|
| quote: |
First and foremost, computer DJs are boring as hell to watch. A single finger on a track pad, controlling things on a screen the crowd can’t see is not in the least entertaining, especially when compared to someone handling CDs or records. Secondly, because computer DJs are generally so busy twiddling round with effects or trying to find music on their hard drive, they tend not to pay attention to the crowd, which has the dual effect of decreasing their physical antics behind the decks, and dulling their track selection. However, this is not a concrete rule, and does not apply to all computer DJs.
Some DJs use Ableton or other computer based programs simply because they are no good at beat matching, or are sick of it after all these years. This type tends to use a minimal amount of effects and other computer trickery, and just stick to one track after the other as you would on decks, keeping them more attentive to the crowd. On the other hand, there are DJs like Sasha, who spend all their time in the booth making minute, boring changes to perfectly good tracks, and hence forget that the crowd is even there.
Besides detracting a DJs attention from the crowd and being plain dull to watch, computers also have the lovely trait of breaking down. Not so long ago, one Mr. Nathan Fake came to town, a gig which I was considering, but thankfully didn’t attend, for the crowd was treated to nothing but an hour of stuttering music and silence, thanks to a dodgy laptop. Trance CD Paul van Dyk is also one who has dealt with this problem, as well as many more big names. When was the last time you heard of a CDJ packing up? Perhaps you’ve heard a CD skip or freeze in the past, like I have, but that equates to an interruption that can be measured in seconds, as a new CD is loaded, or the crossfader slammed to the other side. It’s extremely rare for a CDJ itself to break down mid-set. Even rarer to require attention than a CDJ is the Technics 1200 turntable, the so called “tank” of the DJing industry. When was the last time you heard a laptop lauded for such reliability?
What vinyl and CD lack in versatility, Ableton and other programs make up, or so a computer DJ will tell anyone who will listen. I can’t deny that cutting up precise sections of a track or using multiple precise filters just isn't possible on a turntable or CD player, but what I do refute is the fact that this will make any real difference to the music.
Will the crowd notice if you extend a breakdown by 4 beats, or boost a frequency by +2dB? Probably not. How about if you use a drastic ping-pong reverb effect to improve the impact of a lack-lustre build-up? Most likely, but a dramatic effect like this could easily be done on a standard mixer with built in effects too.
Mixers and external effects units have already achieved so much when it comes to manipulating music creatively, that, in my opinion, whatever computers have to add is so negligible that it’s not even worth considering and so subtle that it’s not worth noticing.
All the time I see and hear interviews with DJs raving about their computers, and how much better it has made their job. However, no set on computer has ever astounded me and made me sit up and think “hey, what this person is doing live is amazing, why isn’t everyone using computers?” I’d like to think that I pay more careful attention than the average punter, too.
So, why are all these jocks raving about the versatility of Ableton and the ease of computer DJing in general? It’s purely because computers make their job easier, despite having no measurable impact on the crowd. After DJing for ten or twenty years, time spent behind the decks is obviously not as enjoyable as your first year, but having a new toy to play with, or, to be precise, a new medium with which to ply your craft, it’s likely to ease that boredom, as well as give you the impression that you’re playing better sets, simply because you’re doing more in the booth.
Well, I for one am opposed to it. I recognise that computer DJing is sadly “the future” of the art; however it would be good to see a return to carefully crafted sets from skillful DJs, with supreme track selection and flow, rather than poorly constructed “on-the-fly” mash-ups, tiny, dull changes to certain frequencies, and multiple loops playing at the same time, with no consideration for how they might actually sound on the dance floor (“hey, I’m playing six tracks at once, it must sound good!”). When will people realise that more does not equal better?
I’m sure that when CDJs first became popular, there were vinyl purists expounding exactly the same type of argument that I am now, but what the hell; in a way I agree with them too. Vinyl is and always will be the king, CDJs acceptable and enjoyable, but computer DJing is just plain horrible, and my opinion will stay the same until I see a ground-breaking set that proves otherwise. Stay tuned. |
|
