quote:

Originally posted by sym I'm trying to keep an open mind and hear out your point of view so there can be an intelligent debate, but I still feel you have not made the reasons behind your opinion clear. Are you saying that you feel digital mixing will be the downfall of dance music because you don't like the DJs that are using it? Or because MP3's are flooding the scene? Or because digital downloading is much cheaper than buying records and you seem to be trying to start a record a label? Please clarify.

Finally someone with some objectivity.

Ok here goes. There are a lot of factors involved here. I hope I don't run out of space in a single post, plus its late so I will try and condense the main points behind my statements.

1. I feel Digital mixing technology is first and foremost at the ground level as something latched onto by people who see a quick and easy and or cheaper (how at 1200 bucks a deck) cost of entry to DJing. Their motivations are typically impure. They want fame and want it fast. They want overnight recognition without putting in the time and effort and as result they attempt to skip the understanding "of what it all means as a whole" from purely the mathematics of mixing and music in itself. More often than not, many of these people give it a go with digital mixing systems, skip this fundemental learning stage, become frustrated and quit. We need people to stay in the scene, not treat it like the fad of the week. And we need DJs who pay and play good music and show people a good time through performance skills as well as selection. I am not saying that digital mixers out there can't do this but by default there is a large amount of the performance aspect that is removed as well as the excitement of risk and commitement to opening up a fader which crowds know is about to take place, taking place or has past bringing them now into another stage - the appreciation of the musical work on it own brought forward through all of that to be realized in all of its indended glory - meaning mixed in and out in a manner that mathematically makes sense - not just any old way a DJ seems to "pull it off". I am talking about proper phrase mixing technique as well as clean beat mixing, EQ and fader control WITHOUT key shifting which comes back down to DJ fundementals because you don't have to key shift shite if you know what you are doing mixing key to key and not forcing records that don't naturually go together just to throw down some big track for "crowd response" purposes... Doing so is taking your crowds inteligence for granted and it doesn't do the tracks any justice... get to that track in your set by linking it with records that MAKE sense to mix based on the mathematics. Not on pure emotion. You will find that following this path leads to better emotional response from yourself and your audience. On top of this, FX on mixer boards seem to be the latest in a string of things used by digital mixing types to try and cover up their errors or bring something back in which was lost from their lack of understanding on how to pick two records that go with each other and effectively compliment their natural lead out and lead in break out from an instrumentation approach. Personally I find it rather depressing the amount of over use of the "pioneer flange" in peoples sets these days, vinyl or digital. come on guys, give it a break. That burned out in 1999.

Anyway, jumping into digital and trying to become "god" motivated by whatever you feel warrants this approach is usualy shallow, shortsighted and down right selfish. This is not a good approach for anyone starting out to have and we have all been there but it might be that some people through different experiences haven't figured out the importance of working for/at/on obtaining the skills needed at the foundation level in order to clearly grasp what I am getting at. As a result they don't understand the importance of vinyl as the foundation and starting and ending point of all things DJing as we know it today and should for the foreseeable future and for reasons greatly expanding beyond "convienience".
The point here is this... through vinyl DJing, everything is laid in front of you if you clearly understand the principles behind it and come to the understanding that it is "perfection" as it stands, once you reach that level. When you reach that point you can see from just a performance aspect that anything else simply just doesn't cut it. I could list various reasons of here but it will just start another feverish debate all completely related to simply control and speed to mix and sound reproduction etc etc...
Still clearly understanding those prinicples are made possible through patience and applying some senseable approaches to the puzzle of "how do I make that record go with that record and make it sound good" not just keep beats together.
I train a lot of new people on vinyl and once I explain to them a few things before even letting them touch the decks or look at the mixer I cover off these prinicples and beat mixing comes to them much easier than if I don't. The reason? Because they now have it in their heads that its not about beats at all, its about bars and measures and this gets lost of digital mixer types because they cannot see lego pattern in front of them giving those visual cues and clues as to where to "cue" and release a record going from one to another. I have taken several students (mostly girls because they don't come into it with any preconception of what is involved and their motivations are VERY different than those of their male counter parsts - ie trying to impress chicks with the "djing") and have had them laying down complete sets mixed, matched and essentially "composed" to the poin where after they finish a few hours experimenting on their own, all that is needed from there on in is instruction on speed detection techniques and control.
This is just the tip of the iceberg though...

2. I feel that digital djs or mixer types as I can't really call them djs even though discs are involved, it just doesn't have the same meaning to me, that; their motivations for choosing digital technology over vinyl overwhelmingly comes from "saving money" only to spend the same amount if not more on tracks that they can actually play in the end. I will be honest with you. I don't have a massive record collection. I make money sure, but I can't warrant dropping 15 bucks on a record that sucks, so I don't. So why would it be different if it's 5 bucks or 2 bucks. Because it's a deal?? there is no sense in that. If a track sucks at 15 or 2 or free I don't care, I probably won't take it or give it back instead or simply won't play it. BUT, I will tell them why in hopes that they will take some constructive yet objective and critical feed back from a DJ as well as a label owner. I do take the time out to email labels and producers about records I have bought and tell them what I like about the tracks that I feature in my sets. I don't see that happening from digital mixers. I don't see the kind of artist support these people claim to lend to others with the exception of "simply playing it because it was free" approach. A flash in the pan of glory for the track played by that person but did anyone really know who it was by? was that artist compensated not only in terms of money but also in terms of credit and acknowledgement? Was artist to DJ and DJ to artist conversation kept up proceeding through the development stages of a track? Not likely. I have a lot of people on my label that are sometimes misled by what "such and such" DJ said about their track after "playing" it somewhere in some club between two mega tracks of some sort and then when I hear these productions evolve under the opinion or influence of these people, more often than not they go away from what the sound of the artist originally intended; and not for the better. Some of thes so-called DJS have been mentioned here. I can tell you only 1 of them has come back to us (meaning the label) and actually come forward and said "I like it for this and this reason", and I think you were wise to press it or would be wise to press it because I will buy it and play it. But of course if they take that kind of step forward we would obviously send them a promo. YOu now a little give and take is what that is about at that level.
All of the others simply use these kids for the tracks and then ditch after putting it out on a mix somewhere EVEN when that mix is actually signed to our label! Wait one damd second there guys.....

They don't support the artist any further than a few mixed sets here and there or possibly included in a downloadable mix located online through their site or otherwise made available for free. and they certainly don't care about the label that helped to develop that artist while pushing to get the tracks into the RIGHT DJs hands before a pressing and after.

Remember one can get really popular through free downloads and while some of the people here have no clue as to who I am - since they probably haven't been allowed to be on a computer on their own for more than 2 years without mommy watching - I can tell you that is very much the case if you have the bandwidth and the cash to spend on it to put out mixes in numbers that would make your head spin. But wait a second.... would they (these other djs people here claim to be the future through mixing on CD and are so goddamd popular for it apparently) be able to say the same if they charged for it online?? Probably not.
Some of us however can say that and that is the ultimate ACID TEST which passes what will become known as the D.E.J.I. Trials. ;P

While I am not here to be a braggart even though many would call BS on that statement with their opinions of me clearly formulated at this stage; I can tell you factually that I have spent literally tens of thousands of dollars on bandwidth for my station and my sets to be made available online freely to anyone who wanted them. Today however I can only operate the station freely and in a greatly reduced capacity. The shear costs of course being the main factor but I still do it and have for 6 years. Things went stupidly expensive for me when the station hit iTunes and was released to the public in 2001 with >>DJLithijm.com - Pure Dj Mixed Trance Online<<< - listed among a handful of stations in the electronica genre.
Here is some math and this is just an example of what I have done in the past but I bring it up because I actually broke a network in the process and I figure I would throw it in for dramatic (even though it is fact) effect. I also bring it forward so that these little punks who think they are hot shit can now have something to measure themselves against and would need to suprass in some equal capacity before beaking off to me about how I don't know shite and how I am just some "random DJ".
From the release of iTunes in late May 2001 (if memory serves me correct) I had a server running on a 10mbps line streaming my station at 128kbps. (the sever being my own design as a competing technology to shoutcast and icecast) This server was very effective at achieving maximum loads, saturating that connection while not cascading towards packet collisions and thus re-transmits - if you know anything about TCP/IP you will understand what this can mean for streaming.

As a result it was VERY stable and people caught on to this and stayed tuned in for HOURS, if not days in some cases. I figured people either left themselves connected at home over the weekend or something or it was a bug in the software but when I kicked these people they would email me and bitch, so yes, DAYS. It was typically maxed out at 100 listeners almost all the time all day.

Now here is where the real fun starts. In the first month after itunes release I did 500GB of traffic (at 10 bucks per gig after the first 10GB!) Fortunately I was working in partnership with a company that wanted the technology for use in another streaming application (video) so they picked up the tab as this was all part of their betat testing agreement. This eventually became too much for them along with the costs in terms of bandwidth for the server that was providing FTP access to the sets at 128kbps or 256kbps mp3 quality.

By November the plug had to be pulled as it was consuming more than 8000GB every 2 weeks on the FTP server side alone (different sized line but same company footing the bill) and at one point the service provider attempted to bill us for destroying one of their routers which had overheated because of the efficient load saturating the connection feeding through it >>> the radio station streaming server. How that is possible I have no idea? But I still have logs laying around that were emailed to me after all this happened and I nearly had a heart attack with how much money it woud have totalled to be up at their rates (stupidly I high to be honest). I had to fork over some serious coin to keep the ISP from taking me and the company I was partnering with to court for damages so let me tell you this, if you have free bandwidth and a promotion engine like a station in iTunes you can do amazing things... but what if your listeners and audience had to pay for it?? AHAH! And the future of mp3.com and several other free stations and free download services would follow the same path.

The lesson I learned here is that if you have a plaform for giving people material freely increasing awareness of that material you can very easily get TONES of people to start sucking it off of you. of course, they will take anything put in front of them as long as its free. I couldn't keep this up so I had to shut it all down and start over from scratch going back to two DSL, Cable and 2mbps wireless shots to service just the regular load of listeners to keep my top 20 shoutcast spot (which I maintained for almost 2.5 years) and a private FTP as well as for my own needs for general internet use.

So, what about the pay for it part... well of course some of these super stars have the label backing to get compilation mixed deals so that certainly helps with getting product to market but online - do people fork over money for what they download for a mixed set? I will not get into any futher details on a yes or no answer from myself on that but it all leads back to the question or rather the reality that if something is free of course some one will download it and play it.And digital singles or "hey try my track out" releases are very much in this catagory. They didn't pay for it, so what skin off their nose is it to download something... it might be good? right? Not typically and here is another check your head moment...

How is it that something being 2 bucks all of a sudden becomes the same value as something that costs 10 or 15 bucks in terms of track quality? The answer? It probably doesn't. Someone who is paying 12-15 or 9-13 bucks a pop for a record is going to be more selective in what they buy and are probably going to spend more time looking for gems rather than go with the popular stuff (generic trendy releases deemd safe and sound by labels - sure because it sells because when people have no brains they move in mobs easily... cash cows!)
For me I go through the effort and the expense because who wants to be the guy who plays after someone else but ends up with almost an identical record crate? No one. Certainly not me, but this brings up one of the big points that most cddjers or digital mixers come out with in full force "well with CDs and tracks I get off the internet (paid or not) I can have a wider selection than others who play on vinyl and that means I am more original".
Reality check. THAT IS BOGUS. Because with all that selection comes a wide variety of garbage simply because there is "more of a selection available". So, assuming that most of that selection is 1. pirated (come on guys< Admit it!) and 2. not from published or signed artists who for the most part are just starting out and haven't matured in their production techniques but are SO eager to get tracks out to anyone and everyone that they can who will play them if given out freely; then what >valuable< and diverse selection from that which is purchase and played by a vinyl DJ are you refering to? Oh, but I forgot about the "beatports" of the internet... Okay... where is the diverse selection? I DON'T SEE THOSE WHITE LABELS I LOVE TO FIND IN THE BACKS OF BINS skipped over by people who won't give those records a chance because it doesn't say someones name they recognize on it or have a flashy jacket on beatport!

Hey go hard guys... I will take those whites any time over "everyone and their dog has that" tracks.

My frustration with all of this is yes; I am record label owner and I see people ripping off our stuff to play on cd or mix digitally along with the records as a DJ, that I buy (although I am sure most of you would have problems trying to id the tracks for my sets, most of the people on di.fm get them completely wrong so I doubt any of the haters here would have ANY clues) for use in my peformances and my sets - without paying a dime let alone going through the time and effort to hunt them down via online shops or locally in record stores. I might not be so pissed off if there was a little more RESPECT paid to those artists and labels in terms of these "cddjs" not sucking so hard when they mix those tracks. I almost want to slit my wrists when I hear people mix on CDs. It sounds fuked up sonically and musically and its boring as hell to watch considering I just paid 10 bucks at the door or more. IT's even more insulting when mega star dj shows up, the price tag is now 40 bucks or more and he blows just as much as "been djing for 2 years" boy and his crew do.
This brings me to the other part of my argument against digital mixing. Where is the value in terms of performance??
Do you honestly believe that crowds are stupid enough at the underground dance music level who for the most part dispise the lipsyncing pop icons and boybands of today for being just that, lip syncing pop icons and boybands of today - gone tomorrow to fall into the same trap and sell out their scene and their music to just any one who shows up and can press play on a CD deck or boot their laptop? AH no. With digital mixing and to a certain extent, overtly computer based "live" peformances that value goes down hill fast and people will not tolerate it. They will wise up to it and stop going, looking for something else with some soul in it. DJs and I do mean DJs as in those who play vinyl - have enough problems from the traditional music community along with producers of electronic music as being looked as as "not musicians", well there is some truth to that. We are as the name suggests, DJs. We jockey, wrangle and wrestle tunes into something more. And hey, its got a beat and you can dance to it... This is just the basics. Turtablism is a prime example here of a section of underground music that has rejected digital mixing technology for the most part if not completely. It degrades the performance reality and value in the terms of "wow, that was a killer show - that guy moved, sounded wicked and did you see his skills?". For digital djs to suggest that underground dance music djs are some how excluded from this is what is truly laughable. We are not but by going digital these people push the culture futher towards britny spears and disposible dance music than closer to being the artform, culture and business that warrants much more than repect.It warrants REJECTING digital mixing technology in the use of a DJ performance for sound source because anything else will drive it over the edge into a direction that I don't think it can survive if pushed to far. WE have seen it happen several times over the past 30 years but frankly I don't feel like waiting around for another 5, 10, 20 years for the music industry and the likes of the general population as whole to continue my career, those of the artists on my labels or in entertaining the crowds that appreciate us; because a few shortminded mofos thought it was a good idea to go "digital" and took an entire generation with them for about 6 - 8 months before massive amounts of them fall off as quick as the next megawave of interest in "electronic music" might come from this increased exposure and ease of access, so to will a mighty crash further than we have experiened to date (for those of you born before 1975 this might ring a bell). And when will it come back??

If it does happen and these digital mixing clowns get their way I something for sure. If dance music does die as I predict it will after a big boom if things continue unchecked - that in 20 - 25 years (probably how long it will take for it to come back at the levels seen in years past now) that my records, providing I keep then well, my decks and my mix board will still work perfectly and play wonderfully and sound great. As for your CD-Rs?? Guess what!!! Gravity is your enemy. And if you think spinning media and solid state storage is the solution... oh boy you guys are going to have fun learning the joys of magnetic media!

All in all I think digital djing will be the downfall of dance music because it turns the music from being music into the equivilant of being a software upgrade.

___________________
DJ Lithium
Black Tiger Recordings | NKME Ltd.
www.djlithium.com | www.blacktigerrecordings.com

It's unreasonable to hate a useful tool just because it can be abused and perverted. I can do a lot of things with a hammer... drive nails, perhaps, or clobber someone on the head, or go drive around and smash mailboxes, or use it to bust a window and break into a house.

So yeah, I could probably buy two CDJs and a cheap mixer and download mp3s to my hearts content and call myself a DJ. But I won't. Because I had a respect for the artists and the craft before I bought my first turntables. Lazy noob DJs aren't a new phenomenon. CDJs have been around in some way, shape or form for quite some time. Mobile/bar DJs have had them forever, and I'm sure some teenagers who had just heard Tranceport last week have managed to get their hands on them before. Hell, there are a lot of vinyl DJs who are the exact same way. They go out, get some decks and a mixer, two dozen records, practice for two weeks, and start practicing their Oakie poses in the mirror. This is nothing new.

I've been mixing for about.... 9-10 months now? My first purchases were 2 shiny new Technics MK5s and a Vestax mixer. I had been saving and scheming to get a pair of decks for at least 3 years prior, but I never jumped for a pair of inferior decks because I knew this was something I truely wanted to do, and do properly. Instead, I satisfied my urges by making a lot of mp3 mixes on silly programs like MixMeister and Traktor. It was fun and I learned a lot, to the point that when I finally got my decks, I was beatmatching almost instantly.
I've made a lot of mixes since then and shared them with friends, on forums, etc. I've gotten a lot of really good feedback on them, but I've still yet to hand out a single demo to any promoter, and I have no intention to for some time now, until I'm 110% satisfied with my ability.

Last October I added a CDJ-1000 to my setup. I had been thinking about it since about June, when I was really starting to dig James Zabiela and I was noticing all the things you could do with this thing. Since before I had bought my turntables, I beleived there was a lot more you could do with DJing than just mixing 2 tracks back to back, and the things Zabiela was doing with loops and hotcues - pretty much rearranging tracks on a whim - really got me excited. I also realized that I could easily make my own tracks, edits and bootlegs and play them immediately. I could even burn myself all sorts of little samples and sounds, and loop and hotcue them over another track until they became a part of that track. I had a lot of fun digging through my old Half Life .pak files and burning all these sounds of the scientists and Gman and shit and going wild with them on my CDJ. I was doing things with this CDJ that are simply impossible to do on vinyl.

How can you possibly tell me that it was "wrong" and "evil," and that my experiments were contributing to the downfall of dance music? On the contrary, I think it's actually helping to push it forward, but I'll get into that later.

Let me give you another example. Right now I'm listening to a mix I made about 2 months ago. Like a lot of my mixes, it happened when I just got bored, threw on a record, and went at it. Along the way, I started to beatmatch a track, but I got an idea in my head. I had previously mixed this tech-house track I had on CDR with this crazy robot vocal in it's breakdown. So as I was beatmatching my two vinyl records, I cued up that robot vocal on my CDJ (which btw, you do have to backspin and manually cue like a record), and then put it into a continuous loop, tweaked the loop to perfection (which is pretty tricky), then cued it ready to go. Then I mixed into my next record, then after it had taken over, I launched the robot vocal into its loop and opened the fader. And suddenly this little vocal loop, which only made up a small part of its own track, was now part of the record I had playing. It sounded awesome. I let that loop go for a few minutes (had I been sampling it off a vinyl record, it would have run out within 30-45 seconds), then right as my record went into a quick breakdown, I smacked the robot vocal loop into reverse, then when my record's beat came back in, I killed the CDJ loop. It sounded mad cool. It's something that was simply impossible to do with vinyl.

How can you possibly tell me that it was "wrong" and "evil?" How could cool little tricks like that possibly be contributing to the downfall of dance music?

What is my point here? My point is that CDJ technology can be used for "good" OR "evil." It's what you do with it that counts. I could probably sell my Technics and buy another CDJ and spin off downloaded mp3s for the rest of my life, but I won't. Because I have more respect for the artists and the craft of DJing than that. I also love my records and love the feel of mixing them. I still buy every record I can with my limited income. But I also love my CDJ and the things I can do with it. And that's why both vinyl and CDs are sitting peacefully side by side next to my mixer.

My point is also that the same people who would buy 2 CDJs and mix downloaded mp3s and practice their Oakenfold pose in the mirror are the same people who, 5 or 6 years ago, would have bought Technics, 20 records, practice for two weeks, then start asking to play at parties. Or they're the same people who would buy cheap mobile/bar DJ CD players and spin off those. I won't deny that the problem is probably more prevailant today, but I just don't see why they're so much of a threat. Like you said, when you were at a party and were watching these guys spin on CDJs, the crowd wasn't moving, but when an experienced DJ came on, they were. I don't think the medium had so much to do with it (as long as they were playing full quality .wav files). If these poor CD DJs were spinning on 100% vinyl, do you think it would have made any difference (sound quality aside)? Your sorty proves that crowd's aren't stupid, and can tell the difference between a good DJ and a bad one (no matter what they may be playing on). Thus, all these cheap poser DJs, no matter what they're playing on, will get weeded out by any crowd with half a brain anyways. Or, if they're playing to a crowd of yuppies who just want to chase some snatch or get wasted or whatever, they're not even going to notice that the mixing's bad, or that the DJ is sitting over a laptop with a mouse, or whatever. Thus, no ruined scene.

And no, I don't beleive that easier access to tracks through cheap (LEGALLY PURCHASED) CDs means that DJs are going to start playing crap. When I order records, I usually get around 12-15. These 12-15 are selected out of a batch of about 40-50 potentials that I have written down in a big huge .doc file. All of these potentials are records that I would conceivably drop in a set. I say conceivably because they are all tracks that I like, but a lot wouldn't fit in with a set that I personally would drop in a club or at a party (usually they're really deep kind of tracks, I have a niche for them). But if I had the money, I'd buy them all in a heartbeat. But I don't have that kind of money. So first I weed out the novelty ones that I wouldn't really have much of a chance to spin. That leaves me with about 30ish records left. Then I can weed out about 5-10 that just aren't as thrilling as the rest (not that I wouldn't buy most of them if I could, though). That leaves me with about 20-25 left. I then begin a fun little process in which I systematically drive myself to the brink of insanity by trying to choose only 12-15 of these excellent tunes to keep. Seriously, it's like Sophie's Choice sometimes. I can only hold on to one of my children, which one do I drop so that I can save the other? It's always sad seeing some of them go.

But with my CDJ, sometimes I don't have to make that choice. Some of the tracks I can get on CD for a fraction of the cost, so I get more quality tunes in the end. I can also buy a lot of those niche novelty tunes real cheap on CD and play with them in my bedroom to my hearts content. Yeah, there's some degree of "fuck it, it's cheap I'll get it anyways," and yeah, there's a big corner of my CD book that's filled with these tracks, but so what? I like each and every one of them, even though they wouldn't fit in with my regular style. I'm not an idiot and I know damn well what does and does not work together. I don't consider it wasted money or flooding myself with bullshit. These are tunes I enjoy and they let me be a lot more diverse musically. Oh, and they let me be a lot more flexible should I ever need to play a deep warmup set or a really really funky set. I have access to a lot more music than I otherwise would, and my sets are better, and more enjoyable.

And here's my other point: easier access to music does not mean that you will be saturated with bullshit. Good, well known DJs get literally dozens of free records mailed to them every week, and god knows how many CDRs. I wouldn't be suprised if it was more than 100. But that's part of being a DJ. You gotta pick the diamonds out of the rough. More rough means there's a better chance of finding more diamonds. Yeah, there's probably a lot more schlock sent in (it's not like vinyl pressing services for individuals weren't around before, though), but there's also a lot more really insane tracks sent in by brilliant new producers, and that's a good thing.

Which brings me to another point, along the same lines: DJs can't be lazy any more. Big jock DJs 5 or 6 years ago were keeping themselves in style because they had big records you would never, ever get or hear elsewhere. They'd get these obscure, hard to find tracks with their hype and recognition. They could sit back with their half assed mixing and set construction let their records do the work for them. But I don't think they can get away with that today like they could before. Yes, big jocks still get all the unsigned CDRs before we do, but the thing is that the up and coming producer who made that hot new track could easily make 1000 copies and flood them to everyone he could. The rise of filesharing also means that the general EDM public can hear all these tracks (even if they're live set rips) when they could previously only hear them by going to see that particular DJ. It's DJ darwanism. They have to adapt, get more creative, keep their beatmatching and construction skills in top form, and keep their playlists fresher if they want to survive. A lot of them (Hawtin, Zabiela, Sasha, Phil K, others) are using this digital technology to their advantage and doing things that were never possible with turntables alone.

Which brings me back to my original point. You can't hate a legitimate, useful tool just becuase it can be perverted by idiots with bad intentions.

___________________
NEW MIX [Feb/March 2008]

quote:

Originally posted by djlithium The future of what exactly Steven?? No one is looking past their noses with the exeption of vinyl DJs as to where digital mixing will lead for the future of dance music. I didn't say "don't provide digital downloads to non-djs". When vinyl "dies" as you insist it will, you will find a repeat of what happened with disco in late 1979 and early 1980 and in then again with techno/acid house etc. in early to mid 90's when everyone and their dog/record label put out a mass amount of trash from anyone and everyone who could manage to throw something together in a studio - to try and cash in on the wave. That wave CRASHED. Vinyl pressings are the ULTIMATE ACID TEST for a track. Yes it costs more per copy but it will certainly cost us all a lot less in the long term because the vinyl DJ and vinyl records provide a barrier to the flood gate of shite that comes from every 12-18 year old who "has been in the scene for almost 2 years and is now considered a verteran" with a copy of reason and abletonlive and expects to be worshipped like a god because someone downloaded their track - more often than not for free or illegally. I also have news for you. Vinyl DJs like myself and internet radio station operators who put together the first trance and collectively underground dance music radio stations (myself included there as my station has been listed in the electronica genre section of iTunes since day one - how that happened I will explain later in my proposal to the underground dance music industry) exclusively online kicked started things all over again in late 1998. Now with the recent crash (again the result of people driven buy "cashing in") in mid-2002 has us scratching our heads going "what's next and will it survive or will dance music be killed for another 20 years at this level we had just experienced? and what will be the cause for it?" YOUR IGNORANCE OF HISTORY AND INSTISTANCE OF VINYL DJs TO GET WITH THE TIMES will result in just that. The people who continuously argue about price, convienience and 'weight of the records to carry to a gig' are completely inept and inexperienced in the business and or are essentially cheap ****s. You don't value the culture obviously so then how do you value the music and the artists with attitudes like this? Would it also shock you to find out that many so called "pro djs" who play on cds or mix digitally won't really consider anything unless its a promo from a label??THAT PRESSES VINYL! Yup it would. Because you still have your heads in mp3.com land. I have MORE news for you. Many of the top mp3.com trance and house artists go NOWHERE through those systems and have now turned around and found it is better for their careers and the music as a whole to seek out vinyl record pressing deals and even if that only amounts to 1000 copies, the big ticket is compilation mixed disc releases from djs who will play those records and license them. But there is a barrier to that of course left over from old world music business practices. I will put foward a complete system to change this situation for the better and you will find that not only are you incredibly misinformed but also among a list of very shortsighted people who have contributed more in the form of damage to the dance culture as a whole while filling the pockets of technology companies that will cash in and cash out when the bottom falls out if you get your way.

I have to say that I find your devotion to vinyl both heartwarming and admirable.

I don't however agree with all that you say and I think that you may be somewhat missinformed or atleast perhaps speaking from perhaps a local but definately not a global perspective.

I notice that you were critical of young people who are producing and releasing material. The thing is that talent doesn't always correspond to age whether it was Mozart (Who was 4 when he composed his first piece) or Armin Van Buuren who was 17 when he released Blue Fear.

I have contacts with a few producers on this forum who have sent me CDs that have later become pressed on vinyl. Take Icone for example, he has sent me CDs which I have played in clubs. I was able to give this guy some exposure before most DJs had even heard of him. He may not have benefited massively from this but his music has been heard and appreciated by people long before other DJs got this music in their hands.

I know for a fact that the majority of the top DJs in the world all use CDs at some point in the their set and some also use final Scratch etc.
When I worked with Matt Hardwick is was in the same phase that Electrovoya - Whispers was due to come out. He had a copy on CD because Greg Murray had given him a copy on CD before it even existed as a vinyl. It was also the track that totally rocked the night and the one that everyone was talking about after, even if it was on CD.

I play my own stuff from time to time if the situation is right all thanks to CDs.

There are also some creative aspects with CDs that are cool, fun and effective on the dance floor. If that helps you rock the crowd then do it.

You can be this vinyl purist if you want and hell I salute you for it but you need to realise that your view isn't final or that particuarly well informed either.

I love vinyl too and would very much like it to be the main medium of choice but times are changing... for better? I don't know the answer to that.

I do know this much, I had a free saturday for the first time in about 4 months and went out yesterday only to see DJs using vinyl (Name DJs too) make a right pigs ear of it too.
I would rather have heard a good set from I guy who knows how to use CDs than a crap one from a vinyl DJ.

The whole spirit of the vinyl industry and dance music has always been faced with adversity from the early days of hip hop etc. Things change but good ideas often endure over fads. Time will tell which is a good idea etc.

I have worked in this industry for nearly 20 years and have taken a long time to accept CDs but they have gone beyond being an alternative to vinyl. Both mediums have pro's and cons and also have their unique areas of creativity.

I do however appreciate the fact that you take the time to make your arguements and are capable of wrtiting them rather than just ranting a load of abuse so again a credit to your integrity.

The thing that does disturb me though is that you tarnish all digital users with the same brush.
In the case of the shall we say 'junior trance addicts' with their MP3s, could it not be that they were also inexperienced and didn't necesarily have the knowledge to read what was going on? Where the tunes that they were playing actually suitable for the time slot, was there a flow. To me it sounds as if there must have been a whole bunch of factors involved and the fact that MP3s were used may not even have been known to half the dance floor? (Question rather than statement).

I'm sure that you have the skills and knowledge to back up what you say in terms of your own feats as a DJ, but there is also the fact that you have to be careful that the industry doesn't pass you by. If you are looking to get really noticed these days, just mixing vinyl isn't enough to stand out.

So to each their own.

Cheers
Nem

PS
My compliments on a good website that shows that you guys are working really hard to practice what you preach.

___________________
https://www.mixcloud.com/Calvin_Karass/

Last edited by Nemesis44 on Jan-17-2005 at 14:24