TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- DJ Booth
-- Using software to doctor your mixes?
Pages (2): [1] 2 »

Using software to doctor your mixes?

now for a new topic to discuss

i'm just wondering what are your thoughts on djs using software to edit their mixes

like if you have a bad transition, pick up the needle and try again and then just edit it out later


i for one am for it
when putting together a demo, i think it's best to put all your best mixes on
if they wanted to hear a one-off mix, then they could just see you live

what are your thoughts?
and please try to keep the discussion civil

i dont know i think that mixes should be done "live" , i mean how bad your transition can be ?

if you edit it, it will lose its energy , well at least to yourself.

It doesn't bother me, like for a promo mix I think the track selection and presentation is more important than the mixing. I wouldn't mind messing with that type of editing but I'd have no idea where to start.

I agree with both sides of the argument here

Personally I really hate listening to a mix I've done, and thinking it's really good, except for one or two mixes. Therefore I always redo the "bad" mixes until I am happy with them. At the end it results in a CD (I always do CDs not tapes) I like.

However, you can often tell if someone's done this too much, (or to the extreme, done the whole mix using software). An over engineered mix loses it's "live" feeling and, although all transitions are dead in time, the mix may be more boring as a result.

Remember: it is the little mistakes and variations that add a human touch to a mix. And a human (at the moment) can always perform a more engaging mix than a computer

quote:

Originally posted by TranceInMySoul I agree with both sides of the argument here Personally I really hate listening to a mix I've done, and thinking it's really good, except for one or two mixes. Therefore I always redo the "bad" mixes until I am happy with them. At the end it results in a CD (I always do CDs not tapes) I like. However, you can often tell if someone's done this too much, (or to the extreme, done the whole mix using software). An over engineered mix loses it's "live" feeling and, although all transitions are dead in time, the mix may be more boring as a result. Remember: it is the little mistakes and variations that add a human touch to a mix. And a human (at the moment) can always perform a more engaging mix than a computer

Couldn't have said it better myself. I personally make mixes so I can throw them on CD and listen to my favorite tracks in the car. If I trainwreck a transition, I'm not gonna want to listen to that over and over again, I'll fix it up. I mix purely for my own gratification and to share it with others.

i agree that humans are flawed by nature
and i only doctor 1 maybe 2 mixes for a cd

i just want to present the best transitions i can do to the promoter
and edited properly, it doesn't lose anything
not even noticable to even me

what program do you guys use to mix on computer? sound forge??

Well i dont like the idea of it all. It sounds great and all when they use a program to fix the mix but then again it wasnt there skills that did all the mixing.
John 00 Fleming mixed his new cd using software.

I agree in doing mix CD's (compilations) by computer, but not demos. Demos/promos should be a display of your skill level at the turntables, not your ability to push button to correct things after you screw up. Armin and Tiesto do a lot of their compilations without any doctoring.

When you give a producer a perfect demo and then fuck up a lot live, they're not gonna be happy, and they're less likely to trust you in the future.

I just wanna straighten up any misunderstanding about what we're discussing here.

"Fixing" a mix using software, to me, means re-recording the mix live (i.e. mixing it again on your turntables) and glueing the new mix in place of the old one. So, the mix is still live, just a better take than the original

I personally disagree with using software exclusively for doing mixes. Sure, I've tried it myself, but the result was lifeless. I know a lot of commercial CDs are done that way now, and I will say it makes your life a lot easier if you need to fit lots of tracks on a CD (another thing I disagree with )

quote:

Originally posted by deejay2002 what program do you guys use to mix on computer? sound forge??

if i mix something on my computer i use Cool Edit. thats far better than soundforge.

@topic: hmm, i don't really know. if it's for promotion, why not, but if you really want to have a "live" set, it should stay "live". learning by doing. if you always just edit the bad transition, you won't get any better, because you always think "well i can edit that afterwards"...

quote:

Originally posted by TranceInMySoul I just wanna straighten up any misunderstanding about what we're discussing here. "Fixing" a mix using software, to me, means re-recording the mix live (i.e. mixing it again on your turntables) and glueing the new mix in place of the old one. So, the mix is still live, just a better take than the original I personally disagree with using software exclusively for doing mixes. Sure, I've tried it myself, but the result was lifeless. I know a lot of commercial CDs are done that way now, and I will say it makes your life a lot easier if you need to fit lots of tracks on a CD (another thing I disagree with )

i should have clarified
yes, you're just re-recording a transition you didn't like and pasting it over the transition you didn't like

so it's all live, you just have a "best of" thing going

the only reason i do this is because i play 500 times better live than i do when recording

i have the crowd energy to feed off of and for some reason i play a lot better on a loud system
i've even recored my sets and listened to them afterwards to make sure my theory is true... pretty much every mix is seamless and spotless

it's to the point where i'm thinking of not bothering recording in a studio anymore, just recording my livesets and releasing those

hmm i think that is how they do it for those mix compilation CD's. i doubt those mixed compilation CD's are done live... live set is only good if you have a crowd in front of you.

When I cut a new mix fresh from the tables, pop on my headphones and listen to it, I sometimes get the feeling like something is missing.

When you're cutting a mix in your bedroom, you loose that 'live' element that you get when you typically hear dj's mixing on the radio, at the club, etc. Mostly it has to do with crowd noise and reverb of the dance club.

Personally, I record my mix straight up, no editing, no computer beat matching... it's only one shot, just like it would be live. The only thing I may go back and edit later is volume and gain levels, and reverb effects. (Gives it that fuller sound I was talking about). Basically only the fine tuning that really gives your mixes that final polish.

quote:

Originally posted by DJ A.i hmm i think that is how they do it for those mix compilation CD's. i doubt those mixed compilation CD's are done live... live set is only good if you have a crowd in front of you.

actually most of those mix cds are done only with the computer. they beatmatch with the computer (this is really easy) and make the transitions with programs like cool edit or something like that...

I hate the idea of fixing your mixes, even the best dj's aren't mixing perfect all the way! If i mess up a mix, then i sure feel bad about it, but if all the others sound good, then i just leave it that way. If there are to many mixes bad, then i just record the entire set again, en try to create better mixes (djing is a hobby, so it may cost a lot of time ). And i also think that it aint fair. Just imagine, some kind of idiot created a perfect mix with his software, and is hired by your local disco, while you have a mix that has some faults in it, but you can mix it life. And i know, that guy faking his sets wouldn't last long behind the decks of the disco, but in the same time you could be there....

Greetz Maarten

i think the point was lost somewhere along the line
i'm not talking about using software to mix, i'm just talking about using software to fix a bad transition in a live mix

ok, here's what i do
i'm mixing and say the needle skips and the beats drift mid-mix, i just re-cue the outgoing record to the start and start again

then after i finish i edit out the bad part, usually i make the edit point at the start of a breakdown or something like that

i was just asking if any other djs do this when recording a cd
or do they record a mix straight off one shot

quote:

Originally posted by DJ_Shockwav i think the point was lost somewhere along the line i'm not talking about using software to mix, i'm just talking about using software to fix a bad transition in a live mix ok, here's what i do i'm mixing and say the needle skips and the beats drift mid-mix, i just re-cue the outgoing record to the start and start again then after i finish i edit out the bad part, usually i make the edit point at the start of a breakdown or something like that i was just asking if any other djs do this when recording a cd or do they record a mix straight off one shot

thats the thing though, in a club you simply dont get that oppurtunity. if you're not really good enough to be nailing a transistion the way you want too, i simply wouldent want a promoter hearing a transistion that took me 2-3 goes to nail and get right on a cd that i had to re-edit sometime later.

its all about morals, becasue everyone fucks up once in while. it just varies from one person to another i guess.

I understand what you mean shockwave.
I most of the time dont edit errors with software, as I will just restart the whole thing, but sometimes it can get tedious.
Anyhow, i sometimes encounter a fucked record, where the pitch fluctuates and the mixing is very tricky. In that case, i to have to record a mix into two parts. One part of the whole mix until that messed up record, then I record a seperate mix starting with the last track of the 1st recorded, mixed with the screwed record (sometimes it may take several times to get the mix right, considering the record is fucked and pitch fluctuates). Then paste the mixes.. doing it right it wont be noticable, but sound levels have to be right, etc.

I dont think anything is wrong with it... ill tell you why. Cause records arent perfect, and sometimes it gets out of your control. Your not cheating, because your creativity is still there. Its not a live performance, its a demo, and you want it to be crisp and precise. You dont want to give out a demo with a clip in the beatmatch and someone thinks 'this guy doesnt even know how to beatmatch' just cause you had a fucked record. The person does not know under what conditions the recording was made.
I believe its being smart if you use the software wisely to edit and save you some time, but not for mixing or sequencing of the tracks (unless you are making a pro compilation release).

quote:

Originally posted by DJ_Shockwav i think the point was lost somewhere along the line i'm not talking about using software to mix, i'm just talking about using software to fix a bad transition in a live mix ok, here's what i do i'm mixing and say the needle skips and the beats drift mid-mix, i just re-cue the outgoing record to the start and start again then after i finish i edit out the bad part, usually i make the edit point at the start of a breakdown or something like that i was just asking if any other djs do this when recording a cd or do they record a mix straight off one shot

i dont know if your recording a mix i tend to use a bit more weight so i dont have to deal with this problem, i guess you could try that and then just turn the weight to normal after done recording.

and what GelatinPufF is true you cant just do that in a club.

quote:

Originally posted by bachatu I understand what you mean shockwave. I most of the time dont edit errors with software, as I will just restart the whole thing, but sometimes it can get tedious. Anyhow, i sometimes encounter a fucked record, where the pitch fluctuates and the mixing is very tricky. In that case, i to have to record a mix into two parts. One part of the whole mix until that messed up record, then I record a seperate mix starting with the last track of the 1st recorded, mixed with the screwed record (sometimes it may take several times to get the mix right, considering the record is fucked and pitch fluctuates). Then paste the mixes.. doing it right it wont be noticable, but sound levels have to be right, etc. I dont think anything is wrong with it... ill tell you why. Cause records arent perfect, and sometimes it gets out of your control. Your not cheating, because your creativity is still there. Its not a live performance, its a demo, and you want it to be crisp and precise. You dont want to give out a demo with a clip in the beatmatch and someone thinks 'this guy doesnt even know how to beatmatch' just cause you had a fucked record. The person does not know under what conditions the recording was made. I believe its being smart if you use the software wisely to edit and save you some time, but not for mixing or sequencing of the tracks (unless you are making a pro compilation release).

Well.. in my opinion i think that using software to fix errors in your mix is sorta like cheating. A demo should be a representation of what you can do in a club environment. In a live setting you will never have the opportunity to edit a mix..if you mess up you move on. Bachatu.. there's a flaw in your arguement when you say that its just a demo not a live performance. A demo should convey to the promoter what you can do live. If you were to use that flawed record live and you messed up, what are you going to do? you cant tell the audience to stop dancing so that you can edit ur transition and then resume like nothing happened. Would you use a flawed record in a live performance knowing that there's ppl watching you and judging you? i dont think so. If a flawed record is the problem then maybe you shouldnt be using that record in the first place because you wouldnt be using that record live. Either go buy a new one or use another song. DJing is about flexibility afterall.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I think you're reading too much into it, I don't think anyone's talking about 'synthesizing' a promo with editing software. As dj_shockwav clarified it's doing another take of the transition and doing some cutting & pasting. To me, that's fine because I feel track selection and presentation is more important than the mixing. Don't get me wrong, if you can't mix and use only software to construct the mix it is cheating. Promotional mixes and live sets are two different subjects as far as I'm concerned though; human error is all part of the experience of a live set and that's what makes them more magical.

quote:

Originally posted by jonnycarcinogen ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ I think you're reading too much into it, I don't think anyone's talking about 'synthesizing' a promo with editing software. As dj_shockwav clarified it's doing another take of the transition and doing some cutting & pasting. To me, that's fine because I feel track selection and presentation is more important than the mixing. Don't get me wrong, if you can't mix and use only software to construct the mix it is cheating. Promotional mixes and live sets are two different subjects as far as I'm concerned though; human error is all part of the experience of a live set and that's what makes them more magical.

and i play a shitload better live on a loud system
seamless mixes
compared to a studio setting with quiet monitors

i feel a demo mix should represent all that you're capable of
if they wanted to hear a one-off live mix they could just come see me live

IMHO if in a mix there are some mistakes (naturally not too big) i prefer recognize them, i don't like listen a perfect-robotic mix without mistakes, i want to listen a man that djing not a computer...

quote:

Originally posted by DJ_Shockwav and i play a shitload better live on a loud system seamless mixes compared to a studio setting with quiet monitors i feel a demo mix should represent all that you're capable of if they wanted to hear a one-off live mix they could just come see me live

I actually find that its easier to play on a loud system. I think its actually because the loudness of the system can hide alot of mistake whereas in a quiet studio setting you focus too much on any mistakes u may make.

If you're giving a demo to a promotor or club owner i dont think you're in any position to say that they should come see you live. A demo mix SHOULD be a representation of all that you're capable.. live. They're judging you based on what you present them. If you mess up on one transition at home then there's a chance to mess up in a club environment. What happens when you mess up in the club? The promoter will think that your demo is a false representation of what you could do.

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