i'd say 120 to 145 for me. but very rarely over 140 i think and almost never over 145. of course i like some stuff under 120 too, but it's not like there's much of that around (at least i haven't found much stuff under 120 that i like).

___________________

Get Dropbox, with 250 MB extra space!

quote:

Originally posted by Ian little bit of both. I remember putting an Ophidian track on at my ukta party, and trying to pitch it up further. Every 10 seconds someone would walk up & pitch it down, and i'd have to knock it back up again

The hardcore Ophidian?

___________________

this is like considering architecture by how high above sea level it is.

completely unrelated to the quality

quote:

Originally posted by nefardec this is like considering architecture by how high above sea level it is. completely unrelated to the quality

Not completely.

___________________

10-15

___________________


Uncredible Haak on Soundcloud
Uncredible Haak - September 2008 mix

130

110= night night

150= speed/crack needed

i would have to say about 140-145 does me just right

___________________
London Loud | Sense.fm
Prog House | Tech House | Techno | Minimal

Dancing= 115 (approx, sometimes slower, but then the dancing style changes completely) to approx 150.

Listening= 0 to 140

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by ThaMaestro i think one is accurate enough, when a mix between 2 songs is adequately beatmatched, sounds seemless without any major bumps or beats that are out of the rythm ... thats what matters, not what BPM-counters tell you. next to that, dont look at bpm-counters during mixing. you become a better mixer/dj when yuo do it without the help of those things. in the begin they're handy, but later you dont have to trust them, you must be able to do it on your own. next to that, those things arent always right. it occasionally happens to me that i mix a track from 135 to 137 bpm, simply because the bpm is not accurate, or very slow to give new updates on the bpm-count ...

I know, I try not to look at them and I am well aware that they aren't accurate. Sometimes though I have no idea if the tracks are both say 130 BPM when one says 129 BPM and it sounds like it's matched to 130 BPM but sometimes I don't know if I should just trust my ears or trust the BPM counter. Haha I know my ears are more accurate but say I do have the track at 130 BPM even though it reads 129 and I want to mix that into 130 BPM, but then it wouldn't match up right. I would have no way of knowing if my ears or the BPM is more accurate, because at some points it could be right. I was trying to mix last night and this happened and I had no clue if the track was indeed 130 even though it was reading 129, but it sounded matched...

quote:

Originally posted by DOOMBOT You are drunk. And so am I. So therefor, we agree. Hooorah!

Yeah I was so wasted.....

quote:

Originally posted by Spirit5 I think 0 BPM would sound really cool. DJs should try playing tunes at 0 BPM that way there wouldn't be much of a beat...at all and people wouldn't dance anymore, they would stand around with a beer in their hand starring at a DJ doing absolutely nothing...

at 0 bpm not only would there not be a beat, but there will not be any music whatsoever.

in a track of infinite bpm (from a post on the first page) and a finite length there would only be time for one audible moment of sound/s.



the tracks i enjoy the most are often in the range of 110-132 bpm.

___________________
People who own my ass: Citric Acid, Boomer187, Tribu, Sand Leaper,
Jackson, venomX, jamie, Renegade, Konjin, Akridrot, Miss Bliss.
Psy-T - Down The Rabbit Hole (400minute long acid set)