno, which I associate with a much higher bpm than fluffy trance and prog house.

yes, European techno is completely different to Detroit's regular , but well for the example is the same with technology you can cover a 10bpm gap but house and after that 140 bpm techno... oh my god this would sound awful.

Tbh apeattack. Whats funny is this.

Music productions = zero profit.

Producer has to DJ = some profit.

Automation makes DJ disappear.

No profit = no new music, only bedroom hobby stuff. Is that the future of dance-music?

quote:

Originally posted by Voci Tbh apeattack. Whats funny is this. Music productions = zero profit. Producer has to DJ = some profit. Automation makes DJ disappear. No profit = no new music, only bedroom hobby stuff. Is that the future of dance-music?

I believe that technology eventually will destroy the traditional DJ and producer roles. It is unclear if DJs and producers will create new roles for themselves as computers become more and more powerful.

In the near future, human producers will continue to make music and human DJs will mix songs at clubs. However, automation will slowly make the job of the DJ obsolete until one day software is developed that can mix songs more precisely than a human for a fraction of the cost. It may take 20 years to reach this point of automation, or it could take 50+ years, but if technology continues to progress at its current rate it will happen.

You are correct that (today) producers make their money from mixing live. In the future this economic model may change to deal with the automation of DJing. Perhaps, as you suggest, the automation of DJing will stifle music production. However, it also is possible that people will continue to pay to see their favorite producers mix live because they place a value on being in the presence of great producers (similar to how a lot of people will go to an event just because Armin or Tiesto is DJing, even though their DJ skills are adequate and no where near the greatest in the world). Perhaps opening and closing DJs will be hardest hit by the automation of DJing.

I believe in the long run (30+ years) software will be developed that will be able to create music on the fly that is tailored to your personal musical tastes, like a very powerful Pandora. This software will make new sounds and songs and will be able to gather user statistics from across the globe to see what groups of people like and dislike the new music, and adjust accordingly. Producers (as we know them today) may become completely obsolete.

Eventually, all human-made music genres may be threatened once we develop software than can reproduce perfect human vocal sounds. Technology is fuuuuuunnnnn.

quote:

Originally posted by Apeattack I believe that technology eventually will destroy the traditional DJ and producer roles. It is unclear if DJs and producers will create new roles for themselves as computers become more and more powerful. In the near future, human producers will continue to make music and human DJs will mix songs at clubs. However, automation will slowly make the job of the DJ obsolete until one day software is developed that can mix songs more precisely than a human for a fraction of the cost. It may take 20 years to reach this point of automation, or it could take 50+ years, but if technology continues to progress at its current rate it will happen. You are correct that (today) producers make their money from mixing live. In the future this economic model may change to deal with the automation of DJing. Perhaps, as you suggest, the automation of DJing will stifle music production. However, it also is possible that people will continue to pay to see their favorite producers mix live because they place a value on being in the presence of great producers (similar to how a lot of people will go to an event just because Armin or Tiesto is DJing, even though their DJ skills are adequate and no where near the greatest in the world). Perhaps opening and closing DJs will be hardest hit by the automation of DJing. I believe in the long run (30+ years) software will be developed that will be able to create music on the fly that is tailored to your personal musical tastes, like a very powerful Pandora. This software will make new sounds and songs and will be able to gather user statistics from across the globe to see what groups of people like and dislike the new music, and adjust accordingly. Producers (as we know them today) may become completely obsolete. Eventually, all human-made music genres may be threatened once we develop software than can reproduce perfect human vocal sounds. Technology is fuuuuuunnnnn.

Which destroys creativity and the fun of being creative and removing all effort.

quote:

Originally posted by stealthman Which destroys creativity and the fun of being creative and removing all effort.

/thread.

Close this or die please.

If this thread is going to get locked, I might as well go all out.

Over Thanksgiving dinner, I was talking with my father about this thread and the topic of technology leading to massive unemployment in the future (we love to talk about the future of humanity when we get together... different strokes for different folks, I guess). A lot of fun ideas were thrown around.

In the near future, society is going to have to deal with robots taking over more and more jobs. For example, RIGHT NOW we have the technology to eliminate cashiers and baggers at all supermarkets. Products can have microchips implanted into them. Once finished with shopping, customers will put their filled carts onto a track where they will be sent through a detector that will catalog each item in the cart, and a robot arm will pack the items into bags faster and more optimally than a human ever could. The entire checkout process will take less than 30 seconds. Eventually, robots will be able to restock shelves too, further eliminating jobs.

What does this have to do with DJing? Countless jobs, such as cashiers, baggers, and DJs likely WILL be eliminated during the next century. What is going to happen to society when unemployment is 10% permanently? How about 15%? 20%? Massive unemployment is the natural outcome if technology continues to progress as it has during the past century. Huge tensions develop in society when unemployment reaches these percentages (1930s, for example). THE great question of the next century is the following: How is society going to deal with technology making humans obsolete at many jobs?

One idea that has been put forward is that people will work less hours (say, 30 hours per week instead of 40 hours per week). This will increase employment greatly, people will have more free time, but people will make less money. However, as robots take over more human jobs, companies will save a lot of money which they can pass along to the consumers, so goods will cost less. The transition from the current way of thinking (that 40-hour workweeks and 5% unemployment are good) to whatever the future looks like may be VERY messy. But the transition likely will come before most of us die.

Contrary to what many think, I am not happy (or sad) about this eventuality... it is just a natural outcome of the evolution of technology. Technology already has replicated many of the skills of a DJ and more skills will be replaced in the future. Some skills will be easier to replicate than others, but eventually a true 'virtual' DJ will be created. Patrons and club owners over a the next couple generations will decide whether the automatic DJ mixing software is acceptable.

Anywhoooooo... Happy Thanksgiving weekend all! Well, for those of you in the US... awwwwwww, OK... for the rest of you too.

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